Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Most polls just before the 2000 election showed such > a bias. IIRC, Zogby > was the one poll that was close to on top of the > right number. IIRC, that > was true in the previous election, tool. > > Dan M. This may be right, but I seem to recall that Zogby was way off in 2002...his methodology is, I believe, not highly thought of in the field. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
W and the apocalypts
All right, I was challenged to come up with direct links between W and the apocalypts. Here you go: http://www.counterpunch.org/hill1019.html http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20030922&s=mcalister see also http://www.rolligstone.com/ (you have to poke around) for the article "Reverend Doomsday". W has explicitly said that he believes the Anti Christ is already among us, and the countdown to Armageddon is begun. This should worry us. The guy has nukes and he does not like to lose. And if he wins the election? Do you honestly believe this will end happily? That These thieves won't push us till some brave whistleblowers catch them with their hands up to the armpit in our cookie jar? During Bill Clinton's impeachment (over nothing) not one person lost a minute's sleep over him going off the deep end. Wasn't gonna happen. During W's, it will be a very tense time. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Kerry on Iraq in the 2nd Debate
KERRY: Well, let me tell you straight up: I've never changed my mind about Iraq. I do believe Saddam Hussein was a threat. I always believed he was a threat. Believed it in 1998 when Clinton was president. I wanted to give Clinton the power to use force if necessary. Then, about five minutes later, after a question about Iran: KERRY: I don't think you can just rely on U.N. sanctions, Randee. But you're absolutely correct, it is a threat, it's a huge threat. And what's interesting is, it's a threat that has grown while the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat. JDG - Pax Americana Kerryum, Maru ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
At 10:04 AM 10/12/2004 -0500 Dan Minette wrote: >Most polls just before the 2000 election showed such a bias. IIRC, Zogby >was the one poll that was close to on top of the right number. IIRC, that >was true in the previous election, tool. I would argue that Harris came out ahead of Zogby in 2000, but he was close. http://www.ncpp.org/1936-2000.htm With that being said, Zogby's methods are not considered to be scientific by the academic polling community.Zogby's polls were also abysmally wrong in 2002, and during the Democratic primaries in 2004. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Cheney Vows To Attack US If Kerry Elected
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4041 In an announcement that has alarmed voters across the nation, Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that he will personally attack the U.S. if Sen. John Kerry wins the next election. "If the wrong man is elected in November, the nation will come under a devastating armed attack of an unimaginable magnitude, one planned and executed by none other than myself," Cheney said, speaking at a rally in Greensboro, NC. "When they go to the polls, Americans must weigh this fact and decide if our nation can ignore such a grave threat." Added Cheney: "It would be a tragedy to suffer another attack on American soil, let alone one perpetrated by an enemy as well-organized and well-equipped as I am. My colleagues and I urge voters to keep their safety in mind when they go to the polls." Although Cheney would not comment on the details of his proposed attack on a John Kerry-led U.S., national-security experts said he possesses both the capabilities and the motivation to pose a serious threat. "There is no question that Cheney has the financial assets and intelligence needed to pose a threat to our nation," said Peter Bergen, terrorism researcher and author of Threats And Balances: Former Executive Branch Officials And The Danger To America. "After all, this fanatic can call upon the resources of both the Republican Party and Halliburton to aid him in his assault. America would be foolish not to take his warning seriously." After his speech, Cheney was asked to confirm his remarks. "Make no mistake: If Kerry becomes president, no one will be safe from me," Cheney told reporters. "Businesses, places of worship, schools, public parks: No place will offer you refuge. A vote for Kerry is a vote to die in your own bed at the hands of Dick Cheney." Stepping up to the podium after Cheney, Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge vowed to increase surveillance of the vice president. "Wherever Cheney iswhether in his office in the White House or stumping in battleground stateswe will be watching him," Ridge said. "I will not rule out raising the terror-alert level, should Kerry begin to draw ahead in the polls. Every percentage point conceded to Kerry brings the nation under greater threat of attack by Cheney." In a televised address from the White House, President Bush promised "to serve and protect the nation" by being re-elected. "A war against Dick Cheney would be a long, hard struggle," Bush said. "It would be a difficult battle against a shadowy nemesis who is able to hide among us, loves only death and destruction, and hates