Castro Dead

[Sailormann]

Now then, if I were in a purely socialistic state, my choices would be limited to those given me by the state. It would decide what job I worked, where I lived, etc., because the state owns everything. Without private ownership, you have no avenue to making choices, because you are dependent on the state.

I think that you might be confusing communism and socialism a bit here... Socialism is based on free enterprise, communism is (theoretically) based on the enterprise of the communal unit (community).

[Rickm505]

Originally Posted by sailaway21

jef,I'm sorry, but I am done with you. .

Sailaway, I get the feeling you're "done" with anyone who disagrees with you. I might suggest that when you're not so busy telling everyone how right you are, that you take a couple of steps back and start counting how many Constitutional Amendments we've all lost in the last few years.

OH, here's a thought.... you don't by chance work as a speech writer for the bush Administration, do you?

I have to find the guy who wrote that "I'm the Decider" line... and thank him.

[Rickm505]

Again to Mr. Sailaway

Your example of misallocated post offices sounds pretty good when you compare them to Republican Senator Ted Steven's 'Bridge to Nowhere'. The damn thing is longer than the Golden Gate bridge....

Socialisim denotes centralized organization. Our Congress denotes...pork..

Sheesh.... It's been so long that I forget how to get to the sailing part of this website. This is a sailing website, right?

[Sailormann]

At the end of the day we end up with too few post offices where we need them and too many where we do not. And those post offices have to devote a good amount of time in accountability to the central authority. The central authority is responsible for assigning a limited number of assests to the post offices it has to supply and control. And since the central authority is responsible to politicians it has the unenviable task of providing services that the users are not really willing to pay for. The whole advantage to the system is that everyone pays equally but everyone would like to receive just a little more than their equal share. This is a recipe for disappointment, because somebody is going to get less than equal or no post office at all.

Contrast this with how the market approaches the same problem. Post offices come and go as needed. Someone figures out that, in certain areas that no longer need a post office we can just install a post box. And profitability determines what will be invested in each post office. Certain post offices may offer expensive options that their customers want, but customers at other post offices do not. And, if another businessman get's the feeling that a need is not being met, he opens his own post office to meet that need. He succeeds or fails based on his judgement about that need.

Ya know - I copied this and was all set to reply to it - but then I realised that it's a complete waste of time.

I don't think you drank the Kool-Aid - I think you're pretty well embalmed in it by now.

So here's hoping that as your dotage creeps up on you and you grow infirm as all of us will, that you've saved enough to hold on to your health insurance, and that you are always able to afford a bus ticket up north to buy your meds.

[sailaway21]

Just checked my pocket size Constitution and, yep, all them amendments was still there.

Of course, I do try to limit my time wasted on such luminaries as think that inciting Cuban-Americans to invade Cuba is the basis of a foreign policy for the USA. And I also am not so one dimensional as to not understand that Castro is a tolerable nuisance up until the time he threatens our strategic interests, as happened in the early sixties. If that happens again he will be squashed like a bug. In the meantime though, I see no reason to facilitate his comfort or even existence. And I suspect most Cuban-Americans would agree with both positions.

I have bid good day to only two posters on sailnet, neither seemed to be grounded in any semblence of reality so there was little point in continuing with them. I have often contentious debates with others, frequently humourous at that, and regard those people as friends. I am sometimes honored that they return the sentiment.

I do not feel that your cherry picking of posts, obviously not having read them all, or your drive-by shooting style serves your cause well. But that is your choice and I await more cogent arguments than the Cuban-Americans hiring the CIA to retake Cuba.

[Sapperwhite]

So is Castro dead or what?

[sailaway21]

Sailormann,
Obviously I'll have them FedEx'd to me! (g)

Rick,
Thanks for a most excellent example of socialism in action. If the Alaskan's want the damn bridge so bad they should have built it themselves. Of course, there is the little detail of the fact that their gas/highway taxes were sent to Washington, DC thereby limiting their resources. I knew you'd come around, if only to see a republican ox gored. And goring it needed.

[Rickm505]

I'm afraid that I only have time enough for the occasional "drive by" these days. Things are a bit interesting in the banking field these days and the boat's been taking up weekends...

As for inciting Cubans to insurrection? ---I'm guilty as charged. I was upset at being 'taken down' for what I didn't write, instead of what I did in fact write. Besides, the CIA does owe them big time....

I do read the posts before I write a word....

[sailaway21]

Rick,
I think I understand your "business" viewpoint on Cuba. If I am reading you right, you see an economic opportunity going awasted by the US to the advantage of other countries economies. That part I understand.

What I, and others, particularly Cuban-Americans, cannot condone is the enriching of Castro's despotic regime. Humanitarian aid as in the past, for such as hurricane relief is one thing, but doing anything to make his system of oppression last one day longer with our dollars quite another.

There are certainly enough countries, such as France, who are willing to enrich themselves by actions such as ignoring the UN embargo on Iraq. I am not such a capitalist that I am willing to condone trade with totalitarian nations, especially totalitarian nations with a wont to exporting mayhem.

[PBzeer]

Sailormann

If you WANTED one, then you would have to go to a private clinic. If you NEEDED one, it is readily available.

So, who decides if I need, or simply want a CAT Scan or MRI as part of my diagnosis? And if it is determined I do need one, how long will it take to recieve this readily available test?

Medically necessary yes - cosmetic no.

I'm trying to figure out how Lasik could be considered anything but cosmetic. Unless of course, we factor in the self-esteem angle and how damaged my self image is because I have to wear glasses. I would assume that contact lenses would be considered cosmetic as well?

Yes.

Again, I have to wonder, how long would it take to recieve this treatment.

If ordered by your doctor and performed in a hospital yes.

I don't know about Canada, but in the US you have to have cortisone injections approved by a doctor. At least, us ordinary mortals do. We don't though, need to go to a hospital to recieve it.

So, let me see if my perception of Canadian healthcare is accurate, as iterated in your replies and other posts. Canadians recieve healthcare superior to that provided in the US, as long it is something the government decides is necessary to be provided? And because medication is subsidized by the government, it is cheaper than in the US, where the majority of them are formulated and discovered, which entails certain capital expenditures by the drug companies, not to mention the inital R & D costs, which Canadians do not have to shoulder due to government subsidy.

One thing I am curious about is, how does one going about recieving a second opinion on a diagnosis?