HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
Subject: Re: Canadian vs US health care (was "ACM downgrades Catastrophe Medical Insurance")
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 02:55:08 GMT

lmb@netcom.com (Larry Blair) writes:

>So solve the problem by providing insurance for those that fall through the
>cracks.  Having the govt. pay for all medical care is a guaranteed failure.

It is still better than having no medical care at all.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45331 alt.rush-limbaugh:4767 alt.politics.elections:13066 alt.politics.clinton:5313 alt.politics.bush:5039
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:19:13 GMT
Organization: Oracle Corporation
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <BuIw3z.1pn@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarWatcher@uiuc.edu writes:
>mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>: Now, can I propose a better system?  Bet your ass.  The key is to hit
>: the things that make it cost.

>: I.  Too many lawyers.
>: II.  Too few doctors.
>: III.  Overuse of the system.
>: IV.  Irrational use of the system.
>: V.  Unhealthy habits

>Even though I am personally against the government's interfering with
>businesses' rights (as well as normal people's rights), might I mention
>a couple of other excessive costs in the system:

>  VI.   Excessive profit-making by health care products manufacturers and
>	distributors.

This is, of course, a reasonable concern.  How much profit-making is
excessive?  Also, is it really profit we should be measuring?  Isn't
ROI a better measure?  And, of course, most importantly.... what is
the profit/ROI that these guys are making?

>  VII.	Excessive profit-making by drug manufacturers.

Same as above.

>I personally won't like direct government intervention to reduce costs
>in these areas, but I could see the federal government coming up with
>some way to put a stiff tax on companies in these fields making too
>much money.

How much is too much?  And what makes you think they won't increase
fees to pay of rthe tax?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Better Off Than Four Years Ago NOT
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:56:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.214043.22405@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR) writes:
}In article <1992Sep8.173802.2657@linus.mitre.org>, m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)     writes...
}>In article <1992Sep2.012357.10369@pony.Ingres.COM> garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR) writes:
}>}In article <la81loINNi@spim.mips.com>, mpolen@suntory.mips.com (Michael writes...
}>}>In article <1992Sep1.152133.25112@linus.mitre.org>, m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
}>}>|> 
}>}>|> Simple check:  When was the last report of a kid having a nightmare due to
}>}>|> the possibility that he, his parents, his community,... might be incinerated
}>}>|> while he slept?
}
}>}>I assume you are saying that Bush gets credit for all the good things
}>}
}>}	Let's get real people. Reagan and Bush just happened to be
}>}on the watch when the collapse came.
}> 
}>Along with a world-wide economic crisis.  I assume that you've noticed
}>that the inflation rates throughout much of the rest of the world is
}>more than ten times that in the US.  Hence, to maintain consistency
}>amongst your statements, you do not give any credit to the idea that
}>the White House or Congress have anything to do with the economic and
}>jobs situation and just happen to be on the watch.
}>
}This has nothing to do with the above conversation. We were talking 
}about the collapse of communism in the USSR. You can't compare a 70
}year trend with a 10-15 year trend.
}
}Let's stay relevant here. BTW, try to keep control of your emotions.

You WISH that it was only talking about "the fall of communism".
Unfortunately, that isn't the subject.  Your selective "pass out the blame
but not the credit" is noted - though not at all suprising.

BTW:  try to keep control of your life.  Isn't it nice to know that
the chances are REAL good that tomorrow you'll still have it?

Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.animals
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Cat Control!
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:00:01 GMT

In article <swood.716148783@vela> swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG) writes:
>art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
>` He  went to the backyard for
>`a look see.  He saw four neighborhood dogs tossing a doll around and
>`biting it and in general having a hell of time with it.  The doll was a
>`baby.  It was quite dead.  None of the dogs were the so-callled violent
>`breeds e.g. pit bulls or rotweilers.
>
>I suppose we will consider this a "real" example?  I have two dogs that
>toy fanatics.  They are also non-violent breeds.  I don't really credit
>them with a lot of intelligence, but I would be willing to gander that
>they can tell the difference between a doll and a baby.
>
>I don't think that an example with a fake baby doll has anything to do
>with a dogs reaction to a real human baby.
>

I took this story to mean that he at first thought it was a doll, but in 
reality it was a real human baby. Did I misunderstand? 


