Digest for rec.sport.football.college@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 12 topics

Thursday, May 4, 2017

Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: May 04 02:39PM -0700

A TV commercial for Kellog Raisin Bran
uses for its musical accompaniment the
piano music from Warren Zevon's
"Werewolves of London." I find nothing
in the commercial that links to the music.
 
--
Michael Press
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 04:36PM -0400

On 5/4/2017 12:48 PM, The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior wrote:
> Man, we're slipping
 
The only place I heard that one was inside until Colbert ejaculated it
out of his mouth. But then, I'm but a country boy.
 
Ken
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: May 04 01:48PM -0700

In article <6e20374a-ed42-4eb8-9343-f23068c0fab6@googlegroups.com>,
 
> Man, we're slipping
 
Wrong. I was right there with it.
 
--
Michael Press
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 04:57PM -0400

On 5/4/2017 4:48 PM, Michael Press wrote:
> "The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com> wrote:
 
>> Man, we're slipping
 
> Wrong. I was right there with it.
 
In the holster?
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: May 04 02:33PM -0700

In article <oeg4cu$5ig$1@dont-email.me>,
 
> >> Man, we're slipping
 
> > Wrong. I was right there with it.
 
> In the holster?
 
<rubrum-B3EFA6.13501202052017@news.albasani.net>
 
--
Michael Press
YosemiteSam <YosemiteSam@byteme.com>: May 04 08:15AM -0700

Either way it does provide for some thought provoking...um, entertainment.
 
https://youtu.be/dcPVH76gCTA
 
~YS~
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 05:10PM -0400

On 5/4/2017 11:15 AM, YosemiteSam wrote:
 
> Either way it does provide for some thought provoking...um, entertainment.
 
> https://youtu.be/dcPVH76gCTA
 
> ~YS~
 
Come on now, squeal like a pig, just like that, you bad girl.
Futbol Phan <sgzphd@gmail.com>: May 04 08:18AM -0700

Oops.
 
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2017/05/michigan_firearms_instructor_a.html#incart_river_home
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: May 04 01:59PM -0700

If only the victim had been armed as well.
tim.vanwagonerspam@gmail.com: May 04 01:36PM -0700

On Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 12:56:33 PM UTC-5, michael anderson wrote:
 
> > I mean, seriously - give me the low down - how is healthcare rationed in Germany in a way that's different from the US?
 
> when my uncle needed a rather technical(and semi-urgent but not "have this now or die immediately" eye surgery) he was seen by a retina subspecialist within a couple days and surgery was scheduled and done on very short notice.
 
> My guess is that those sorts of things in the european models you adore don't work like that.
 
You know, you don't have to actually guess. The make this thing called Google. It's really cool and you can get all educated about stuff so you don't have to look foolish when you repeat fake facts or just make stuff up to fit your worldview.
 
Average wait times for primary care in the US is some of the worst in the first world. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/files/publications/in-the-literature/2013/nov/pdf_schoen_2013_ihp_survey_chartpack_final.pdfs
 
Average wait times for specialists is one of the best, as expected, but actually behind the NHS.
 
Oh, and one should point out that the U.K. Spends half of what we do with better overall health outcomes and patient satisfaction. But we do have much prettier buildings and our employee parking lots have much nicer cars in them, so we have that going for us.
Emperor Wonko the Sane <doug@sorensensdomain.net>: May 04 12:28PM -0700

> That state is still around? I was assured by rsfcons years ago that it was a giant ponzi scheme on the verge of collapsing. And here it is still around, chugging along, accounting for a huge percentage of our nation's economic growth.
 
But not population growth.
http://journal.firsttuesday.us/golden-state-population-trends/9007/
 
 
> Hmmm. I'm coming dangerously close to supporting the whole "spend more, tax less, let economic growth pay for it" deal.
 
> (Backing away from the ledge - sorry, the context was getting my annual trip plans to go out to pleasanton for work - love going out there, thus humblebrag).
 
I love visiting Cali. Damn glad I don't live there anymore.
 
Doug
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 03:31PM -0400


> Hmmm. I'm coming dangerously close to supporting the whole "spend more, tax less, let economic growth pay for it" deal.
 
