A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Jobst



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 31st 17, 05:08 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,872
Default Jobst

On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 7:18:34 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/31/2017 8:38 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:52:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:

Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.


That's right but when push comes to shove let's see just what goes.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.


You're joking right? I have had over $18,000 in medical bills this year.. Most of it paid for by insurance and every bit of it possible only because of modern medical instruments some of which I helped develop.

Are you telling me that a Thai can go to a clinic and have a $500,000 panoramic x-ray taken of his jaw? How many of these clinics are there? How many doctors trained in doing a sinus lift that requires donated bone material to achieve? That requires three different medications before and afterwards top stave off infections?

We have antobiotics in the USA that you can't even get in Europe and you're telling me that things are better than that in Thailand?

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.


Do you mean 30% more than nothing? Why don't you tell us all that the common Vietnamese isn't nothing more than a rice farmer now just as they were before the communists took over.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".


At what point did it became MY responsibility to make sure you took care of yourself?


You can't understand utterly disparate systems meaningfully
by looking at one price. For example the open billing rate
for a hospital MRI scan around here is $5~12,000 [1] and yet
there are independent (cash only) $400 MRI outfits which are
profitable.

[1] Governments and insurers demand 80/90 percent off
'list'. The list numbers are basically meaningless and exist
only to set up the 'discount' contracts such that the net is
unchanged after discount. Unless you are a cash customer, in
which case they are ridiculous.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


Well, more like 60% and I cover an additional 5%.
Ads
  #12  
Old August 31st 17, 05:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,941
Default Jobst

On 8/31/2017 6:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2017 9:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:28:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 7:33:22 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:37:47 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/28/2017 5:35 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM,
wrote:

Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while
the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war
mongers.

Hmm.* Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of
treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc
typically predated the president in office at the time (whether
Republican or Democrat) the shooting started.

Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents
post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War
(Reagan),
invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado
Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian
Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW
Bush),
inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in
Afghanistan
(GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW
Bush).* That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as
some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger
umbrella conflicts mentioned above.

Technically, the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was started by
Eisenhower,
not Kennedy. Eisenhower sent "advisors" as a prelude to sending
troops.
He also supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, even though Diem was a
major reason for the Vietnam war.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two
at the 17th parallel until 1956, when democratic elections would be
held under international supervision. All parties involved agreed to
this (Ho Chi Minh had strong support in the north, which was more
populous than the south, and was thus comfortable that he would win an
election), except for the US, who did not want to see Communism
spreading in a domino effect throughout Asia.

The U.S., supporting the South, installed Ngo Dinh Diem, initially as
Prime Minister to Bao Dai, the Emperor, and later after a rigged
election as President of the Republic of South Vietnam. He and his
brother were assassinated in 1963 during a coup led by General Duong
Van Minh.

While Diem was a fanatical Catholic and did contribute to the
Buddhist/Christian problems in S. Vietnam he was not responsible for
the Vietnam war which was almost entirely a U.S. effort.

Had the original Geneva Accords been followed and the elections been
held Vietnam would have been united, in 1956, under a Communist
government.

It might be noted that while engaged in a war in Vietnam to make the
world safe from communism the U.S. was buying supplies used in the war
from Yugoslavia.

The so called Domino effect espoused by the Eisenhower Administration
is, in retrospect a bunch of whooee. The two greatest heroes of
Vietnam are the Trung Sisters who lead a revolution against Chinese
dominance of Vietnam and Vietnam fought a (small) war against China in
1979.


While the U.S. exited Vietnam under Gerald Ford, it was the Democrats
that forced the exit, President Ford wanted to continue military aid.

My guess is that the U.S.'s abandonment of the Vietnam war was
primarily an effort to get out of the war in any manner possible
rather then a political scheme of either political party as to be
frank the North had won the war.

Well we can always say you certainly look out for the common man. We
can see the great advances for the communist state of North Korea.
Instead of the North this could have been the entire country. But I
guess that living in Thailand has taught you to totally ignore the
common man as most of Asia does.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sate...Px3RCbfyWplDM:


Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.

Has the U.S. a universal health program where you pay $8.00 and
everything else is free? Has the U.S. developed a low cost housing
plan that houses 80% of their population? Have average U.S. wages
increased by 30% in the past three years.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".
--
Cheers,

John B.


OK, but we don't have your Rice Subsidy either.
We achieved our humongous debts without even giving away rice!


U.S. rice producers are heavily subsidized.
https://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=rice.

But it goes beyond the actual cash subsidies. In California they also
receive non-cash subsidies of water. In a drought-prone state, the rice
farmers have water rights to grow a very thirsty crop.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #13  
Old August 31st 17, 05:24 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,872
Default Jobst

On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 9:15:19 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 8/31/2017 6:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2017 9:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:28:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 7:33:22 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:37:47 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/28/2017 5:35 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM,
wrote:

Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while
the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war
mongers.

Hmm.* Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of
treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc
typically predated the president in office at the time (whether
Republican or Democrat) the shooting started.

Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents
post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War
(Reagan),
invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado
Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian
Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW
Bush),
inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in
Afghanistan
(GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW
Bush).* That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as
some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger
umbrella conflicts mentioned above.

Technically, the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was started by
Eisenhower,
not Kennedy. Eisenhower sent "advisors" as a prelude to sending
troops.
He also supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, even though Diem was a
major reason for the Vietnam war.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two
at the 17th parallel until 1956, when democratic elections would be
held under international supervision. All parties involved agreed to
this (Ho Chi Minh had strong support in the north, which was more
populous than the south, and was thus comfortable that he would win an
election), except for the US, who did not want to see Communism
spreading in a domino effect throughout Asia.

The U.S., supporting the South, installed Ngo Dinh Diem, initially as
Prime Minister to Bao Dai, the Emperor, and later after a rigged
election as President of the Republic of South Vietnam. He and his
brother were assassinated in 1963 during a coup led by General Duong
Van Minh.

While Diem was a fanatical Catholic and did contribute to the
Buddhist/Christian problems in S. Vietnam he was not responsible for
the Vietnam war which was almost entirely a U.S. effort.

Had the original Geneva Accords been followed and the elections been
held Vietnam would have been united, in 1956, under a Communist
government.

It might be noted that while engaged in a war in Vietnam to make the
world safe from communism the U.S. was buying supplies used in the war
from Yugoslavia.

The so called Domino effect espoused by the Eisenhower Administration
is, in retrospect a bunch of whooee. The two greatest heroes of
Vietnam are the Trung Sisters who lead a revolution against Chinese
dominance of Vietnam and Vietnam fought a (small) war against China in
1979.


While the U.S. exited Vietnam under Gerald Ford, it was the Democrats
that forced the exit, President Ford wanted to continue military aid.

My guess is that the U.S.'s abandonment of the Vietnam war was
primarily an effort to get out of the war in any manner possible
rather then a political scheme of either political party as to be
frank the North had won the war.

Well we can always say you certainly look out for the common man. We
can see the great advances for the communist state of North Korea.
Instead of the North this could have been the entire country. But I
guess that living in Thailand has taught you to totally ignore the
common man as most of Asia does.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sate...Px3RCbfyWplDM:


Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.

Has the U.S. a universal health program where you pay $8.00 and
everything else is free? Has the U.S. developed a low cost housing
plan that houses 80% of their population? Have average U.S. wages
increased by 30% in the past three years.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".
--
Cheers,

John B.


OK, but we don't have your Rice Subsidy either.
We achieved our humongous debts without even giving away rice!


U.S. rice producers are heavily subsidized.
https://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=rice.

But it goes beyond the actual cash subsidies. In California they also
receive non-cash subsidies of water. In a drought-prone state, the rice
farmers have water rights to grow a very thirsty crop.


Exactly what produce does NOT receive heavy subsidies in tax crazy California? And the return of rice crop per acre foot of water is less for rice than many other grains.
  #14  
Old August 31st 17, 06:46 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,941
Default Jobst

On 8/31/2017 7:19 AM, AMuzi wrote:

You can't understand utterly disparate systems meaningfully by looking
at one price.


When it's pointed out that the warming of the oceans is contributing to
increased intensity of weather events, there is always someone that will
point to some storm in the distant past and scream "well explain that
storm."