Jeff Achenbach
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45352 ca.politics:7755 ba.politics:5295
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Run conservatives, run away! (Was: Re: Homophobics can't...)
Date: 14 Sep 92 19:53:07 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

pjm@anegada.sps.mot.com (Patrick J. McGuinness) writes:

>Any nationally recognized liberals out there calling for less
>taxation? Aren't they pretty much lining up behind Clinton and
>his tax (increase) plans?

June Genis ...

-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: record album stickering
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:35:12 GMT

In article <BuKuoC.Aoq@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>In article <1992Sep14.141006.19839@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>
>>Any rating not applied by someone other than the artist themself to their 
>>creative work is a form of censorship...
>
>  Saying so does not make it so.   
>
>  I say labeling is informational; no different from putting the
>  sodium content on a can of soup or requiring that the content
>  of something match the description on the box in order to avoid
>  false advertising charges.
>

There is a big difference between "quantitative" factual labelling of
incredients in a food product, and
about the "qualitative" judgement of an artistic work.

>  Parents need to have some way of determining what is appropriate 
>  material for their children to view/listen to, and a label
>  indicating language, violence, nudity, etc, is not in and of
>  itself censorship as long as the vendor is free to sell the item 
>  and the public is free to buy it.  
>

If parents need a "ratings" service, some entrepreneur should take
up the challenge, if the current media reviewers on TV and newspapers
are not enough.  Of what use is an "rating" by an anonymous reviewer
for a parent who is truly concerned...one would think a truly concerned
parent would want to have a reviewer who they can choose and be
certain as to their qualifications and values.  Parents who choose
industry or government sponsored anonymous raters can't be all that
concerned about their children, especially considering how Hollywood
rates its own movies.

Gerald
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: Canadian vs US health care
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:46:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep11.193309.22312@kadsma.kodak.com> pajerek@kadsma.kodak.com (Don Pajerek) writes:
>In article <BuF3IL.Equ@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>>
>>  I don't like the Canadian system either,
>>
>
>I know you like to go out of your way to avoid being labelled as 'conservative'
>or 'liberal', but I would really like to know your specific objections to
>the Canadian plan, and to the concept of National Health Insurance in general.

  Part of it is a visceral distrust of having the government involved in
  my life any more than it has to be.   Unlike libertarians, I don't claim
  that government can never do anythig right or well; but I think the odds
  are generally egainst it.

  The other part of it is that I don't like to give up any control over 
  something as important as healthcare.  Currently I like to take as complete 
  control as possible over my care -- if I get sick I seldom see GP's or 
  internists because in general I find my knowledge to be equal to theirs
  and my general knowledge of physiology, chemistry, etc to often be greater.
  Instead I go directly to the appropriate specialist, and I generally 
  like to have total input into any decisions about drugs, tests, treatments,
  etc.  Usually before going to a doctor I will have read the relevant
  sections of the relevant textbooks, done a Medline search, etc so that
  we can discuss things intelligently.   I've caught too many doctors in
  mistakes to not take this approach.  

  But most national health care is like a giant HMO, and HMO's do not
  tolerate this much patient control.  My approach requires flexible
  access to doctors (especially since part of the task is finding a doctor
  who will tolerate a patient like me!) and labs.  This is easier to 
  achieve in the US system than the Canadian one.

  Finally, I don't like the taxes since I'm in the top marginal bracket
  and in the current political climate if they *do* raise taxes, it will
  be targeted at people in my income bracket.


>I fail to see how any health insurance program, whether private, public, or
>some combination, can be efficient unless large numbers of people are involved.

  OK, but the US has 10X Canada's population, so theoretically we could have 
  5 or 6 or 7 large private insurers and STILL have better economies of scale
  than the Canadians get with their whole country!   Theoretically. 