our freedom. I have the experience, the leadership, and the Republican nomination required to protect us allmyself and my family includedfrom Dick Cheney." Although the effect of Cheney's remarks has yet to register in the polls, some voters report that the vice president's threats have concerned them. "Frankly, I'm terrified," said Dwayne Cummings, a 38-year-old metal-press operator from Cleveland, OH. "The idea of getting attacked by Cheney right now, at a time when I'm out of work, uninsured, and have kids to worry about, is overwhelming. I'm not sure I can vote for Kerry anymore." Mary Pershing, a loom-worker and lifelong Democrat from Limestone, KY, said she appreciates the government's surveillance efforts. "At least they're warning us about the danger," Pershing said. "I've always suspected Cheney might do something dangerous someday. Now that we have confirmation of a possible attackfrom someone as high-ranking as the vice president, no lesswe can make moves to stop it." Cheney's remarks quickly drew a response from the Kerry campaign. "I urge all Americans to remain calm in the face of this new threat," Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards said. "Rest assured that, once elected, John Kerry has a plan to contend with any threat against our nation, whether from rogue nations, terrorists, or former vice presidents." "Should John Kerry be elected, he and I will work with, not against, the international community," Edwards added. "I have no doubt that we would be able to assemble a coalition of nations more than willing to aid us in the war against Dick Cheney." http://www.theonion.com/election2004/ xponent Danger Will Robinson Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
Erik Reuter wrote: What was the margin of error of the poll? Quantify your "landslided", how much did the winner get? Different polls gave different margins, but they were all way short of the actual result - way short. The most prominent polls were talking 50:50 with margins of 3% for Newspoll, 2.6% for ACNielsen and Roy Morgan at 2.2% a week out. In September, ACNielsen and Morgans had the Labour party (the more socialist of the two) leading by more than the margin of error, Newspoll had Labour ahead, but by less than the margin. In the last few days, Newspoll and ACNielsen increased their sample size and came down to just over 2% margin, but still giving the conservatives only the smallest of margins (I think 50.2% and 48.8%). Australian voting is VERY different for a number of reasons: - Preferential voting (as Andrew described) - No direct vote for leader (we elect our members of the House of Representatives, and whichever party has the most seats puts their leader in as the Prime Minister - and the big one - Compulsory Voting - every citizen over 18 MUST vote. But the end result was completely unexpected by everyone except the bookies (Morgan and Newspoll have poor success rates in forecasting the election winner. In its election-eve polls, Morgan got it wrong on three of the past six elections (1990, 1993, 2001), while Newspoll did only marginally better, incorrectly calling two of the six (1993, 1998), whereas Centrebet and other bookies have got it right every time). The Conservatives look like increasing the number of seats they hold in every state bar one, including quite a number of seats always considered safe seats for Labour. The swing toward the sitting conservatives was 3.4% at this stage - ALL polls predicted a swing away from them, varying from 2 to 4% over the campaign - the only question was whether the swing away would be enough for them to lose government. No polls at all even considered the possibility of the Conservatives gaining control of the Senate, which now looks quite likely (counting continues as I write this) and which hasn't happenned in 20 years. Interestingly, I believe that had the polls indicated that it might happen, it wouldn't have happenned (a self-reversing prophecy?) because Australians were generally pretty happy with the idea of a minority party holding the balance of power in the Senate (traditionally called "keeping the bastards honest" here). (We only elect half our Senators at each election - they sit 6 year terms - so gaining control will be an extraodinary feat if accomplished) Cheers Russell C. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Electoral College
Andrew Paul wrote: > > In our recent elections, the HEMP party (Help End Marijuana Prohibition), > :-) Ah, the wonders of a multi-party democracy! Like Australia, Brazil has some weird parties too, but - so far - no one dedicated to Marijuana :-) [we had _two_ strong Communist parties, PCB and PCdoB, namely Partido Comunista Brasileiro and Partido Comunista do Brasil] Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Scouted: Fight The Future: RFID Driver's Licenses - Now With Added 'Papers Please'
The Fool wrote: > > Barcodes have '666' built right in. The two thin bars are a six and > normal barcodes have 6-some numbers-6-more numbers-6. > I imagine that they did that on purpose, to get free publicity, like those heavy metal bands that started to add satanic verses _after_ some nutty fundamentalists started hearing things when they played the music in reverse. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Trouble at Electoral-Vote.Com