The tendency for low-information individuals to point to a single
example of something as "proof" spans many differnet disciplines.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #15  
Old September 1st 17, 01:43 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,941
Default Jobst

On 8/31/2017 9:24 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 9:15:19 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 8/31/2017 6:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2017 9:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:28:11 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 7:33:22 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:37:47 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/28/2017 5:35 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM,
wrote:

Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while
the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war
mongers.

Hmm.* Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of
treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc
typically predated the president in office at the time (whether
Republican or Democrat) the shooting started.

Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents
post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War
(Reagan),
invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado
Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian
Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW
Bush),
inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in
Afghanistan
(GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW
Bush).* That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as
some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger
umbrella conflicts mentioned above.

Technically, the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was started by
Eisenhower,
not Kennedy. Eisenhower sent "advisors" as a prelude to sending
troops.
He also supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, even though Diem was a
major reason for the Vietnam war.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two
at the 17th parallel until 1956, when democratic elections would be
held under international supervision. All parties involved agreed to
this (Ho Chi Minh had strong support in the north, which was more
populous than the south, and was thus comfortable that he would win an
election), except for the US, who did not want to see Communism
spreading in a domino effect throughout Asia.

The U.S., supporting the South, installed Ngo Dinh Diem, initially as
Prime Minister to Bao Dai, the Emperor, and later after a rigged
election as President of the Republic of South Vietnam. He and his
brother were assassinated in 1963 during a coup led by General Duong
Van Minh.

While Diem was a fanatical Catholic and did contribute to the
Buddhist/Christian problems in S. Vietnam he was not responsible for
the Vietnam war which was almost entirely a U.S. effort.

Had the original Geneva Accords been followed and the elections been
held Vietnam would have been united, in 1956, under a Communist
government.

It might be noted that while engaged in a war in Vietnam to make the
world safe from communism the U.S. was buying supplies used in the war
from Yugoslavia.

The so called Domino effect espoused by the Eisenhower Administration
is, in retrospect a bunch of whooee. The two greatest heroes of
Vietnam are the Trung Sisters who lead a revolution against Chinese
dominance of Vietnam and Vietnam fought a (small) war against China in
1979.


While the U.S. exited Vietnam under Gerald Ford, it was the Democrats
that forced the exit, President Ford wanted to continue military aid.

My guess is that the U.S.'s abandonment of the Vietnam war was
primarily an effort to get out of the war in any manner possible
rather then a political scheme of either political party as to be
frank the North had won the war.

Well we can always say you certainly look out for the common man. We
can see the great advances for the communist state of North Korea.
Instead of the North this could have been the entire country. But I
guess that living in Thailand has taught you to totally ignore the
common man as most of Asia does.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sate...Px3RCbfyWplDM:


Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.

Has the U.S. a universal health program where you pay $8.00 and
everything else is free? Has the U.S. developed a low cost housing
plan that houses 80% of their population? Have average U.S. wages
increased by 30% in the past three years.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".
--
Cheers,

John B.


OK, but we don't have your Rice Subsidy either.
We achieved our humongous debts without even giving away rice!


U.S. rice producers are heavily subsidized.
https://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=rice.

But it goes beyond the actual cash subsidies. In California they also
receive non-cash subsidies of water. In a drought-prone state, the rice
farmers have water rights to grow a very thirsty crop.


Exactly what produce does NOT receive heavy subsidies in tax crazy California? And the return of rice crop per acre foot of water is less for rice than many other grains.


The cash subsidies are from the federal government not from the state.
It has nothing to do with the level of taxes in California.

The water rights are the big problem, and the state would have to buy
out the holders of those rights.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #16  
Old September 1st 17, 02:38 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,151
Default Jobst

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 08:18:02 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 8/30/2017 9:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:28:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 7:33:22 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:37:47 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/28/2017 5:35 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM,
wrote:

Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while
the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war
mongers.

Hmm. Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of
treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc
typically predated the president in office at the time (whether
Republican or Democrat) the shooting started.

Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents
post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War (Reagan),
invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado
Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian
Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW Bush),
inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in Afghanistan
(GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW
Bush). That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as
some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger
umbrella conflicts mentioned above.

Technically, the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was started by Eisenhower,
not Kennedy. Eisenhower sent "advisors" as a prelude to sending troops.
He also supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, even though Diem was a
major reason for the Vietnam war.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two
at the 17th parallel until 1956, when democratic elections would be
held under international supervision. All parties involved agreed to
this (Ho Chi Minh had strong support in the north, which was more
populous than the south, and was thus comfortable that he would win an
election), except for the US, who did not want to see Communism
spreading in a domino effect throughout Asia.

The U.S., supporting the South, installed Ngo Dinh Diem, initially as
Prime Minister to Bao Dai, the Emperor, and later after a rigged
election as President of the Republic of South Vietnam. He and his
brother were assassinated in 1963 during a coup led by General Duong
Van Minh.

While Diem was a fanatical Catholic and did contribute to the
Buddhist/Christian problems in S. Vietnam he was not responsible for
the Vietnam war which was almost entirely a U.S. effort.

Had the original Geneva Accords been followed and the elections been
held Vietnam would have been united, in 1956, under a Communist
government.

It might be noted that while engaged in a war in Vietnam to make the
world safe from communism the U.S. was buying supplies used in the war
from Yugoslavia.

The so called Domino effect espoused by the Eisenhower Administration
is, in retrospect a bunch of whooee. The two greatest heroes of
Vietnam are the Trung Sisters who lead a revolution against Chinese
dominance of Vietnam and Vietnam fought a (small) war against China in
1979.


While the U.S. exited Vietnam under Gerald Ford, it was the Democrats
that forced the exit, President Ford wanted to continue military aid.

My guess is that the U.S.'s abandonment of the Vietnam war was
primarily an effort to get out of the war in any manner possible
rather then a political scheme of either political party as to be
frank the North had won the war.

Well we can always say you certainly look out for the common man. We can see the great advances for the communist state of North Korea. Instead of the North this could have been the entire country. But I guess that living in Thailand has taught you to totally ignore the common man as most of Asia does.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sate...Px3RCbfyWplDM:


Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.

Has the U.S. a universal health program where you pay $8.00 and
everything else is free? Has the U.S. developed a low cost housing
plan that houses 80% of their population? Have average U.S. wages
increased by 30% in the past three years.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".
--
Cheers,

John B.


OK, but we don't have your Rice Subsidy either.
We achieved our humongous debts without even giving away rice!


I think you are probably talking about the "rice pledging" scheme that
the various Shinawatras governments implemented as a sure fire vote
getter.

Long gone and the people that dreamed up the scheme are either in
jail, in the process of going to jail, or have fled the country to
avoid going to jail.
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #17  
Old September 1st 17, 02:54 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,151
Default Jobst

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:15:16 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/31/2017 6:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/30/2017 9:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:28:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 7:33:22 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:37:47 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 8/28/2017 5:35 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On 8/28/2017 11:43 AM,
wrote:

Every war since WW I was gone into from a Democrat President while
the Democrat party has been accusing Republicans of being war
mongers.

Hmm.* Many of the wars the US was involved in were the reuslts of
treaty obligations and critical US interests, the roots of whihc
typically predated the president in office at the time (whether
Republican or Democrat) the shooting started.

Just to pick a few that started shooting under Republican presidents
post WW 1: The Lebanon Crisis (Eisenhower), Lebanese Civil War
(Reagan),
invasion of Grenada (Reagan), bombing of Libya (Operation El Dorado
Canyon- Reagan), Operations Earnest Will/Prime Chance in the Persian
Gulf (Reagan), invasion of Panama (GHW Bush), the Gulf War (GHW
Bush),
inervention in the Somali civil war (GHW Bush), the war in
Afghanistan
(GW Bush), the Iraq War (GW Bush), the war in North-west Pakistan (GW
Bush).* That list is not fully comprehensive of all the operations as
some are (Desert Storm, Desert Shield, etc.) are under the larger
umbrella conflicts mentioned above.

Technically, the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was started by
Eisenhower,
not Kennedy. Eisenhower sent "advisors" as a prelude to sending
troops.
He also supported the regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, even though Diem was a
major reason for the Vietnam war.

The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two
at the 17th parallel until 1956, when democratic elections would be
held under international supervision. All parties involved agreed to
this (Ho Chi Minh had strong support in the north, which was more
populous than the south, and was thus comfortable that he would win an
election), except for the US, who did not want to see Communism
spreading in a domino effect throughout Asia.

The U.S., supporting the South, installed Ngo Dinh Diem, initially as
Prime Minister to Bao Dai, the Emperor, and later after a rigged
election as President of the Republic of South Vietnam. He and his
brother were assassinated in 1963 during a coup led by General Duong
Van Minh.

While Diem was a fanatical Catholic and did contribute to the
Buddhist/Christian problems in S. Vietnam he was not responsible for
the Vietnam war which was almost entirely a U.S. effort.

Had the original Geneva Accords been followed and the elections been
held Vietnam would have been united, in 1956, under a Communist
government.

It might be noted that while engaged in a war in Vietnam to make the
world safe from communism the U.S. was buying supplies used in the war
from Yugoslavia.

The so called Domino effect espoused by the Eisenhower Administration
is, in retrospect a bunch of whooee. The two greatest heroes of
Vietnam are the Trung Sisters who lead a revolution against Chinese
dominance of Vietnam and Vietnam fought a (small) war against China in
1979.


While the U.S. exited Vietnam under Gerald Ford, it was the Democrats
that forced the exit, President Ford wanted to continue military aid.

My guess is that the U.S.'s abandonment of the Vietnam war was
primarily an effort to get out of the war in any manner possible
rather then a political scheme of either political party as to be
frank the North had won the war.

Well we can always say you certainly look out for the common man. We
can see the great advances for the communist state of North Korea.
Instead of the North this could have been the entire country. But I
guess that living in Thailand has taught you to totally ignore the
common man as most of Asia does.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sate...Px3RCbfyWplDM:


Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.

Has the U.S. a universal health program where you pay $8.00 and
everything else is free? Has the U.S. developed a low cost housing
plan that houses 80% of their population? Have average U.S. wages
increased by 30% in the past three years.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".
--
Cheers,

John B.


OK, but we don't have your Rice Subsidy either.
We achieved our humongous debts without even giving away rice!


U.S. rice producers are heavily subsidized.
https://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=00000&progcode=rice.

But it goes beyond the actual cash subsidies. In California they also
receive non-cash subsidies of water. In a drought-prone state, the rice
farmers have water rights to grow a very thirsty crop.


Subsidizing agriculture, in some manner, in the U.S., dates back at
least to the 1920's, and even before that U.S. policies were aimed at
promoting farms and farming. See the Homestead act of 1862.

I remember, years ago when I was still in High School, visiting a
friend of my father's who may have been the largest potato grower in
New Hampshire at the time and being shown this huge pile of potatoes
all dyed green. We were told that financially, with the subsidy, it
was more profitable to not selling the potatoes then to selling them
on the open market :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #18  
Old September 1st 17, 03:39 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,151
Default Jobst

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:38:07 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:52:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:

Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.


That's right but when push comes to shove let's see just what goes.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.


You're joking right? I have had over $18,000 in medical bills this year. Most of it paid for by insurance and every bit of it possible only because of modern medical instruments some of which I helped develop.


No, I am not joking. Any Thai citizen can visit a government clinic,
pay 30 baht, and receive any necessary medical treatment (that is
available in Thailand) free.

A friend who suffered kidney failure was treated and had dialysis for
several weeks for the initial 30 baht payment. Luckily his problem was
resolved. His wife joked that the only thing that they didn't pay was
the gas for the car to drive back and forth to the hospital.

My wife has a heart condition and thyroid problems (both controlled)
and has a blood test and checkup quarterly. Entirely free because she
is over 65 years of age. (the clinic is close enough that she walks
:-)


Are you telling me that a Thai can go to a clinic and have a $500,000 panoramic x-ray taken of his jaw? How many of these clinics are there? How many doctors trained in doing a sinus lift that requires donated bone material to achieve? That requires three different medications before and afterwards top stave off infections?

Yup. Anything that the doctor orders. Specifically a panoramic x-ray I
do not know but if the government hospitals have the device then yes.
free.

We have antobiotics in the USA that you can't even get in Europe and you're telling me that things are better than that in Thailand?


Nope. I am saying that a Thai Citizen can get any medical treatment
that is available in Thailand for 30 baht (1/10th of the minimum daily
salary)


Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.


