June 16, 2000
Am I incorrect, or is this the same as last year?
Am I incorrect, or is this the same as last year? All of these articles seem familiar to me, but I could not find them in the archives.
Today I saw an ad on TV
complaining that American health care is being “Canadianized.” All I can say is
that I wish these Americans would stop lying about the Canadian health care
system. While most Canadians seem to agree that our health system is a bit of a mess,
we also seem to agree that we
don’t want the American system, thank you very much.
The US market-driven medical system spends about 14% of its economy on health care, while Canada's cost is about 9% of GDP. Both countries' health care costs stood at about 7% in 1971, when the Canadian system converted to the public system and the US decided to stick with a market-driven private system. Yet the Canadian system covers everyone; the American system doesn’t. Private delivery of health care means money is lost to the profits investors demand (as much as 15%), higher executive salaries, higher marketing/advertising costs, and lost economies of scale.
Why attack the Canadian system? Part of the answer lies in the fact that to the American health care industry, Canada is just one huge, untapped market that they would love to have access to.
The US market-driven medical system spends about 14% of its economy on health care, while Canada's cost is about 9% of GDP. Both countries' health care costs stood at about 7% in 1971, when the Canadian system converted to the public system and the US decided to stick with a market-driven private system. Yet the Canadian system covers everyone; the American system doesn’t. Private delivery of health care means money is lost to the profits investors demand (as much as 15%), higher executive salaries, higher marketing/advertising costs, and lost economies of scale.
Why attack the Canadian system? Part of the answer lies in the fact that to the American health care industry, Canada is just one huge, untapped market that they would love to have access to.
Having just made contact with another dimension, I thought this was worth a read.
Having just made contact with another dimension, I thought this was worth a read. It's small yet, and a bit New Agey-Crunchy for my tastes, but I'm convinced that if we could just enfold the shamanic experience with what's coming down the pike for information exhange, we could twist the world into a pretzel. Or whatever.
House Adds $50,000,000 to Abstinence-Only programs Under Labor, HHS, Education Bill.
House Adds $50,000,000 to Abstinence-Only programs Under Labor, HHS, Education Bill.
What's next, funding for the Easter Bunny?
What's next, funding for the Easter Bunny?
A third party candidate?
A third party candidate? Funny commercial site and great place for links to campaign spoof sites.
Hotmail users shut out of accounts, find data missing.
Hotmail users shut out of accounts, find data missing. Don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but it's a nice kick in the ass to remind people: web-based apps aren't all that reliable.
If this little man
If this little man with the funny haircut has the courage to abandon the policies of his father, there is a chance within three years to witness one of the greatest triumphs of human spirit in recent memory.
Everything about the way we use computers is about to change
fellow 3D geeks ahoy!
fellow 3D geeks ahoy! strata 3D is free for download! get it. it's got a rockin' modeler.
Clearing landmines with a click
Clearing landmines with a click It costs $3 to put a landmine in the ground and $1000 to pull it out. Along the same lines as The Hunger Site, head over to this site and help make war-torn areas safe again for the people living there.
Is the Boss really in charge?
Is the Boss really in charge? Tucows is -- supposedly legally -- posting tracks from his early album, "Before the Fame" (though that sounds like a title applied after the fact to *me*).
Lance Morrow hates hate-crime legislation
Lance Morrow hates hate-crime legislation
Does it really matter what the criminal's intent was? Is killing someone because of hate really worse than just killing someone? Should the government be telling us how to think?
Does it really matter what the criminal's intent was? Is killing someone because of hate really worse than just killing someone? Should the government be telling us how to think?
We can try who we like, but don't anyone try to try one of ours.
We can try who we like, but don't anyone try to try one of ours.
From the article: "The Clinton administration is offering a "Get Out of Jail Free" card to future Saddam Husseins and Slobodan Milosevics, simply in order to pander to the Pentagon and the Republican right on Capitol Hill. American diplomats are fighting a rearguard action in New York, in tandem with Congress in Washington, to emasculate the International Criminal Court that was established by the United Nations last year in Rome.
"Why does the United States oppose a way to punish the world's greatest villains? In short -- and in no uncertain terms -- congressmen such as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms demand that no such court have jurisdiction over potential American criminals."
Silly me, I thought the law was supposed to apply to everyone or to no-one at all. Am I just being old-fashioned, or is anyone else bothered by the hypocrisy at work here?
From the article: "The Clinton administration is offering a "Get Out of Jail Free" card to future Saddam Husseins and Slobodan Milosevics, simply in order to pander to the Pentagon and the Republican right on Capitol Hill. American diplomats are fighting a rearguard action in New York, in tandem with Congress in Washington, to emasculate the International Criminal Court that was established by the United Nations last year in Rome.
"Why does the United States oppose a way to punish the world's greatest villains? In short -- and in no uncertain terms -- congressmen such as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms demand that no such court have jurisdiction over potential American criminals."
Silly me, I thought the law was supposed to apply to everyone or to no-one at all. Am I just being old-fashioned, or is anyone else bothered by the hypocrisy at work here?
If you don't live round here, you might not have heard of these chaps. They have a nice line in (Flash-animated) semiotics, and their advice for urban gentlemen is pretty useful as well.
Is linking illegal?
Is linking illegal? New York Times article about DeCSS linkage fiasco involving 2600. If linking is illegal, the Web is SOL. This is insane.
how in the world did this article, which basically repremands readers from making assumptions about and being intrusive into the private lives of memoirists, end by propositioning dave eggers? i mean really, wtf? the author of the piece, lorri gottlieb, ought to be ashamed of herself.
Speaking of vandalism...
Speaking of vandalism... What on Earth was Ron Howard thinking? More inside...
never acknowledged:
never acknowledged: evidently, reparations were never made to gay holocaust survivors in germany. never mind that's where the pink triangle came from...
« Previous day | Next day »