HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnf@apollo.hp.com (John Francis)
Subject: Re: Is Clinton Wilson?
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:52:09 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Oct1.135017.27650@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne) writes:
> [ . . . . ] Clinton is proposing that the Reagan-Bush program of military
>power is spending money that could be better spent on health care and other
>social programs.
>
>Unfortunately a country is basically strong if it is productive.  When it
>subsidizes industries which should be turned out to pasture the economic
>costs of the inefficencies will overpower it.
>
>For example, in the U.S. at the present time, Government health care programs
>cost about 4 or 5 times per person what comparable private programs cost and 
>yet we are constantly bombarded by people who want the government to do more.

A few points:

    1)  I have seen these sort of "4 to 5 times" figures bandied about, but
        have yet to see any statistics provided to back them up.  Following
        in the footsteps of G.H.W. Bush, I presume:  Who cares whether it's
        true if it makes a good sound bite.
        [For non-US readers:  Bush _continues_ to claim that Clinton raised
         taxes 127 times while Bush only raised them once, even though he
         has admitted that in fact the number 127 counts some things twice,
         that different definitions of a tax raise were used, and that he
         is talking about 4 years for himself vs. 12 years for Clinton.
         Applying the same rules to Bush that he used for Clinton ends up
         with a figure that is considerably higher; definitely over 60, or
         about half the number of tax raises in only one third the time.]

    2)  Government health care costs are artificially inflated because they
        are the health care service of last resort, and so they end up with
        all the people that private programs have dropped because providing
        care was too expensive.

    3)  U.S. health care as a whole is too expensive because, in part:

         o  Many insurance companies will only pay for actual treatment,
            not for preventative medicine.  This encourages people to use
            expensive means of health care (that are covered by insurance)
            rather than methods which are cheaper overall, but have a
            higher out-of-pocket cost.

         o  A disgustingly high percentage of U.S. medical bills goes to
            cover malpractice insurance.  Unfortunately the U.S. courts
            seem to be prepared to award millions of dollars for almost
            any malpractice settlement, even if only one doctor in a
            thousand could theoretically have spotted some very obscure
            complication.  As a result, almost all doctors will order
            batteries of expensive tests to protect themselves against
            lawsuits.
            
-- 
John Francis                                johnf@apollo.hp.com
Seen passing on the net:  Spotted Owl - the *other* white meat!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sushilm@amgen.com (Sushil Madhogarhia)
Subject: Re: Pitiful limit on value of duty-free gi
Organization: AMGEN Inc., 1000 Oaks CA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:56:12 GMT

From sushilm Tue Sep 29 18:55:44 1992
Return-Path: <sushilm>
Received: by amgen.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA05737; Tue, 29 Sep 92 18:55:43 PDT
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 18:55:43 PDT
From: sushilm (Sushil Madhogarhia)
Message-Id: <9209300155.AA05737@amgen.com>
To: sushilm
Subject: Hi
Status: R

Does anyone knows email address of city university in london.
thanks
sushil
sushilm@amgen.com
From: mickw@autodesk.com (Mick Washbrook)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Guy Fawkes night
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:29:19 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.164023.22610@osf.org>, dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) writes:
> -- 
> David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
> (who remembers slaving in the hot sun for 3 hours and getting paid a
> shilling by a literal-minded old skinflint)

Luxury. LUXURY!

I remember, I used to 'ave to lick roarrd clean, wi' me tongue...etc.

Sorry.


--
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell)
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:19:31 GMT

martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge) writes:
: In my ideal school, Shakespeare would be presented through
: *performance* (e.g. the excellent recent film of Henry V,

  Gosh yes, that is a wonderful film. I persuaded some - very sceptical
first year  history undergrads here in SIngapore to go and see it when
it was on for 2 days or whatever. They were convinced a. they wouldn't
understand the English and b. that since it was Eng lit it wasn't
relevant to our discussions of nineteenth century theories of
patriotism. They felt completely different when they'd seen it. Comment
of one - "I never realised that patriotism could be so SINISTER" which I
still think was a pretty smart point. Cue for falme war on differences
between nationalism and patriotism . . .

