Deep Freud Moors <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
    > On 8 Dec 2003 02:33:44 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:

(...)

    > And you really shouldn't make stuff up, it's most unbecoming.

Eh? Shurely shome mishtake - OJ's posts wouldn't be quite as
entertaining without the use of his lively imagination.

I suspect that the queues of people he saw were Americans checking in
to hospital after fainting at the idea of having to pay to use the
toilet after gulping down gallons of sub-standard orange juice.

J.

Jenn writes:

    > in the US at least achievers are only a small fraction of the wealthy --
    > most great fortunes recently have been made by people cheating and using
    > their position to skim money off of productive systems

This is not true. Most people with lots of money worked to earn it (in
the United States).

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

In article <[email protected]>,
Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Jenn writes:
    >
    > > in the US at least achievers are only a small fraction of the wealthy --
    > > most great fortunes recently have been made by people cheating and using
    > > their position to skim money off of productive systems
    >
    > This is not true. Most people with lots of money worked to earn it (in
    > the United States).

if you count what mutual fund traders do as work including their
skimming profits through fraud, or Ken Lay and the crew, or 'investment
bankers' whose contribution is shuffling paper as productive and
'working' maybe so

the rich are mostly those who have been admitted to the game -- not
those who produce value

Deep Freud Moors <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
    > On 8 Dec 2003 02:33:44 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >
    > >Deep Freud Moors <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
    > >> On 7 Dec 2003 12:26:05 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Deep Freud Moors <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
    > >> >> On 6 Dec 2003 11:29:51 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >
    > >> >> > Statistics please to back up your claim. When driving through
    > >> >> >Australia,
    > >> >> > I saw private hospitals and public health clinics. The public
    > >> >> >clinics
    > >> >> > were easily identified by massive cues outside.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> There are no such 'cues' in Australia. You were mistaken.
    > >> >> ---
    > >> >> DFM
    > >> >
    > >> >Then I must have seen queues (lines of people waiting to go into
    > >> >public health clinics in Australia).
    > >>
    > >> Queues outside every clinic? I don't think so. You were mistaken.
    > >> ---
    > >> DFM
    > > >
    >
    > Apparently you are having some issues.

Like many of my fellow Americans, I do not want Socialized
medicine. That is
my issue. If others want it, to each his own.



    >It really bothers you that
    > Australia has actually got a good national health system, eh! How
    > could an idea that is shunned by America actually work well? Curiouser
    > and curiouser...

Doesn't bother me at all, I just don't want any part of it here. If
others want it in other countries, fine.


If your national health system is so good, why do 80% of the
Australians seek private care as oposed to the national health care
system? This disparity makes the National system the provider of last
resort as I have been told by Australians themselves.

Jenn <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > In article <[email protected] >,
    > [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >
    > > "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:<a%[email protected] k.net>...
    > > > PJ O'Donovan wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > Your pontification reeks of inconsistency. We are at the "top"
    > > > > technologically
    > > > > but we have the "worst" delivery????
    > > > >
    > > > > Wishful thinking on your part. Many wealthy European consider their
    > > > > "national"
    > > > > health care as the provider of last resort and those that can afford
    > > > > it seek private care. Many of the wealthiest come here and pay for the
    > > > > service.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >> Screw the "wealthiest" - they can always take care of themselves.
    > > >>
    > >
    > > Karl Marx couldn't say it better. Achievers should be penalized in
    > > order
    > > to subsidize under achievers.
    > >
    >
    > in the US at least achievers are only a small fraction of the wealthy --
    > most great fortunes recently have been made by people cheating and using
    > their position to skim money off of productive systems

You are living in fantasy. Most wealth in the US is self made through
perfectly
honest means by working hard and working smart within the law.

I myself was born into poverty, the grandson of 3 Irish immigrants,
who became a millionaire by age 45 and retired to travel and manage my
investments by age 53. Didn't skim from anybody, went to college on
the GI bill after 3years in the Marine Corps, worked my ass off , paid
my taxes, put 3 kids through college and I am not alone. There are
millions here like me.

