Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
in [Europe]
|
From: marika on 6 Aug 2006 21:33 On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 19:09:12 -0400, TOliver <toliverjrFIX(a)Hot.rr.com> wrote: > > "marika" <mcenko(a)mindspring.com> wrote... >> >> So, I look at this skeptically, but realize that there's a lot going on >> in >> the government that we just don't know about. And that's not paranoia, >> that's just fact. and all it does is lead to deaths >> > > Laughably, some of us around for the 1950s would rightly claim that civil > rights are far, far more observed today than then, and personal liberty > of > conduct, belief and speech is immeasurably greater today than then. how very interesting, especially if, assuming i am as young as you think. but i am pretty sure i was talking about death, an ultimate deprivation. initially of course, in a thread that was taking the temperature of the financial climate in US. i of course mentioned the loss of able bodied people in the war as one of the benchmarks by which we can measure the health of the nation. it's not just the bodies, but if considered in terms of the skills lost, and family grief that will cause a need for health care due to counselling and other ills. and then of course, the wounded, o my, that's another budget item. now i was talking about the US budget. you posited the disturbing loss of iraqis et al. i conceded even though while very sad, not really directly related to the us budget > As for government secrecy, you've got to be kidding. Even with the most > stringent security requirements of the 50s, with which actions, programs > and > materials were far more tightly "held" than today, a sieve hardly > describes > the nature and extent of leakage. Today, "secret" information surfaces > far > more rapidly, and between bloggers, Drudge, and dozens of other sources, > one > who bothers to look can stay well ahead of the power curve, only trapped > by > attempting to assign levels of credibility to sources and information. uhuh then i suggested that i had heard a rumor. It's not a new one. I heard it sometime ago on the radio and then a few more times about some fence and some related deaths. heard them later on blogs. indeed i stayed ahead of the curve > > Around when Hoover worked in Baghdad on the Potomac, let me be among the > first to assure you that not only is your reaction sophmoric and your reaction is equally sophomoric, jejune, thesaurus thesaurus ect ect your suggestion that the government doesn't endeavor to keep things secret is very funny and your reaction screams guilty mind. clearly you did at one time work for the government and may do so now. i like it when government workers say that it is impossible to keep a secret. it can and has been done > (let's make > that almost as juvenile as prepubescence), but that your imagination > must be > nearly as vivid as that of the conspirowackos with their black helos and yes my imagination is splendid and it is this which keeps me farther ahead of the bloggers. if i can imagine something that is being done, then someone else probably imagined it too. > > foiled-lined helmets. Conspiracies? The larger the entity the more > rapidly > the conspiracy is revealed, and that is why the things that must be kept secret are held closely by small groups. come now, i am sure you have now or had in the past some level of clearance that required signing a nondisclosure agreement > and the federal government's capacity to mount > and continue a conspiracy ranks right up there with a classroom of 7th > grade > girls. > > >> i heard someone joke about giving the Iraqis our Constitution because >> we're not using it anymore, this was funny, but cuts a little too close >> to >> home. Our rights guaranteed in that document are getting whittled away >> little by little by the cowboy-in-chief and his evil minions. So someone >> might as well get some use out of it... > > Just be be clear, would you enumerate and describe which of your real or > imagined constitutional rights have been circumscribed or eleiminated > lately? > > since you work for the government, or did, please help yourself to my file. if you are retired, come on over and i will share my foia folder with you. it's not all there of course, because of the black magic marker stuff. we;ll have fun, i will make you a nice meal while you devour all the stupidity
From: Mxsmanic on 6 Aug 2006 23:23 TOliver writes: > Then there's the European (Continetntal?) tendency to be license happy.... Yes. Unfortunately, the tendency is much worse in Europe. The interesting thing is that Europeans aren't any more qualified, they just accumulate a bigger stack of largely meaningless credentials. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on 6 Aug 2006 23:27 TOliver writes: > Conspiracies? The larger the entity the more rapidly > the conspiracy is revealed, and the federal government's capacity to mount > and continue a conspiracy ranks right up there with a classroom of 7th grade > girls. Seventh-grade girls are very good at this. > Just be be clear, would you enumerate and describe which of your real or > imagined constitutional rights have been circumscribed or eleiminated > lately? The First Amendment (freedom of speech and the press, peaceful assembly), the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable search and seizure, probable cause), and the Fifth Amendment (grand jury, due process, seizure of private property) spring immediately to mind. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Hatunen on 6 Aug 2006 23:29 On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 12:06:05 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: You always edit out important stuff and then respond to the leftovers. Let's recreate it, shall we: >JohnT: >> You are suggesting that one doesn't need to be qualified to perform brain >> surgery? Mxsmanic: >I am saying that one doesn't need credentials. One does need >qualifications, but qualifications and credentials are not the same >thing, contrary to popular myth. Me: Credentials are simply attestation to the qualification. I wouldn want a brain surgeon to operate on me on his undocumented claim of qualification. But that's just me; I always look at the certificates on a doctor's wall. Me again: >> They usually are the likes of diplomas and certifications, and as >> close to proof as you can get without having attended school with >> the applicant. My respponse here: You want to watch a brain surgeon perform before he operates on you? Me: >> They are also generally verifiable by the issuing institution. Mxsmanic: >What makes the issuing institution reliable? What makes anything reliable? At some point you have to accept things, such as the surgeon being a fellow of a brain surgeon's certifying group just as his certificte shows and contact with the group confirms. In general it ain't a bad idea to ask some former clients, but with brain surgery those are going to be rather hard to find. In the US many states have on-line records of disciplinary action agains physicians (and contractors) by the state's aulatiy board for that profession. If Harvard University cnfirms that Richard Roe, MD, earned his medical degree there, you're going to have to take Harvard's word for it. ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Hatunen on 6 Aug 2006 23:34
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 16:52:33 +0100, "Keith Willshaw" <keithnospam(a)kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:1154834545.305768.182160(a)m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> Keith W wrote: >>> "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:1154650659.478476.197950(a)75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... >> >>> > They will pay the doctor for you at a rate that they have set. That's >>> > controlled rates. Controlled wages and prices. >>> >>> Nope , Medical practises are paid fees based on a complex formula >>> that reimburses them based on the number of patients treated, >>> the nature of that treatment etc. Individual doctors are either >>> employees of or partners in that practise >>> >>> Within hospitals doctors are employees of the health care trust >>> but senior consultants also work a protion of their time in >>> private practise >> >> So you're saying that the NHS calculates a rate rather than has a flat >> rate? Still that means the NHS is setting the rates. >> > >No the NHS provides each practise with a budget administered >by the medical staff who run it. > >>> > The US tried that under >>> > Nixon. The runaway inflation under Carter was in part caused by Nixon's >>> > dumb attempt to control prices and wages. >>> >>> Irrelevant >> >> Very relevant. Price controls always skew the market. The market is a >> powerful force. It *will* get even. >> > >There are no price controls as there is no price. Treatment >is free at the point of use. But there are wage controls: the amount a physician receives for providing the service is a form of wage control. There are also price controls on what the NHS pays manufacturers for the likes of pharmaceuticals, etc. If the controls take the form of a budget, it still constitutes a form of wage and price control. ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |