Elephant said to me:
"If you really *are* forced to think what you do because of your Kultur, you
might as well not bother. Think that is."
I certainly cannot claim the intellectual arrogance to believe that I am
capable of completely transcending the belief system in which I was reared.
I think all of us in the current "left vs. right" discussions could rightly
be accused of a healthy dose of cultural relativism. Your accusation infers
that you yourself have risen above any form of cultural bias due to the
advanced nature of your thought processes. I guess it's just coincidence
that you seem to echo the same party line (as pertaining to the recent
topics) as all the other left-wingers in your Kultur. Or perhaps you are all
completely correct!!!
CLARKE WROTE:
> Regarding the US system of health care - the rise
> in health costs in this nation is in direct, empirically-verifiable,
> relationship with one thing: the increase in "social health" programs such
as
> Medicare and Medicaid. While I'm not disputing the need to address the
> health concerns of the poor, it still forces my "cultural filter" to think
> National Health=Exorbitant Costs=Disaster. The social pathologies of this
> nation are simply different from those of Europe, in that what works well in
> one nation may not necessarily work well in another,IMO.
Fascinating speculation. How To Identify And Compare Social Pathologies In
One Easy Stage.
El, are you saying that social pathologies do not vary from country to
country, or region to region? Ask the Pakistanis' who just got the bricks
upside their heads in your homeland. Then again, maybe pathologies in this
sense are all the same.
Elephant said:
Why do you think they got Clinton's health programme
stopped - paid for all those campaign adds when it was going through
congress? - it would have lost insurers a hellava lot of money.
The reason the Hilary Clinton health care program was stopped was because
many Americans (i.e., those who would have foot the bill) began to see the
huge defects in a system that would have catered to the individuals who
couldn't care less about their own individual health,e.g., smokers, drinkers,
crack addicts,etc., devouring available resources to people that don't
physically abuse themselves. Also, the system was a veiled attempt at
pushing an idealistic agenda that believes the government can produce social
harmony, e.g., Bill Clinton went on national TV to assure the populace of
their continued right to "choose" their own doctor. What he failed to
mention for some reason was that we could only "choose" from a limited pool
of authorized doctors. In order to be at the top of the pool it was best to
be African-American or Hispanic. What you may not be aware of is that a
"minority" designation in this nation means you get as many trips to the
plate (baseball metaphor) as required in order to get a hit. If you fail a
medical class, keep taking it as long as is necessary. Without this
designation, one failure means you are out of the program. I'm not sure if
this allows for a real "Quality" approach in terms of health care. If I were
fighting cancer I'm more inclined to be concerned with the capabilities of
the attending physician, not my humanitarian goal of achieving racial harmony
at the expense of my lymph tissue.
To end, I was recently visiting a friend at the Ochsner hospital (a
well-respected institution here in New Orleans), and noticed an abundance of
European patients. I wonder why.
Clarke
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