Richard Pennell, History NUS
: 
: ---
: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: "You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"
: 
: Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
: Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
: Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
: JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
: Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
: X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Subject: Re: Children in Pubs?
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 07:02:48 GMT


In article <1992Oct5.134412.9217@vax.oxford.ac.uk>, daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes...
>In article <BvMvJ1.Do0@comp.vuw.ac.nz>, Francesco.Ballara@comp.vuw.ac.nz (devitt) writes:
>> 
>> My mother, my brother (aged 15) and I are going to Britain in January.
>> We thought 'pub lunches' might be a cheap and possibly nice way of gaining
>> nutrition.
>> 
>> What is the age limit for entering pubs in Britain?
>> Can my 15 year old brother go into a pub, when accompanied by his
>> mother, in order to eat only?
> 
>Yes, as long as the pub has a separate eating area (many do these days).
> 

But since his brother is 15, the rule about seperate eating areas doesn't apply.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Craig Cockburn, Digital Equipment Co. Ltd, Reading, England.     Suas
  Internet: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com                           leis
  UUCP:..!decwrl!edieng.enet.dec.com!cockburn                      a'
                                                                   Gha\idhlig!
  Views here are my own, and are not necessarily those of Digital
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson)
Subject: Re: My wife's gon to the West Indies
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 21:58:54 GMT

In article <19676.2ad007ec@ul.ie> mckeonj@ul.ie writes:
>In similar vein:
>Man in garden, sawing wood planks; neighbour looks over fence:
>"How's the wife?"
>"Sick indoors."
>"'Sthat her coughin'?"
>"No, it's a dog kennel."


Reminds of the two deaf men in a train joke:


"Ah, this is Wembley"
"No, its Thursday"
"So am I"
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Currency problems
Organization: sgi
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 04:17:20 GMT

In article <ggm.718241074@brolga>, ggm@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (George Michaelson) writes:
|> livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> >It's not *deep* mined coal, German or otherwise, which is the
|> >real cheap stuff.    It's open-cast coal which has a built-in
|> >price advantage, expecially open-cast coal from low-wage economies,
|> >like Poland.
|> 
|> Not all coal is coal. Lots of Polish open-cast coal is 'brown coal'

Blah, blah, blah about Poland deleted.

Look, I wrote *like* Poland precisely because I wasn't sure if
Poland is necessarily the best example.   Since I wrote that, 
someone else has claimed that you can ship coal from Virginia
cheaper than you can buy British coal.   One example is enough.

jon.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13164 rec.arts.books:17086
From: igb@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 29 Sep 92 08:55:48 GMT
Organization: Fulcrum Communications

In article <1992Sep29.112614.3849@darwin.ntu.edu.au> salter_duke@darwin.ntu.edu.au writes:
> I've just read in my "Grauniad Weekly" that all British school-children
> are going to have a compulsory test on a Shakespeare play at the age of 14.

True.

I can't recall the list of plays that were deemed suitable, but I recall
being amazed.  I have a feeling that R+J and JC were in there, but I
don't remember.

The Tories, eh?  It must be satire.

ian
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Tory 'predictions'...
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:06:05 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

One snippet which I picked up from the papers over the weekend is that
one of the constituency resolutions which has been submitted for debate
at the upcoming Tory conference is one to the effect that the
government should stop announcing the upturn of the economy until it
actually has some evidence that it is occurring.

I was going to let this pass, but in the Grauniad today I notice that 
Major (in what looks to me like a pre-emptive move) has apparently just
stated that he is going to stop predicting an upturn, though he will
be sure to announce it when he makes it happen.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Words: American vs English (UK type)
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 11:27:16 GMT

In article <venable.164@faculty.coe.wvu.wvnet.edu> venable@faculty.coe.wvu.wvnet.edu (Wallace Venable) writes:
>In article <26432@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
>
>>>Truck vs. Lory
>
>>>Can anyone help me?
>
>>Ok. In English a Lory is a large Australasian parrot with a brushlike
>>tongue. What is it called in America? I thought in America a truck was
>>a large goods vehicle?
>>--
>
>       In America, a large goods vehicle is usually a "semi."


	I disagree, the "semi" is the cab and power unit.  The
	word "rig" is used for either the semi or the full-length
	truck (aka 18-wheeler).

	I speak after spending 18 months convincing the city that we
	needed a "No Trucks" sign on the alleyway beside our our house.

	Alec Chambers.
From: harderaf@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Halloween in England
Date: 1 Oct 92 00:18:40 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

In article <1992Sep30.170407.21185@philmtl.philips.ca>, ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn) writes:
> In referenced article, alisonjw@spider.co.uk (Alison J Wyld) writes:
>>>I grew up in Scotland and remember celebrating Halloween every
>>>year.  We didn't call it trick-or-treating but "guising", I
>>>suppose this is a confusion with the celebration of Guy Fawkes
> 
>>Wrong etymology. Its from the same root as disguise.
> 
> Gosh, so it is (checking his OED).  I even _spelled_ it "guysing" in my
> posting.
> 
> Anyway, we've been alluding to the _American_ tradition of
> trick-or-treating coming into the UK.  I would presume though that the
> Scottish tradition (also in the north of England) is the basis for the
> American one.  Anyone know?  How do other European countries celebrate
> hallowe'en?
> -- 
> Ray Dunn at home    |    ray@philmtl.philips.ca    |    (514) 630 3749


Hi, Ray!