http://www.electoral-vote2.com/#news The site has had technical problems repeatedly in the past several days and has been down several times. I didn't want to discuss this, but I don't want anyone to think the problem was an incompetent hosting service. Just the opposite. The site has been subjected to a full-scale, well-organized, massive attack with the clear intention to bring it down. The attackers have tried repeatedly to break in, but the server is a rock-solid Linux system which has stood up to everything they threw at it and hasn't crashed since I got it in May. While our troops are fighting and dying to bring freedom of speech to the Iraqi people, there are forces in America who find this concept no longer applicable to America. I don't know who is behind this attack yet (although we are working it), but it is too professional to be some teenager working from a home PC. Given that all the hate mail and threats I get come entirely from Republicans, I can make an educated guess which side is trying to silence me, but I won't say. And I won't surrender to cyberterrorists. Staving off yesterday's attack was relatively easy. For $150, I upped my server capacity by adding an additional Pentium 4 with lots of bells and whistles. I have a few more tricks up my sleeve too. I must say the hosting company I am using, HostRocket has been fantastic. I burned through half a dozen web hosting companies before finding them. The others all promised the moon in their ads but the promised service vanished instantly as soon as they got paid. Hostrocket is a big company, with tens of thousands of customers, many of them large companies, and the technical staff is knowledgeable and very oriented towards helping the customers. They have done a wonderful job dealing with this attack. If you need a web hosting company for your business where reliability and customer service are top priorities, I recommend them very highly. I am sure the attack will continue. In the event that the site goes down again, one way to at least get the score and the daily commentary is via the RSS feed. That is very difficult to take down. I would suggest going to the RSS information page now and print it out for future use. If the site goes down, you won't be able to get to it then. More on countermeasures in a few days. I will not let the forces of censorship win. There was some mail about the projected map. It is still there, but you have to go the actual file each day. Today's file is at www.electoral-vote.com/fin/oct/oct12p.html; tomorrow will be .../fin//oct//oct13p.html, etc. As I said yesterday, I think the current map is actually a better predictor of the outcome than an average of the past 30, 60, or 90 days, no matter how weighted. Media news: The Sinclair Broadcast Group, which reaches about 1/4 of all American homes, has ordered its stations to pre-empt regular programming just before the election to run a long attack ad on John Kerry thinly disguised as a documentary on Vietnam. www.politicalwire.com has the story, including links to articles in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post. For big companies, freedom of speech is still applicable. xponent If Everyone Who Believes In Freedom Would just Clap Their Hands..Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Caminiti Smiles
Dan Minette wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 9:05 AM > Subject: RE: Caminiti Smiles > > >> Behalf Of Robert G. Seeberger >> >> How about those Astros?!! > > An impressive win, no doubt. How bad is the NL East that the Braves > run away with it every year but can never win in the playoffs? > >> As a Cardinals fan, I was hoping to play the Braves as I think we >> match up better against them. As Jose Lima showed on Saturday >> night, the Cardinals lineup is definitely vulnerable to a hot >> pitcher and the Astros have several. But you don't always get what >> you want and the Cards will have to play the hand dealt to them (pun >> intended). > > You are fortunate that the Astros' great pitchers will not pitch until > games 3 & 4. Brandon Backe will start game 1, and will start > game 2. The Astros do not have a decent 4th starter, so game 2 will > be very hard for the Astros to win. Oswalt or Lidge? > > Clements will be available on 3 days rest for game 7, so that's > decent for the Astros. But, it does not look as good as a rotation > that is set up properly. > > I feel very fortunate that the Astros are in the NL finals. But, I > can't help thinking of how different things would be if you > substituted Andy Pettitte for Backe, and Backe for ?. Ah well, > that's part of the fun. > > I think the Cards have a real advantageprobably 60-40. > I have to assume that is likely. What the Astros need to hope for is a 4 or 5 game series, that is probably the only kind of series they can win considering their pitching rotation situation. If St Louis wins the forst two games at home it is more than likely over for the Astros. OTOH, the Astros are Hot Hot Hot right now and have been for over a month. They won the season series against the Cards and were 5 - 1 against them during the current hot streak. But overall I think this is the Cards series to lose. xponent Isn't This Fun?! Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: economics issues
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 03:08:54PM -0700, d.brin wrote: > (The complete numbers are available at > www.economist.com/economistspoll.) I thought the results of the last question, "For whom would you rather work? [if you had a chance to work in a policy job in Washington]" were interesting: 81% for Kerry, only 14% for Bush. Perhaps this explains why Bush's advisers are so horrible...nobody wants to work for him? -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
re: Brin: economics issues
Meanwhile, if we weren't to stoked up on artificial "war" panic to pay attention to our own nation's well- being In an informal poll of 100 economics experts, conducted by The Economist, Mr Bush's policies win low marks. More than 70% of the 56 who responded to our survey rate Mr Bush's first-term economic policies as bad or very bad. Fewer than 20% give positive marks to Mr Bush's second-term economic agenda, and almost six out of ten disapproved. Mr Kerry hardly got rave reviews either, but his economic plan still fared better than the president's did. In all, four out of ten professors rated Mr Kerry's economic plan as good or very good, but 27% gave it negative scores. (The complete numbers are available at www.economist.com/economistspoll.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Caminiti Smiles
> Behalf Of Dan Minette > > Oh, is it contention you want, huh? > > Well, your mother sews socks that smell. I don't ever recall seeing my mom sew socks. Maybe that's why my feet were always cold... - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
In a message dated 10/12/2004 1:19:34 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . I'll be posting a Second Salvo (maybe tonight) that detailed-dissects the Neoconservative alliance. db >sigh< I can see the argument now. Some will say you're using breech loaders. Some will say you obviously both use and need a muzzle Some will say right on target. And some will go off half cocked. "You can always fire off a better argumentative salvo if you've studied the art of bull-istics." --William Taylor Now take the i out in subject line. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
Good question Dan. A clue is the 50% figure. It has to be very broad. e.g. those people hypnotized into believing that stupid obstinacy and monomania are the same thing as "strong leadership". For all of my vaunted belief in the People,this is a genuine cult mentality, in the face of clear evidence that these guys are monsters. As for the groups you mention, I really don't mind NASCAR. I'll be posting a Second Salvo (maybe tonight) that detailed-dissects the Neoconservative alliance. db --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "David Brin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 1:59 PM > Subject: Re: Brin: The latest ripoff > > > > > Yes, 50% of them are insipidly trapped by a > dogmatic > > cult right now. SO? > > Out of curiosity, just what is this cult you refer > to? > I've seen frequent vauge swipes at what you now > idenfity as half of > Americans. I've seen some general indicators, but > you offer exceptions to > each indicator. They are: > > 1) Republican > 2) Southerner > 3) NASCAR fan > 4) Evangelical Christian. > > Well, I haven't seen exceptions to the 3rd, come to > think of it, so that > technically remains openbut I don't really think > you believe in turning > left as a cult. :-) > > One of the reasons that I would appreciate > clarification is that I know a > number of nice, generally reasonable people who fit > all four criteria. > Many of them have fairly complex reasons for what > they believe. Extensive > discussions over many years with people who differ > with because they are > fundamentalists, for example, makes me appreciate > the subtly of their > position. If you clarify your position I should be > able to determine if I > misunderstood your position, or if we have some very > fundamental > differences. > > Dan M. > > > ___ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l > ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
- Original Message - From: "David Brin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 1:59 PM Subject: Re: Brin: The latest ripoff > Yes, 50% of them are insipidly trapped by a dogmatic > cult right now. SO? Out of curiosity, just what is this cult you refer to? I've seen frequent vauge swipes at what you now idenfity as half of Americans. I've seen some general indicators, but you offer exceptions to each indicator. They are: 1) Republican 2) Southerner 3) NASCAR fan 4) Evangelical Christian. Well, I haven't seen exceptions to the 3rd, come to think of it, so that technically remains openbut I don't really think you believe in turning left as a cult. :-) One of the reasons that I would appreciate clarification is that I know a number of nice, generally reasonable people who fit all four criteria. Many of them have fairly complex reasons for what they believe. Extensive discussions over many years with people who differ with because they are fundamentalists, for example, makes me appreciate the subtly of their position. If you clarify your position I should be able to determine if I misunderstood your position, or if we have some very fundamental differences. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