---peter


 

Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45442 ca.politics:7780 ba.politics:5316
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:27:08 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Sep12.070558.12065@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
> In article <12211@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #The homosexual fascist lobby is creating a situation where the choice
# #is "the devil and the deep blue sea."  If you were told that you could
# #preserve your right to free speech by giving up your right to not be
# #searched at random by the police, and that these were your ONLY
# #choices, what would you do?  You would have to decide which right was
# #more important, and hold your nose.  I would prefer to not make that
# #choice -- but the homosexual fascist lobby seems intent on using the
# #government's power to force people to hire and rent to homosexuals
# #against their will -- and the only realistic way to stop it is by
# #assisting another group that I don't like.
# 
# So I take it you will have no objection is queers in Oregon took any action
# necessary to defeat the OCA? After all 10% of the citizens of Oregon will
# soon be stripped of there right to free speech if the OCA gets its way.

Would anyone happen to have the text of the initiative?  I've heard
some pretty incredible claims by the least credible faction imaginable --
homosexuals.  It does prohibit the GOVERNMENT from supporting or
assisting in the promotion of homosexuality.  How does it strip
a homosexual of free speech?

# And Clayton unlike your fantasies that queers molest your children, the
# OCA will definitly molest queer child. So I assume that given the gravity
# of the situation in Oregon you would applaud the use of heavy artillery
# and chemical warfare agents by QN against OCA? After all the only way to
# stop an action you don't like is to commit another thats even worse...

Well, it would certainly win the election for OCA.

I just found that one of my nephews who lives in Oregon was molested
a couple of years ago.  The man who did molested at least one other
kid.  This homosexual child molester received five years probation,
and a permanent ban from teaching in Oregon.  If the homosexual
community doesn't want to be identified with child molesters, they
need to shun NAMBLA.  Otherwise, you are left to the consequences
of your actions.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
prohibition won't work.
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: speed, police, crime, hell
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:58:09 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <96044@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:

> Theodore A. Kaldis:

>> rarely does anyone in the U.S. run red lights.

> The man has never been to Boston or New York.

I have been to New York (unfortunately) as I pointed out elsewhere.
Moreover, someone else has informed me that in Boston the
understanding is "straight ahead on red".  But New York and Boston are
not (thankfully) typical of the rest of the U.S.
-- 
The views expressed herein are my   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously      ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university as  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
this would hold such views???       ||
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45719 ca.politics:7850 ba.politics:5372 soc.motss:39180
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss
Subject: Re: What is "Sexual Orientation"?
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:01:19 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Sep15.004413.27761@microsoft.com>, bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
# # Suppose the ordinance contained language which made it clear that
# # "sexual orientation", as used in the ordinance, meant the common usage
# # of the term as applied to gays, lesbians and bisexuals, that is,
# # referred only to the different gender combinations (male and/or
# # female) possible in intimate relationships.  Then would you be happy
# # with the ordinance?  Or would you look for another nit to pick?
# # 
# # Michael Bryan  michael@resonex.com  "Milk and Cheese in '92!"  |     ,_,
# 
# (cramer)
# /I would be happiest of all if homosexuals stopped trying to involve
# /the government in telling consenting adults what they may do in
# /private.
# 
# You didn't answer Michael's question, Clayton.  Do you have an answer,
# or do you not?

My answer is that it is none of the government's business what
consenting adults do in private.

# Also, cite three examples of homosexuals "trying to involve
# the government in telling consenting adults what they may do in
# private".  Hint:  non-religious employment and for-profit rental 
# situations are not private situations.

They aren't?  Does that mean I get to redefine homosexuals
having sex in a bedroom as "not private situations"?

What makes religious employment private but non-religious
employment private?  Why are non-profit rental situations
private but profitable ones are not?

Why does your employer have the right to prohibit the carriage
of weapons on Microsoft property, when you may carry the same
weapons on public streets in Washington?

Private vs. public.  If you really want to destroy the distinction,
you are opening up the floodgates of governmental power.  Sodomy
in private suddenly becomes a "public" matter because it affects
the society as a whole (transmission of STDs).  Are you sure you
want to have that excuse available?


