| Author |
Message |
George Conklin
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:53 pm Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
"Sancho Panza" <otterpower@xhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:crbid2$90b$1@news.monmouth.com...
| Quote: |
"George Conklin" <georgeconklin1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:2yPBd.15237$RH4.14003@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
The motto of the 18-wheeler, where in an accident, the car is NINE
times
more likely to have a fatality than the truck.
There is no need to go that big. Ford pickups like the F-250, 350 and 550
all have higher bumpers than ordinary sedans.
|
The bumpers of ordinary sedans are far, far too LOW. The bumpers of
ordinary sedans in the past were much higher. Further, bumpers do not
really exist except behind $1,500 plastic covers which are scratched just by
walking by them.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:16 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of an SUV endorsement? |
|
|
Your are wrong once again. The USA is a, democratically elected,
Constitutional Representative Republic of independent states, not
a democracy.
mike hunt
DonQuixote-v-Windmills wrote:
| Quote: |
MelvinGibson@mailcity.com wrote:
You better, it can't be the USA. The USA is a, democratically
elected, Constitutional Representative Republic of independent
states. The USA operates on a capitalist system. But then
perhaps we should expect
that you do not know that. LOL
Humble you are not. You think America is the only DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY?
Perhaps it is the least democratic among democratic countries. Or to
put it another way, the most democratic country among communist
nations...
"Israel's health indicators for longevity and infant mortality are
better than those of the United States. This aspect is not unique to
Israel, but many Western countries are better in the various indicators
of health than the United States."
But God forbid the thought, "input from ordinary Israelis to help set
priorities for the future," what a communist nation Israel is...
America is quick to hand out prescriptions to the world, but fails to
apply them to herself. Even those countries she bankrolls and defends
to her own peril, do it better.
Of course, this doesn't make the news, where the issue is the war or
whatever makes you pity that nation. But hey, we can take some pitying
ourselves... ;)
Israel has Rx for U.S. Healthcare
Mordechai Shani
Israel and the United States each have successes and failures in their
respective health care systems, but the younger of the modern nations,
rooted in its tradition of helping the needy, has much to teach its
American ally. When it comes to some of the most important issues
facing the American health care system today - universal health care,
administrative costs and establishing a national health basket of
services - America can look to Israel.
Until 1995, health insurance in Israel was voluntary, although 99
percent of the Jewish population and 97 percent of the Arab population
were covered by four HMOs, the first of which was established at the
end of 1911. This was a system wherein the insured members paid the
HMO, and the employer made a compulsory payment to the National
Insurance Institute.
Today in Israel, everyone is covered by health insurance. In 1994, the
Israeli parliament passed a groundbreaking health insurance bill that
made every Israeli resident automatically insured, no matter their age,
financial status or religion. In the United States today, more than 43
million people, including 12 million children, are uninsured.
Israel's universal health care is characterized by its "national health
care basket," which defines the range of services to which every
resident is equally entitled. Residents can petition a labor court if
they believe an HMO has ignored their rights to a medical service.
Universal access to Israel's national health care basket means that
there is no underinsurance in Israel, which happens when there are gaps
in coverage. In the United States, more than 100 million citizens are
underinsured, including 40 million with Medicare, 50 million with
Medicaid and at least 10 million who are employed in large companies
that have self-insurance.
The main health care delivery system for all Israelis is through
primary and secondary clinics. These clinics, which are present
throughout the country, provide easy and efficient access to care.
The clinics that belong to the HMOs enable quick access to primary
medical care and also easy referral to specialists without waiting
lists. There is continuity of care, while there is now a tremendous
effort to computerize all the medical data.
Ninety-five percent of general care hospitals in Israel are public.
There is no wait for diagnostic examinations such as MRI and CT or for
procedures such as open-heart surgery. Payment for hospitalization is
the responsibility of the HMO, and there is no deductible or
co-insurance payment required of the patient.
There is a $3 co-payment for each prescription on the approved drug
list covering acute and chronic diseases.
High unemployment and the Israeli economic recession make it difficult
for about 10 percent of the population to pay even this, even though
there is a $50 biannual co-payment cap.