> (Backing away from the ledge - sorry, the context was getting my annual trip plans to go out to pleasanton for work - love going out there, thus humblebrag).
 
> Cheers.
 
Like the dot com growth during the 42nd President's term, the growth in
California is happening in spite of its government.
JGibson <james.m.gibson@gmail.com>: May 04 12:36PM -0700

On Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 3:31:51 PM UTC-4, Ken Olson wrote:
 
> > Cheers.
 
> Like the dot com growth during the 42nd President's term, the growth in
> California is happening in spite of its government.
 
And the shrinkage of Kansas is in spite of its government?
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: May 04 12:38PM -0700

On Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 3:31:51 PM UTC-4, Ken Olson wrote:
 
> > Cheers.
 
> Like the dot com growth during the 42nd President's term, the growth in
> California is happening in spite of its government.
 
Love partisan logic.
 
State X is controlled by [ ]Republicans [ ]Democrats: "It's growing because of its wise government"
State Y is controlled by [ ]Democrats [ ]Republicans: "It's growing despite its government"
 
Asserted as a truth with nothing to back it up, natch.
"Con Reeder, unhyphenated American" <constance@duxmail.com>: May 04 02:46PM -0500


> State X is controlled by [ ]Republicans [ ]Democrats: "It's growing because of its wise government"
> State Y is controlled by [ ]Democrats [ ]Republicans: "It's growing despite its government"
 
> Asserted as a truth with nothing to back it up, natch.
 
Massachusetts and Washington are cases of states that are blue but
are run pretty well in many ways. They grow like gangbusters, and I
don't see anyone saying "despite". Oregon and Minnesota have a lot
to be said for them as well.
 
California, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California, not so much.
 
The fiscal condition of those blue states is pretty evident. California has
a vast unfunded pension liability, and there will have to be a
default. Of course they will try to make it a bailout, but luckily we
have the U.S. Senate and that ain't gonna happen.
 
If you are a 50-something California state employee counting on your
pension, I'd be very afraid.
 
It remains to be seen what will happen when those constraints become a
straitjacket for state government, but based on the example of
Illinois it isn't going to be pretty.
 
--
There's nothing sweeter than life nor more precious than time.
-- Barney
JGibson <james.m.gibson@gmail.com>: May 04 01:20PM -0700

On Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 3:46:39 PM UTC-4, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
> are run pretty well in many ways. They grow like gangbusters, and I
> don't see anyone saying "despite". Oregon and Minnesota have a lot
> to be said for them as well.
 
Are you sure you're a fan of Massachusetts?
 
http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2017/05/04/state-tax-haul-falls-short-again-in-april-widening.html
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 04:25PM -0400

On 5/4/2017 3:36 PM, JGibson wrote:
 
>> Like the dot com growth during the 42nd President's term, the growth in
>> California is happening in spite of its government.
 
> And the shrinkage of Kansas is in spite of its government?
 
I don't know, but it could well be.
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 04:26PM -0400

On 5/4/2017 3:38 PM, xyzzy wrote:
 
> State X is controlled by [ ]Republicans [ ]Democrats: "It's growing because of its wise government"
> State Y is controlled by [ ]Democrats [ ]Republicans: "It's growing despite its government"
 
> Asserted as a truth with nothing to back it up, natch.
 
I actually look at it as that there are many variables. Government can
only control a few.
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: May 04 03:27PM -0400


>> But I am obviously naive because we don't frequent the same places.
 
> And that naviete will see you dead. Wake up.
 
> Mike
 
How so, Mike?
Emperor Wonko the Sane <doug@sorensensdomain.net>: May 04 12:16PM -0700

> Because they wanted it to be even more insane and assumed crafting something that would be palatable to winger and centrist alike would hit that mark?
 
> They're celebrating because it's a steaming pile of shit
 
So it's a vast improvement over Obumblecare.
 
Doug
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: May 04 12:08PM -0700

For E-CornLiquor Gasoline.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: May 04 12:14PM -0700

> For E-CornLiquor Gasoline.
 
Sheetz is selling the real thing for $1.999 at a station in Durham.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: May 04 11:56AM -0700

On Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 1:16:31 PM UTC-4, michael anderson wrote:
 
> How's that burn going to feel in a bit senator menendez?
 
> you mess with the bull...you just might get the horns.
 
> We rammed it down there throat on gorsuch...about to do the same thing on health care. Taxes coming next.
 
Great job, Brer wolf.
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: May 04 11:56AM -0700

> Can you give me some specifics on what differentiates government provided infrastructure (roads, bridges) from government provided healthcare? Not a leading queation, I'm genuinely curious where you're going with that.
 
Wait - are we talking healthCARE or health insurance? Not the same thing. If care - do you want individual bridges everywhere? Care can easily be delivered in a competing manner by various companies/individuals. Bridges.....not so easily.
 
for example

 
> (Not meaning that super snarky like "you're cool with..." usually does - just more asking is this a line in the sand?)
 
> IMO, that's what we're eventually going to end up with - some terrible "gov't insurance" plan which covers not all that much - "Sorry, you've had your one MRI for the year" - and then private insurance for the rest of us - and very little will have changed - the empathy crowd can still bay about unfairness of health care while the math crowd gets to bitch about costs."
 
> I think almost everyone is cool with quality of care caps, in you're looking at in in some binary form. We all might have different ideas about where the lines should be drawn, but I doubt many folks support using our taxes to pay for elective surgeries, or even some experimental but highly expensive procedure or drug.
 
Sure doesn't seem like that at *all* - all the emotional arguments in favor of gov insurance seem to focus around how heartless it is we don't provide unlimited services to group X.

> I don't see us eventually ending up where you see us ending up. Did you happen to catch the link I poasted in another thread about automated brain surgery.
 
I did - exciting stuff.

> I have pretty good insight into this at work. We're a lot further along on automation and ai than folks presume. Training a concept identify tumors in scans more accurately than a trained tech is something anyone with a couple hundred dollars and an aws/azure/cloud compute account can do, if they have enough labeled scans.
 
That's fantastic - truly
 
> HC costs - the real cost, not necessarily the charge - are going to plummet over the next several decades.
 
That'd also be fantastic

> And don't get me started on smart toilets.
 
> Anyhow - two main points - again I see all these concerns being based on a scarcity condition that's already sort of illusionary and is only going to get moreso over time. Two - what we've been doing is so stupid it's painful. The current system has soooooo much waste and inefficiency. Half the procedures / orders are unnecessary - either padding a bill or playing cya because of ridiculous litigation.
 
Sure - absolutely - would never argue otherwise.

> But I do think we'll have some form of what you're talking about (except the public option won't be terrible) before abundance overtakes any need for private options.
 
I hope you're right. however, I look at history and see crapass prior results when the gov "controls" delivery of something - food stamps and public housing for example

> I think I mentioned Germany in another related thread - they have something similar to that, but again I don't think most people find the public option to be inadequate.
 
> https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/04/what-american-healthcare-can-learn-from-germany/360133/
 
> Note their efficiency, effectiveness, and accessibility. Better than us on the point "can you get a next day or same day appt", for instance.
 
Will look at when I get a chance, I will

> (Usually when I bring up something like this I get some argument about how americans are different and foreign models don't apply. That's stupid - we base an entire system on compete and copy success but don't believe in copying successes beyond our borders? That's a general point, we've spent enough time talking about places like Singapore for me to know you're not shy about doing that sort of thing).
 
I'm *always* open for new and more efficient ideas - and maybe the cost of single payer would be totally worth - I'm even open to that idea.
 
Couple of years ago, went out to dinner with X and a friend of his - his friend mentioned how having single payer could spur a huuuuuuge boom in startups b/c people wouldn't be afraid of health insurance costs being too much for a startup to handle - this was an excellent point.
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: May 03 11:28PM -0700

Every week or so Congress crushes another of President Trump's propositions.
 
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/trump_can_afford_to_wait.html>
<http://tinyurl.com/kqxv5mn>
 
--
Michael Press
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.football.college+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment