Shopsmith Forums

Somebody...maybe Winston Churchill(?) once opined that "Anybody under thirty that wasn't liberal, had no heart. And, anybody over forty that wasn't Conservative, had no brain". I guess I've been a mean, heartless bas***d since I was 21.

Gene Howe wrote:Somebody...maybe Winston Churchill(?) once opined that "Anybody under thirty that wasn't liberal, had no heart. And, anybody over forty that wasn't Conservative, had no brain". I guess I've been a mean, heartless bas***d since I was 21.

I've heard that quote before. Here's another quote by Winston Churchill that may come as a surprise:
[INDENT]The discoveries of healing science must be the inheritance of all. That is clear. Disease must be attacked, whether it occurs in the poorest or the richest man or woman simply on the ground that it is the enemy]

http://www.salon.com/2009/08/14/healthcare_28/

That's right. The conservative Churchill not only endorsed the idea of the National Health Service but actually saved it against repeal.

His premise is valid. But, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

algale wrote:I've heard that quote before. Here's another quote by Winston Churchill that may come as a surprise:
[INDENT]The discoveries of healing science must be the inheritance of all. That is clear. Disease must be attacked, whether it occurs in the poorest or the richest man or woman simply on the ground that it is the enemy]

http://www.salon.com/2009/08/14/healthcare_28/

That's right. The conservative Churchill not only endorsed the idea of the National Health Service but actually saved it against repeal.

algale wrote:
The conservative Churchill not only endorsed the idea of the National Health Service but actually saved it against repeal.

Yes he did and that was more than 50 years ago. It worked well for a dozen years and then fell into disrepair (not doing proper maintenance on your SS but expecting it to perform and sell for what you paid for it 30 years hence). Where is it today?

Canada adopted a similar program in the late 70s and now Canadians who have any money go to the US for surgery that is denied (excuse me, delayed for however long it takes the bureaucrats to have it come to the top of the list - forever, in other words).

Just because a famous and successful man endorsed and saved something doesn't mean that it endures forever. Remember the Titanic? Who endorsed it, promoted it, put money into it and guaranteed that it was unsinkable? J. Bruce Ismay was the man behind the project and was on the maiden voyage. He was one of the first to abandon ship (sound like any politicians you have heard of who promote something but won't accept failure?)

Ismay also guaranteed that sufficient lifeboats would be available (which they were not) and after a board of inquiry in the US returned to the UK where he could not be reached and absolved himself of anything other than saving his own self-centered hide. Bless his heart!

Ismay was as well known and respected as Churchill, but his projections were wrong while Churchill's were correct for the short term. But like most government programs they got bigger - and bigger - like obesity in the US until they were so bloated that they couldn't stand up without support from more taxes/funds, etc.



J Bruce Ismay

Interesting reading for those who have a bit of time!;)

http://www.titanic1.org/articles/ismay.asp

I suspect those 30 million Americans who have no insurance coverage at all would welcome a lifeboat of any kind no matter how long they may have to wait for a major operation.

Of course that lifeboat does come at the taxpayer expense. They will pay a flat fee for a year, say 500. They will then use services but, as we all know, that 500 will only go so far. Services rendered above that amount are covered by uncle sugar. They claim it's not taxpayer funded but in the end it is.
Like all discussions about politics here, there is no easy answer and all answers are painful. Deflation is coming and is the real enemy.

holsgo wrote:Of course that lifeboat does come at the taxpayer expense. They will pay a flat fee for a year, say 500. They will then use services but, as we all know, that 500 will only go so far. Services rendered above that amount are covered by uncle sugar. They claim it's not taxpayer funded but in the end it is.
Like all discussions about politics here, there is no easy answer and all answers are painful. Deflation is coming and is the real enemy.

Not for those of us on a 'fixed' income!;) (as long as it continues)

holsgo wrote:Of course that lifeboat does come at the taxpayer expense. They will pay a flat fee for a year, say 500. They will then use services but, as we all know, that 500 will only go so far. Services rendered above that amount are covered by uncle sugar. They claim it's not taxpayer funded but in the end it is.
Like all discussions about politics here, there is no easy answer and all answers are painful. Deflation is coming and is the real enemy.

Deflation sounds ok as dollar will go further. Devaluation or inflation those are money problems.

Deflation is far from OK. Nothing good comes of it. The money supply shrinks and with it does jobs, spending cuts and a cycle of reduction. The whole of the economy contracts. Inflation is not bad. Deflation is bad. Yes, a money problem. But considering the indebtedness of the govt, there would be no economic tools they would have to combat it.