David, et al, People are not only sheep, they are very dim sheep. Uh oh... now watch it, Dave. My biggest rant is IAAMOAC. There is SOMETHING RIGHT about our civilization. It's the Enlightenment's one hope. And the Enlightenment bets on the common man. Yes, 50% of them are insipidly trapped by a dogmatic cult right now. SO? As an avowed follower of the God of the remnant, I would do well to treat the remnant with a little more respect. Thank you for the reminder. It is still our only hope that enough of them will waken... ...as they have, miraculously, on other occasions. Dave Sleepers, Wake! Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Caminiti Smiles
In a message dated 10/12/2004 10:32:59 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, is it contention you want, huh? Well, your mother sews socks that smell. Dan M. Are you trying to arguile her on? Vilyehm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
--- Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > $101 million for NASCAR tracks. > > Of course, we all know that this is The Good > Doctor's real problem with > this bill ;-). Har! ;-) > People are not only sheep, they are very dim sheep. Uh oh... now watch it, Dave. My biggest rant is IAAMOAC. There is SOMETHING RIGHT about our civilization. It's the Enlightenment's one hope. And the Enlightenment bets on the common man. Yes, 50% of them are insipidly trapped by a dogmatic cult right now. SO? It is still our only hope that enough of them will waken... ...as they have, miraculously, on other occasions. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: The latest ripoff
Folks, $101 million for NASCAR tracks. Of course, we all know that this is The Good Doctor's real problem with this bill ;-). If Mr. Bush cannot bring himself to veto this terrible bill, it will be hard to take him seriously." Honestly, it has been hard to take him seriously for a long damn time. Of course, Dubya has no intention of vetoing this bill. Worse yet, NPR today opined that the President's signature on this disgusting display of paying fealty to their corporate overlords would probably improve his chances of being elected. People are not only sheep, they are very dim sheep. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Caminiti Smiles
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'm sorry. > > The Arizona football Cardinals are so bad, I can't follow any conversation on > any other team called the Cardinals. > > I'll wait for basketball season. > > William Taylor What I'm waiting for is for the Phoenix football team owner to give up on that market and move to L.A. Then we could see a matchup between the St. Louis Rams and the L. A. Cardinals. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
re: Brin: The latest ripoff
Please pass this along. Proof that we need to do more than change the Executive Branch. This is the worst, most corrupt, most spendthrift, divisive and unprofessional Congress in living memory. At least Newt Gingrich had some honesty and weird vision. That's why the corrupt neocons got rid of him... = This is the worst piece of tax legislation I have seen in my lifetime. Outrageous. In the midst of a record $422 billion deficit this year (and, according to Goldman Sachs, $5.5 TRILLION in likely 10-year cumulative deficits), the Republican-controlled Congress yesterday passed a 650-page, 276 provision, $143 billion package of new special-interest corporate tax cuts. The big winners, according to The New York Times: "General Electric, Exxon Mobil, electric utilities, movie producers and agricultural producers." Not to mention big tobacco, which received a $10 billion buyout (which was originally part of a deal to subject the industry to regulation by the FDA but the quid was dropped from that quid pro quo leaving the industry with the handout but no regulation). John McCain calls the legislation "the worst example of the influence of special interest that I've ever seen." Congress yesterday overwhelmingly passed the most extensive corporate tax legislation in the last twenty years, offering industries large and small huge new tax advantages. The legislation offers a textbook example of Congressional excess, further enriching already-profitable corporations and sneaking in dozens of costly pet projects in legislator's home states. Among the special deals in this bill: $336 million for Hollywood. $101 million for NASCAR tracks. $44 million for importing ceiling fans. $27 million for dog and horse races. $11 million for fish tackle boxes. $9 million for bows and arrows. In an editorial today, the Washington Post said (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25661-2004Oct11.html?sub=AR ): "THE CORPORATE tax bill that Congress has sent to the White House rewards just about every special interest that retains a lobbyist in Washington. ... The bill that Congress has produced is monstrous in just about every way. ... In Friday's debate, President Bush said he would discipline Congress in order to reduce the budget deficit. If Mr. Bush cannot bring himself to veto this terrible bill, it will be hard to take him seriously." Of course, Dubya has no intention of vetoing this bill. It is payback time for Republican campaign contributors. Dubya's last big tax cut, which consisted primarily of a reduction in the tax on corporate dividends (Dubya wanted to ELIMINATE taxes on dividends) over 50% of which go to the top 1% of taxpayers, was rationalized because of the supposed "double taxation of dividends" (once in the form of the corporate income tax and eventually