Europeans don't celebrate hallowe'en OR Guy Fawkes.  That's because it's a
British tradition--exported to America.  I would presume they also celebrate in
Australia.  Cheers, old fr-r-r-uit!


Love, and sandwiches,

Ali Spaerk
From: fofp@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Holmes)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Some of my best friends are speculators
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:52:34 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:

#I understand that Mr.Perot's main plank is
#to reduce the federal deficit. I took the original posting as
#saying that the trouble with the UK was that it was just like
#the US - too great a government spending deficit. This at least
#is totally wrong - the UK government has until the past year
#been running with a budget surplus and paying off the national
#debt.

"until the past year". In the current year, we're giving the US a run
for their, err, money in terms of per capita government borrowing. I for
one, am worried about that and hope that something will be done soon to
reduce tha approaching 40 billion Pounds borrowing requirement.

#As for "belt-tightening", talk to anyone involved with
#public services and they will tell you how conditions have
#deteriorated during the years of Tory government due to
#belt-tightening measures. In the eleven years I've been working
#as an academic I've seen a marked detioration in such things as
#the availability of grants, the staff-student ration, my pay
#levels compared to what I could earn as a business programmer
#etc etc.

Perhaps you are now coming to the conclusion tat it isn't a good idea to
have the government running the Universities? Perhaps they don't invest
the money needed to run a good University system? Perhaps it's time for
the Universities to lobby for privatisation?

#I quite agree that Tory economic mismanagement is huge, but I
#don't agree with the line coming from certain quarters that the
#Tories are another variety of socialist, and what we need are
#people who are *really* going to cut state spending.

Why not? Do you think it's better that we go into more debt?

#Matthew Huntbach

FoFP
From: metceram@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Anyone listening from Brighton UK?
Date: 27 Sep 92 17:01:52 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620


In article <26SEP199220413584@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu>, mpragnell@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu (Marlon Pragnell) writes:
> Hello!  I am trying to get in contact with my brother
> who is a bohemian-type artist in Brighton.  Do you know
> how a person may get access to the net if they are not 
> associated with a university or company with net
> accessibility?   
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Marlon Pragnell
> mpragnell@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu

...enter {stage left, flourishing useful document}... CRAIG !!!
From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Currency Problems
Date: 6 Oct 1992 14:05:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd
Distribution: world
Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: bottomdog.uk.sun.com

In article 28175@menudo.uh.edu, chem91@Elroy.UH.EDU ("Bill Harrison (713)-743-2789") writes:
>>>
>>>But travel is so broadening.   In the past twenty years I've 
>>>travelled on privately owned trains, drunk privately provided
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>water, used privately generated electricity, had private garbage
>>>haulage, used privately run telephone systems, and you know what: 
>>>in no case could I tell the difference in a systematic way.  Some
>>>were better than the government service, and some worse.    There
>>>simply is not enough evidence around to persuade me that Government
>>>is either a better director of investment, a better producer of the
>>>service, or even a better self-regulator, than any private company
>>>in these areas.
>>
>
>Jon -- where were these trains?? 

I don't know where Jon travelled on them, but you could try
parts of Switzerland to start looking.

Martin

---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"

Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13400 rec.arts.books:17390
From: zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Geoff Lane)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Enforced Shakespeare?
Date: 1 Oct 92 08:30:59 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre, Manchester, England, M13 9PL.

In article <1992Sep30.204907.262@ncar.ucar.edu> chucks@uars2.acd.ucar.edu (Chuck Smythe) writes:
>A very effective way of selling Shakespeare (or other Lit) to the pubescent
>mind is to point out the racy bits. 
>			Chuck Smythe


Are the versions of the plays published by the sad Mr. Bowdler (sp?) still
in use?  Can't have all that nasty stuff corrupting the young can we.




-- 
Geoff. Lane. | Internet: zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk | Janet: zzassgl@uk.ac.mcc.uts
UTS Sys Admin,  Manchester Computing Centre,  Oxford Rd,  Manchester, M13 9PL
"The Royal Family must think the entire world smells of wet paint."
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13553 rec.arts.books:17591
From: dstein@dione.math.ucla.edu (David Stein)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.books
Subject: Translate Shakespeare!
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:50:13 GMT
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department


  Shakespeare, most of all, should be finally translated into English.

  I enjoyed "Romeo a Julie" in elementary school, but here in High School
  reading Macbeth was no bed of roses.

  Nor, it seemed, was Shakespeare liked by my classmates very much.

  Perhaps Shakespeare is significantly more popular in cultures where
  a reasonable translation exists.  Perhaps his plays will still be
  performed on the shores of Bohemia when he's all but forgoten in
  the land of boiled meat and piss beer.

 - David

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not a native speaker of English, so I'm not sure what I wrote.
Flames will be ignored unless you paraphrase the Bard himself.
================================ - David (the metamathician) - ===
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:13685 rec.motorcycles:34929
From: ses@cmns-sun.think.com (Simon Edward Spero)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: Know someone at Triumph or Norton???
Date: 6 Oct 92 11:56:51
Organization: What's your clearance, citizen?
	<1992Oct5.182245.11475@pixel.kodak.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmns-sun.think.com
In-reply-to: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com's message of Mon, 5 Oct 92 18:22:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.182245.11475@pixel.kodak.com> dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones) writes:
   Are there any British motorcycle companies?  Triumph and BSA merged over
   20 years ago, Norton merged with them some years later, then there was
   the Meriden Workers Cooperative trying to make something out of the
   remnants of the Norton-Villiers-Triumph lash-up after it all collapsed,
   and then -- what?  Maybe a cottage industry in parts for classic bikes
   but hardly anything to keep Papa Honda awake at night.  Tell you what:

Maybe Papa Honda ought to lay of the Halicon; Norton and Triumph are completely
separate companies. Norton is pretty much a niche company, producing 
a 588cc rotary engined sport bike (F1 Sport, #8514), and a touring bike
(Krauser Commander, #6616, c/w krausers). They've been having a little trouble
lately, but they seem to be recovering.

The rebirth of Triumph is little short of amazing; they have an ultra modern
factory, and are producing a full range >750 bikes, using a very modular 
design; they're currently sorting out an importer for the States- these are
mainstream bikes that are as good as or better than the Japs. 

Norton

Norton Motors
Lynn Lane
Shenstone
Lichfield
Staffs
WS14 0EA
Tel: 0543 480101

Triumph

Triumph Motorycycles Ltd
Jacknell Road
Dodwells Bridge Ind Est
Hinkley, Leics
LE10 3BS
Tel: 0455 251700

Details from the back of "Bike". Any problems, take it up with Ogri.

Simon

--
-----
Guest account at TMC 	|	Just Another  WAIS Hacker | DOD# 0612
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Currency Problems
Organization: sgi
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 20:44:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.103333.9759@osf.org>, sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
|> 
|> I am a firm believer that "properly run" and "monopoly" are oxymorons
|> regardless of whether the monopoly is nationalised or private. The only
|> 'natural monopoly' I can think of is national infrastructure planning (not
|> implementation), such as road and rail, and even then I have my doubts.

I think that this is a key point.  Enterprises are managed by 
people, and people solve the problems they perceive.  If the 
enterprise has competitors who may drive it out of business and 
abolish its jobs, then its managers will - if they are any good - 
react by making the enterprise more efficient.    They'll organize 
the R&D department to create new products, Manufacturing to 
manufacture them more cheaply, and marketing to produce funnier 
ads.

If on the other hand, they perceive that their main challenge in
life is to fool government regulators, obtain more government
subsidies, buy more legistors, then - again, if they are any good -
they'll do that instead.

Good people will always meet the challenge they perceive.  It's
just that the challenge isn't always the right challenge.

|> 
|> The other vital thing is competition, something sadly missing 
|> from many UK (and European) industries.

This has always struck me as an obvious difference between
Europe and the US.   It seems to come about in two main ways.
First there is the historical process in the past fifty years
of industries starting out as small companies, then being
sucked into one nationalised industry, and then that industry 
being privatised out into a much smaller number of new companies.

The second process was the way in which private companies 
reacted to American competition in the '60s and '70s by forming
privately owned conglomerates that were supposed to be "big 
enough" to take on big American companies.   What they forgot
was that American companies were big because America is big.
American companies were big, but they had big competitors,
and they still had competitive fears and stimuli that 
European flagship companies sometimes lost for lack of
domestic competition.

jon. 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british