In article <[email protected] >,
[email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:

    > Jenn <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    > > In article <[email protected] >,
    > > [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    > >
    > > > "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > > news:<a%[email protected] k.net>...
    > > > > PJ O'Donovan wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Your pontification reeks of inconsistency. We are at the "top"
    > > > > > technologically
    > > > > > but we have the "worst" delivery????
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Wishful thinking on your part. Many wealthy European consider their
    > > > > > "national"
    > > > > > health care as the provider of last resort and those that can afford
    > > > > > it seek private care. Many of the wealthiest come here and pay for
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > service.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >> Screw the "wealthiest" - they can always take care of themselves.
    > > > >>
    > > >
    > > > Karl Marx couldn't say it better. Achievers should be penalized in
    > > > order
    > > > to subsidize under achievers.
    > > >
    > >
    > > in the US at least achievers are only a small fraction of the wealthy --
    > > most great fortunes recently have been made by people cheating and using
    > > their position to skim money off of productive systems
    >
    > You are living in fantasy. Most wealth in the US is self made through
    > perfectly
    > honest means by working hard and working smart within the law.
    >
    > I myself was born into poverty, the grandson of 3 Irish immigrants,
    > who became a millionaire by age 45 and retired to travel and manage my
    > investments by age 53. Didn't skim from anybody, went to college on
    > the GI bill after 3years in the Marine Corps, worked my ass off , paid
    > my taxes, put 3 kids through college and I am not alone. There are
    > millions here like me.


I made mine by the sweat of my brow as well -- but I think you confuse
what appears to be middle class success, like yours and mine with great
wealth --

people in Bush's class i.e. those who coast through life for free -- are
in a different playing field -- and it these who benefit from the
policies of this administration -- and who don't care that they are
destroying medicare, social security etc because if you have hundreds of
thousands of free lunch coming in for little or no effort then what do
you care about hard working people who will suffer from these policies?

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:37:45 -0600, Jenn <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected] >,
    > [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >> Jenn <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:<[email protected]>...
    >> > In article <[email protected] >,
    >> > [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >> >
    >> > > "Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> > > news:<a%[email protected] k.net>...
    >> > > > PJ O'Donovan wrote:
    >> > > >
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Your pontification reeks of inconsistency. We are at the "top"
    >> > > > > technologically
    >> > > > > but we have the "worst" delivery????
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Wishful thinking on your part. Many wealthy European consider their
    >> > > > > "national"
    >> > > > > health care as the provider of last resort and those that can afford
    >> > > > > it seek private care. Many of the wealthiest come here and pay for
    >> > > > > the
    >> > > > > service.
    >> > > >
    >> > > >
    >> > > >> Screw the "wealthiest" - they can always take care of themselves.
    >> > > >>
    >> > >
    >> > > Karl Marx couldn't say it better. Achievers should be penalized in
    >> > > order
    >> > > to subsidize under achievers.
    >> > >
    >> >
    >> > in the US at least achievers are only a small fraction of the wealthy --
    >> > most great fortunes recently have been made by people cheating and using
    >> > their position to skim money off of productive systems
    >>
    >> You are living in fantasy. Most wealth in the US is self made through
    >> perfectly
    >> honest means by working hard and working smart within the law.
    >>
    >> I myself was born into poverty, the grandson of 3 Irish immigrants,
    >> who became a millionaire by age 45 and retired to travel and manage my
    >> investments by age 53. Didn't skim from anybody, went to college on
    >> the GI bill after 3years in the Marine Corps, worked my ass off , paid
    >> my taxes, put 3 kids through college and I am not alone. There are
    >> millions here like me.
    >I made mine by the sweat of my brow as well -- but I think you confuse
    >what appears to be middle class success, like yours and mine with great
    >wealth --
    >people in Bush's class i.e. those who coast through life for free -- are
    >in a different playing field -- and it these who benefit from the
    >policies of this administration -- and who don't care that they are
    >destroying medicare, social security etc because if you have hundreds of
    >thousands of free lunch coming in for little or no effort then what do
    >you care about hard working people who will suffer from these policies?

Thinking back to my history lessons at school and the causes of the
French Revolution, it was a similar case of free lunches for the rich
and sod all for the poor.

Wonder how long we'll have to wait before the poor get a handle on
what's being done to them?

Jenn writes:

    > if you count what mutual fund traders do as work including their
    > skimming profits through fraud, or Ken Lay and the crew, or 'investment
    > bankers' whose contribution is shuffling paper as productive and
    > 'working' maybe so

I've actually done the research.