later as dividends). But increasingly, because of the accumulations of special-interest tax deals like this most recent monstrosity, corporations are paying little if any taxes. (Over 50% of corporate income ultimate flows to the top 1% of income earners.) The effective corporate tax rate went from 3.4% in 1979 to 1.8% in 2001 (so much for the Republican alarmist rhetoric about double taxation of dividends). By contrast, during that same time the effective rate of the social security tax (paid by middle-income wage earners) went from 6.9% to 8.4%. This is reflected most dramatically in the percentage of federal receipts that these taxes constitute. Payroll taxes have gone from 18.6% of federal receipts 40 years ago to 40% now. At the same time, corporate taxes have gone from 20.3% of federal receipts 40 years ago to 7.4% now. http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=5324&sequence=0 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: br!n: My big salvo
- Original Message - From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 7:42 PM Subject: Re: br!n: My big salvo > > You could also show me why using sums is wrong...but I'm pretty sure that's > what happens in the votes. > > Dan M. I've thought of another way to phrase this. Each state gets one electoral college vote for each senator and member of the house; while DC is treated as though it is a state with one representative. The problem is not that the smallest states are so small that the don't deserve even one representative based on population alone. Counting both the DC population, and attributing one representative to DC, we have 645k population for house member. That means Wyoming, which has the lowest population, deserves .766 representatives in Congress on population alone. This clearly rounds up to 1, instead of down to 0. Using John's stage 3 analysis, we see that Bush has a 9 state advantage, which translates into an 18 electoral vote advantage. If you take this away, Bush would trail by 13 electoral votes, instead of leading by 5. If the electoral votes were appropriated according to population (including fractional values), then Kerry would lead by 14.04. That one vote difference is consistent with rounding error, and is much smaller than the 19 point difference with the present system. So, the easiest way to reform the electoral college system is one electoral vote per congressional district and one for DC. On paper, having each district elect one member of the electoral college would be worthwhile, but I can see two problems with that. 1) It opens the presidential race up to gerrymandering 2) It reflects the Congress too closely. Proportional votes by state would probably be better than this. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Caminiti Smiles
- Original Message - From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 11:56 AM Subject: RE: Caminiti Smiles > Behalf Of Julia Thompson > > rooting for a Sox-Astros WS, and if she can't have that, it would be > nice for at least *one* of those two teams to make it I'm rooting for a Sox-Cardinals WS, personally. Or a Yankees-Cardinals WS. I'll take either one. >Looks like we are going to have some on-list contention about the >National League playoffs! Finally. Oh, is it contention you want, huh? Well, your mother sews socks that smell. Dan M. "take that" Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Caminiti Smiles
> Behalf Of Julia Thompson > > rooting for a Sox-Astros WS, and if she can't have that, it would be > nice for at least *one* of those two teams to make it I'm rooting for a Sox-Cardinals WS, personally. Or a Yankees-Cardinals WS. I'll take either one. Looks like we are going to have some on-list contention about the National League playoffs! Finally. - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Medicaid from rural doctor's perspective
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB109745753470341716,00.html Medicaid Makes Treating the Poor A Collections Hassle October 12, 2004 Editor's Note: The Doctor's Office is a new online column about the issues, challenges and rewards facing physicians today. It's written by Dr. Benjamin Brewer, 36, a solo family practitioner in Forrest, Ill. We welcome comments from physicians and patients alike. Awash in a spectrum of gold and brown, the fully ripened fields of Central Illinois are speckled with farmers combining corn and beans that will feed the world. But at the doctor's office, the harvest has been a bit slim. Dawn the bookkeeper is working to gather money owed us for our spring and summer work. The past-due accounts aren't generally the result of our farmer friends. Instead, it's the Medicaid program run by the state of Illinois that is more than four months behind in settling the accounts -- totaling $26,000 at one point. This amount covers seven deliveries, about 200 office visits and four months of hospital work. In my rural area, 25% of my practice involves low-income pregnant women, poor children and foster kids on public aid. They're the kind of people you feel bad about turning away when you're the only doctor in town. I have a nice, expensive computer system to send the claims out daily in electronic form. The state will confirm that an accurate "clean" claim is valid in about a week. But it could be weeks later before we receive a check. Toward the last quarter of