-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
There can be no peace as long as AB 2601 lives.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: pfieland@citron.sw.stratus.com (Peggy Fieland)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics,soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: Re: The Harrassing Phone Calls Can Stop NOW!
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:46:50 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <12211@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>You would have to decide which right was more important, and hold your nose.  

>-- 
>Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
>Alcohol prohibition didn't work; drug prohibition doesn't work; gun
>prohibition won't work.


Oh. come on. What I hope I would do is refuse to give up either right,
and have them drag me off to jail.

There are always other choices.  We may just not want to make them.
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Family Leave (was Re: Bush is pro-child molestors?)
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:05:10 CDT


In article <20368@drutx.ATT.COM>, dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL) writes:
> In article <farenebt.716140581@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
> } I think I need to provide you with some info on the first one. The bill
> } mandates up to 12 weeks of UNPAID maternity leave for workers who work
> } in businesses of MORE THAN 50 EMPLOYEES. Therefore, your example doesn't
> } hold water.
> 
> I heard it was 25.  Oh well, what ever the actual number is, apart from
> another case of government's meddling into someone else's affairs, there
> is another bad side effect of that bill -- businesses whose employees
> number at or below the cutoff point will be reluctant to hire the number
> of people that would put them over that threshold.

It's interesting that Republicans see parental leave is seen as government 
interference while requiring government contractors to conduct drug testing 
is not.

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Dangers of line item veto.  [Was: Yes to line item veto]
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 22:23:11 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.215013.16654@tamsun.tamu.edu> rdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Roger B. Dubbs III) writes:
>The danger of a line-item veto isn't in its application after a bill is
>passed.  The danger is in the power that the president would then wield
>over individual congressmen.  Certainly, a good president would veto all
>the pork out of a bill, and this would be a good thing.  However, a more
>probable scenario has the president holding opposition pork hostage to
>votes on other issues.  "Vote for the anti-abortion amendment or I veto
>the Superconducting Supercollider project."
>
>As long as we are discussing abuses of power...
>
>Could the Congress pass a law withholding Federal Highway funds to
>states that don't ratify an amendment to the Constitution?

Sounds somewhat like a bill of attainder which, if true, is unconstitutional.
That is, the Congress cannot act to punish individuals.

Mike Best
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:45262 alt.activism:16256
From: drm@esl.com (Don McGregor )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Nicaragua Series -- comments and replies (3/4 ;"Silence of the Left"?)
Date: 13 Sep 92 19:10:58 GMT
Reply-To: drm@esl.com
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc

In article <9209120227.AA09312@poly.math.cornell.edu>  
harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator) writes:
> 
> So it makes perfect sense to spend one's finite resources publicizing
> the human rights abuses of countries A, B and C which, given that they
> are the worst ones, rather than those in D, E, and F. On these ground
> alone it makes perfect sense to publicize El Salvador and Guatemala,
> and then Honduras and Brazil and Uruguay and Colombia and other Latin
> countries, and then Cuba and other Latin countries, and *then*
> Nicaragua under the Sandinistas.
> 
So, do you think you might take five minutes out of your busy schedule to  
type in a paragraph that condemns Sandinista abuses of human rights?  I  
noticed that you never quite got around to doing that in the last four  
multiple-page postings.  Very curious.

--
Don McGregor
drm@esl.com  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc

In talk.politics.misc, gary@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:

> dq> Doug Quarnstrom
> gs> Gary Strand
> 
> gs> Do I really need a law to tell me to wear a seat belt when I drive? Come 
> gs> on!
> 
> dq> I don't know.  Do you?
> 
>   No, but I suspect that you do.

Well, this is all the evidence I need to satisfy my curiosity as
to your perspicacity.

> You probably need a law to tell you when to
>   blow your nose, too. (Hint: Do it when you can't breathe through your nose,
>   and snot is running into your mouth.)

Thank you for the public service message.  You have clearly
spent some quality time thinking about this.

doug
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.environment