Do you mean 30% more than nothing? Why don't you tell us all that the common Vietnamese isn't nothing more than a rice farmer now just as they were before the communists took over.

It really doesn't make any difference what the starting point was,
that is history. What is important is that today, living is nearly 30%
better then it was three years ago.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".


At what point did it became MY responsibility to make sure you took care of yourself?


I have no idea. That seems to be a sort of socialistic notion that
seems to be taking root in the U.S. I recently read that almost half
of the families in the U.S. was receiving government aid, in some
form.
http://tinyurl.com/yamwp3mt

I read that 81% of the U.S. government revenues are from individual
income tax and payroll taxes so it appears that yes, you are taking
care of the common man :-)
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/b...-101/revenues/
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #19  
Old September 1st 17, 03:48 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,151
Default Jobst

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:19:01 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 8/31/2017 8:38 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 7:52:43 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:

Hardly. In fact the South East Asian nations are very interested in
heir citizens welfare, likely because satisfied citizens rarely
revolt.


That's right but when push comes to shove let's see just what goes.

Thailand, for example, has universal health care. You go to a clinic,
pay 1/10th of the minimum daily salary and any and all treatment
proscribed by the doctor is free. And, of course if you are over 65 it
is completely free.


You're joking right? I have had over $18,000 in medical bills this year. Most of it paid for by insurance and every bit of it possible only because of modern medical instruments some of which I helped develop.

Are you telling me that a Thai can go to a clinic and have a $500,000 panoramic x-ray taken of his jaw? How many of these clinics are there? How many doctors trained in doing a sinus lift that requires donated bone material to achieve? That requires three different medications before and afterwards top stave off infections?

We have antobiotics in the USA that you can't even get in Europe and you're telling me that things are better than that in Thailand?

Singapore built low cost housing for their people. They brag that over
80% of Singapore's resident population reside in this housing and
about 90% of these resident households own their home.

Vietnam? Well, in the past three years the average income has
increased by nearly 30%.


Do you mean 30% more than nothing? Why don't you tell us all that the common Vietnamese isn't nothing more than a rice farmer now just as they were before the communists took over.

Tell me more about " looking out for the common man".


At what point did it became MY responsibility to make sure you took care of yourself?


You can't understand utterly disparate systems meaningfully
by looking at one price. For example the open billing rate
for a hospital MRI scan around here is $5~12,000 [1] and yet
there are independent (cash only) $400 MRI outfits which are
profitable.

[1] Governments and insurers demand 80/90 percent off
'list'. The list numbers are basically meaningless and exist
only to set up the 'discount' contracts such that the net is
unchanged after discount. Unless you are a cash customer, in
which case they are ridiculous.


Because I do have a heart problem and cholesterol problem (both
controlled) I have a quarterly checkup which includes blood tests. Out
of curiosity I took the blood test papers to a commercial medical lab
and asked what the tests would cost there. Just about half what I am
being billed in the hospital.

At a different hospital and different doctor I was told that unless
the doctor prescribed a medicine to be furnished by the hospital that
"the hospital complains". Again twice the price if from a wholesale
druggist.
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #20  
Old September 1st 17, 03:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,872
Default Jobst

On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 7:39:26 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:

Are you telling me that a Thai can go to a clinic and have a $500,000 panoramic x-ray taken of his jaw? How many of these clinics are there? How many doctors trained in doing a sinus lift that requires donated bone material to achieve? That requires three different medications before and afterwards top stave off infections?

Yup. Anything that the doctor orders. Specifically a panoramic x-ray I
do not know but if the government hospitals have the device then yes.
free.


You don't seem to be following me John. The numbers and costs of spectacular medical instruments in the USA is staggering. And these will often be in a private doctor's office. These are not available in Thailand any more than they are in European villages or even in Great Britain outside of the major cities.

The weakness of socialized medicine is that it cannot afford the advancements.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is jobst gone? Crescentius Vespasianus Techniques 7 June 23rd 11 12:08 AM
When Jobst ... Steve Freides[_2_] Techniques 1 January 20th 11 09:28 PM
Jobst Brad Anders Racing 20 January 19th 11 05:31 PM
Jobst TriGuru55x11 Rides 1 January 19th 11 01:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.