Caring for the elderly is a core social policy and an integral part of
health care in Israel. While in the United States geriatric care is
handled by Medicare, in Israel it is part of the health basket and is
the responsibility of the HMOs.
Only hospitalization in nursing homes is the responsibility of the
Ministry of Health for those who cannot afford to pay for private
insurance or from their own means. Geriatric care, being an integral
part of health care in Israel, is of high quality.
I do hope that one of the Israeli government's priorities in an
improved economic situation will be to reflect the nation's social
values by exempting the poorest 5-10 percent of the population from
drug co-payments.
Israel's health indicators for longevity and infant mortality are
better than those of the United States. This aspect is not unique to
Israel, but many Western countries are better in the various indicators
of health than the United States. Yet while Israel spends 8.8 percent
of its Gross National Product on caring for the elderly, the United
States spends 15 percent of its GNP.
In international comparisons of health care systems, Israel ranks among
the top 20 in the world. But, even with its favorable standing, Israel
faces many challenges, such as the financial limitations of introducing
new technologies and prescription drugs to the health basket and the
high taxes Israelis pay. Also of concern are high out-of-pocket
expenses for cost sharing and for health care services that are covered
only by complementary insurance.
Israel's health care system, while based on the core value of access
for all, is still evolving. The establishment of a "health parliament,"
a private initiative endorsed by the government, enabled input from
ordinary Israelis to help set priorities for the future, including the
challenges of limited resources and the growing gap between rich and
poor.
Obviously, Israel and the United States differ vastly in size, making
full comparisons limited. But with the exception of four large states,
Israel is similar in size to most U.S. states. The American health
system can be improved only if states take responsibility for health
care, or, in the case of the four largest states, if there is regional
responsibility within the state.
In 2003, the United States spent at least 30 percent of its national
health expenditures on administration, while Israel spent less than 10
percent. The United States could have saved at least $280 billion of
the $400 billion spent in administrative expenditures in 2003 to cover
the uninsured and to close the gap of the underinsured, strengthening
the democratic principles it holds dear.
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2004/septe...s_rx_for_us.php
http://committed.to/justiceforpeace |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Z. Helm
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:17 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 09:54:30 GMT, "George Conklin"
<georgeconklin1@earthlink.net>
| Quote: |
"John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:cr7jd8$j7c$2@blue.rahul.net...
John David Galt wrote:
For once we agree. Anyone who believes that SUVs' bumper height is
illegal
or that our gas purchases go "straight into the pockets of Osama"
should go
report those crimes to the police immediately -- so they can throw him
in
the loony bin where he belongs.
william lynch wrote:
So you cannot even tell that the bumpers are much higher on SUVs?
Sure they're higher. Show me a law against it.
The bumper heights of the 18-wheeler are higher than those of a car.
Should be illegal, right?
|
Are you sure about that? The front bumper is actually pretty low on
many 18-wheelers, and trailers are required to have a bar (not sure if
you can really call it a bumper) to prevent regular cars from running up
underneath them.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 7:11 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
It is called an ICC bar, and it hits right in the center of the
grill ;)
mike hunt
"Mike Z. Helm" wrote:
| Quote: |
Are you sure about that? The front bumper is actually pretty low on
many 18-wheelers, and trailers are required to have a bar (not sure if
you can really call it a bumper) to prevent regular cars from running up
underneath them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George Conklin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:a0rjt01emb7a1i2as1gm52b2n5ri7ltdko@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 09:54:30 GMT, "George Conklin"
georgeconklin1@earthlink.net
"John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:cr7jd8$j7c$2@blue.rahul.net...
John David Galt wrote:
For once we agree. Anyone who believes that SUVs' bumper height is
illegal
or that our gas purchases go "straight into the pockets of Osama"
should go
report those crimes to the police immediately -- so they can throw
him
in
the loony bin where he belongs.
william lynch wrote:
So you cannot even tell that the bumpers are much higher on SUVs?
Sure they're higher. Show me a law against it.
The bumper heights of the 18-wheeler are higher than those of a car.
Should be illegal, right?
Are you sure about that? The front bumper is actually pretty low on
many 18-wheelers, and trailers are required to have a bar (not sure if
you can really call it a bumper) to prevent regular cars from running up
underneath them.
|
Much higher than even a Suburban. Further, in Europe trucks have to have
good bumpers in the REAR so cars cannot run up under the trailer. When this
happens, drivers get their heads cut off. But the truck lobby in the USA
has prevented that safety device used in Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Olaf Gustafson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Jan 04, 2005 9:42 pm Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 13:42:52 GMT, "George Conklin"
<georgeconklin1@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:a0rjt01emb7a1i2as1gm52b2n5ri7ltdko@4ax.com...
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 09:54:30 GMT, "George Conklin"
georgeconklin1@earthlink.net
"John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
news:cr7jd8$j7c$2@blue.rahul.net...
John David Galt wrote:
For once we agree. Anyone who believes that SUVs' bumper height is
illegal
or that our gas purchases go "straight into the pockets of Osama"
should go
report those crimes to the police immediately -- so they can throw
him
in
the loony bin where he belongs.
william lynch wrote:
So you cannot even tell that the bumpers are much higher on SUVs?
Sure they're higher. Show me a law against it.
The bumper heights of the 18-wheeler are higher than those of a car.
Should be illegal, right?
Are you sure about that? The front bumper is actually pretty low on
many 18-wheelers, and trailers are required to have a bar (not sure if
you can really call it a bumper) to prevent regular cars from running up
underneath them.
Much higher than even a Suburban.
|
Not really
| Quote: | Further, in Europe trucks have to have
good bumpers in the REAR so cars cannot run up under the trailer. When this
happens, drivers get their heads cut off. But the truck lobby in the USA
has prevented that safety device used in Europe.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:18 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
I guess you never heard of the ICC bar, required on the rear of
trucks. ;)
mike hunt
George Conklin wrote:
| Quote: |
Further, in Europe trucks have to have
good bumpers in the REAR so cars cannot run up under the trailer. When this
happens, drivers get their heads cut off. But the truck lobby in the USA
has prevented that safety device used in Europe. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George Conklin
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:18 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
<MikeHunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:41DB0830.A7E15351@mailcity.com...
| Quote: |
George Conklin wrote:
Further, in Europe trucks have to have
good bumpers in the REAR so cars cannot run up under the trailer. When
this
happens, drivers get their heads cut off. But the truck lobby in the
USA
has prevented that safety device used in Europe.
|
I guess you never heard of the ICC bar, required on the rear of
| Quote: | trucks. ;)
mike hunt
Stop top posting please. |
That ICC bar is a joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Jan 05, 2005 8:26 pm Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
What's is the punch line?
mike hunt
George Conklin wrote:
> That ICC bar is a joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Z. Helm
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Jan 06, 2005 7:48 am Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of SUV's |
|
|
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 13:42:52 GMT, "George Conklin"
<georgeconklin1@earthlink.net>
| Quote: | The bumper heights of the 18-wheeler are higher than those of a car.
Should be illegal, right?
Are you sure about that? The front bumper is actually pretty low on
many 18-wheelers, and trailers are required to have a bar (not sure if
you can really call it a bumper) to prevent regular cars from running up
underneath them.
Much higher than even a Suburban.
|
There are quite a few SUVs (and pickups) driving around that are "much
higher" than even a suburban - a factory one, anyway.
| Quote: | Further, in Europe trucks have to have
good bumpers in the REAR so cars cannot run up under the trailer. When this
happens, drivers get their heads cut off. But the truck lobby in the USA
has prevented that safety device used in Europe.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Freeman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Are you in favor of an SUV endorsement? |
|
|
What you do need is a standard bumper height for SUVs, cars and
trucks in general .. . this would make auto bags etc. significantly more
effective.
"John Harlow" <sirsausage@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gbSdnVGXXpy_N1rcRVn-gQ@comcast.com...
| Quote: | Sure we need a tougher license, an endorsement if you will, just like
motorcyclists, but for SUV drivers. They are the ones causing the
mayhem!
Oh yeah,we need more beauracracy. We have way too many personal freedoms
as
it is.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in