    > the rich are mostly those who have been admitted to the game -- not
    > those who produce value

I'm not sure why you cling to this belief, but it has no basis in fact,
in the United States.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Keith Anderson writes:

    > Wonder how long we'll have to wait before the poor get a handle on
    > what's being done to them?

Possibly forever. Contrary to what people like Marx may have believed,
in real life, the lowest classes of society generally have no durable
tendency to rebel. Those who are in the lowest classes and have that
ambition typically just percolate into the upper classes. The only time
a real revolution occurs is when the most competent and ambitious people
in the lower classes are _prevented_ from moving upwards, i.e., when
there is no individual social mobility.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

On 8 Dec 2003 11:22:22 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:

    >Deep Freud Moors <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
    >> On 8 Dec 2003 02:33:44 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> Apparently you are having some issues.
    >
    > Like many of my fellow Americans, I do not want Socialized
    >medicine. That is
    > my issue. If others want it, to each his own.

That's the American way. The associated denial about how ****ed their
own health system is, is also the American way.

You fall into that almighty category of Americans that will blindly
shun anything that looks remotely social, without any regard as to
whether it actually works well or not.

American governments love privatisation, because it's a way of getting
people to pay for something twice, and artificially results in growth
in the private sector. Doesn't always work too well though, does it?

    >>It really bothers you that
    >> Australia has actually got a good national health system, eh! How
    >> could an idea that is shunned by America actually work well? Curiouser
    >> and curiouser...
    >Doesn't bother me at all, I just don't want any part of it here. If
    >others want it in other countries, fine.

Given that you felt the need to make up a lie and go into denial, I
suspect that is does bother you a lot. Did you make sure you told
every Australian about how crap their system was when you were here?

    >If your national health system is so good, why do 80% of the
    >Australians seek private care as oposed to the national health care
    >system? This disparity makes the National system the provider of last
    >resort as I have been told by Australians themselves.

80% seek private care? More bullshit.

http://www.apha.org.au/get/2375386291

"Today, private health insurance membership is 43.3% of the
population."
---
DFM

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 12:56:37 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    >deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu (Deep Freud Moors) wrote:
    >> On 8 Dec 2003 02:33:44 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:
    >> >I did not claim to have seen ..EVERY...clinic in Australia. Driving
    >> >through the
    >> >towns in Australia, I saw clinics. The clinics I saw were sometimes
    >> >located on the main roads through the towns. Sometimes I saw lines of
    >> >people attracting my attention as I drove through some towns.
    >> >Sometimes as I looked, I then noticed that people were standing in
    >> >line to go into public health clinics in Australia.
    >>
    >> Utter bullshit. Waiting rooms exist, lines of people do not.
    >I suppose it's possible they were waiting outside for the clinic to open
    >first thing in the morning. A few people, maybe, but queues per se
    >unlikely...

Same thing could happen at a McDonalds!
---
DFM

On 8 Dec 2003 13:24:46 -0800, [email protected] (PJ O'Donovan) wrote:

    > I myself was born into poverty, the grandson of 3 Irish immigrants,
    >who became a millionaire by age 45 and retired to travel and manage my
    >investments by age 53. Didn't skim from anybody, went to college on
    >the GI bill after 3years in the Marine Corps, worked my ass off , paid
    >my taxes, put 3 kids through college and I am not alone. There are
    >millions here like me.

Travelled to Europe, met a princess, got a massage, and I did it my
way...
---
DFM

Deep Freud Moors writes:

    > Travelled to Europe, met a princess, got a massage, and I did it my
    > way...

Or travelled to America, married a Kennedy, was elected Mr. Universe,
became a movie star, was elected Governator of California, and will soon
be Chancel--er, President.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

In article <[email protected]>,
deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu (Deep Freud Moors) wrote:

    > On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 12:56:37 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
    > wrote:

    > >I suppose it's possible they were waiting outside for the clinic to
    > open >first thing in the morning. A few people, maybe, but queues per
    > se >unlikely...
    >
    > Same thing could happen at a McDonalds!

Or indeed an ATM.

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Mxsmanic) wrote:

    > Jenn writes:
    >
    > > if you count what mutual fund traders do as work including their
    > > skimming profits through fraud, or Ken Lay and the crew, or
    > > 'investment bankers' whose contribution is shuffling paper as
    > > productive and 'working' maybe so
    >
    > I've actually done the research.

Will you share it?