From: csuah@warwick.ac.uk (~WISP at CU~)
Subject: Re: Harel posts a particularly clumsy lie.  (Was Re: "STRONG FAMILY VALUES" (III) (1))
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:43:15 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.182402.27238@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <t8tpbzjf@csv.warwick.ac.uk> csuah@warwick.ac.uk (~WISP at CU~) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug30.224116.13550@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

[Stuff about Harel's posting deleted...]
>>>Evidence please...  To begin with, please define "The health care
>>>situation for the population as a whole."  I don't think you can and I
>>>think your statement above is just someone blowing hot air and
>>>propaganda out their ass.
>
>>OK, how about this? How many people in Europe, Oz, NZ, Canada and Japan (I
>>haven't got the stats for Korea...) have no health cover? Answer NONE. 35
>>million Americans don't: that's over 10% of the population. THAT makes the
>>health care situation worse in the US than in those other places, if you
>>happen to care what happens to other people.
>
>So, in other words, the sole measure of "The health care situation for
>the population as a whole" is the number of people with health
>insurance?  Does that mean that the US "health care situation for the
>population as a whole"  will improve if we get the super rich to buy
>themselves healthcare?  Doesn't the quality of the health care
>available matter?  Shouldn't Canada lose some points because of their
>waiting lists and because they have to export many urgent cases south
>of the border?  Try again.
>

Well, I'm not going to say any more about Harel's stuff, because he's
posted his source. Look it up if you're interested. Your remark about the
super-rich is rather sad: how many of the 35 million Americans with no health
cover are super-rich? And no, the quality of health care available does not
matter *if it is not available to you*! Just because *you* are OK doesn't mean
you have the best system. I said in an earlier post that no system is perfect,
but that the national schemes at least have the basic humanity to provide
cover for everyone. Unfortunately, your posts reveal you to be just another of
those "fuck you, jack, I'm alright" products of the Reagan/Thatcher years...

>>As for the hot air crack, I always take it as a good sign that I'm on the
>>right track when someone who disagrees resorts to personal abuse. It's a
>>typical response from those who know they hold the moral low ground...
>
>Well, Chris, worrying about who is "more moral" is the typical
>response of those who know they will lose if they rely on the numbers.

So why the original insult then? If you know you'll win on numbers, why didn't
you just quote them at me, rather than clutch at some pitiful dig which
further undermines your cause?

Refer to my opinion above and to Harel's source. The numbers are agreeable to
you because they don't affect you. If you were one of the 35 million, and they
did affect you, you'd soon change your tune. Morality isn't the refuge of the
statistically defeated (if you check out Harel's source, you'll be very
surprised...), it's a variable quality found to some extent in all humans. As
a rule, the more extreme and selfish your views, the less of it you have.
All your glorious MRI scanners and single rooms with TV, sauna & jacuzzi
and personal casino don't count for anything alongside the worst peri-natal
and infant mortality rates in the developed world, or the hideous discrepancy
between those who have and those who don't. Of course, if you're into
social Darwinism, then you'll be delighted by the discrepancies. The only
trouble with that philosophy is that when all the poor people have died out,
there'll be no-one to do the jobs that, finally, keep the society from
drowning in its own excrement. Happy drowning, Michael.

The Wisp. [very grateful I'm not an American...]
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Chris Williams <csuah@uk.ac.warwick.csv> aka <csuah@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
"Tony Greig in the slips, legs apart, waiting for a tickle"
                                      Brian Johnson (thanks to A. Simha 8^>)