the state's fiscal year ending in June, the collections process can drag out for months as the state helps itself to an interest-free loan from doctors, hospitals, nursing homes and pharmacies. Many doctors understandably don't take patients on public assistance, or they limit public-aid patients to no more than 5% of their practices. At the Republican National Convention, President Bush said every rural county in the nation should have a rural health center. Senator John Kerry's health proposal has provisions for adding more eligible people to the Medicaid rolls. Half my patients are either on Medicare or Medicaid. From the family-doctor perspective, I've got "government health care" in half my practice and government bureaucracy in all of my practice. My office is a federally designated rural health clinic located in a medically underserved area. In return for added paperwork and regulations, $5,000 per year in extra accounting expenses and intermittent inspection of my premises, the government pays me at a modestly higher Medicare and Medicaid rate. If my office wasn't involved in this special government program, the government would pay me less for practicing in a rural area than in the city for the same services. My first two years in practice, they paid at a lower rate because I was new. I have a certified medical-insurance specialist on staff with six years experience who works overtime to keep my financial house in order. I had no financial training in medical school. I'm self-educated in business, for good or bad. It takes quite a bit of effort to bill the government for a medical claim. Each Illinois Medicaid patient has a multiple-digit number on a special state eligibility document that's issued monthly. The patient's number goes on a claim form that has 38 individual sections. Some of the sections have multiple subparts. Essentially, every disease process has a special five-digit code assigned to it by a consortium of government, insurance and medical entities. The code for whatever the patient came in with that day has to be looked up and recorded on the claim form in the right spot. Every medication, test or treatment has its own number, too, and also must be recorded. There are separate reference books and computer software for all of it. Unfortunately, many of the codes change yearly. If the illness and the test number don't match up, the claim is rejected. If you use an outdated code for the same illness, test or medication, the claim is rejected. If the state isn't ready on time to accept the new codes, the claim is rejected. If anything is amiss, the claim is rejected. The privacy laws in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 necessitated changes in the claim forms, giving rise to yet another reason for the claims to be rejected. The old code for a rural health clinic office visit, W8410, wasn't good enough anymore. They wanted T1015 on Section 24c of form DPA 2360 instead. We did as instructed by the state this year and used the new codes. Turns out, they weren't ready to implement some of the new codes after all. Instead of just being rejected, this past spring $11,000 of claims for office work were marked paid at a rate of $0.00. Dawn was shocked. I was angry. If we tried to rebill the claims using the old numbers, they would reject them as duplicate claims. With payroll hanging in the balance, we called the Medicaid department. The claims would have to be "
Re: Caminiti Smiles
I'm sorry. The Arizona football Cardinals are so bad, I can't follow any conversation on any other team called the Cardinals. I'll wait for basketball season. William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
- Original Message - From: "JDG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:24 AM Subject: RE: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis > At 07:10 PM 10/12/2004 +1000 Andrew Paul wrote: > >> From: Erik Reuter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> The data is really too close to call. People can analyze all > >> they want, it doesn't change the fact that the polls are > >> within the margin of error. > > Using a large number of polls can substantially reduce the number of error. > > That is, while one poll of 50-46 would be "within the margin of error" - > having six such polls would lead you to say with some confidence that > candidate A is slightly ahead, probably by around 50-46. > That is true if and only if the errors can be treated as statistical or pseudo-statistical. If there is a small systematic error that is shared by the polls (by small I mean 1%-2%). Most polls just before the 2000 election showed such a bias. IIRC, Zogby was the one poll that was close to on top of the right number. IIRC, that was true in the previous election, tool. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Caminiti Smiles
- Original Message - From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 9:05 AM Subject: RE: Caminiti Smiles > Behalf Of Robert G. Seeberger > > How about those Astros?!! An impressive win, no doubt. How bad is the NL East that the Braves run away with it every year but can never win in the playoffs? >As a Cardinals fan, I was hoping to play the Braves as I think we >match up better against them. As Jose Lima showed on Saturday >night, the Cardinals lineup is definitely vulnerable to a hot >pitcher and the Astros have several. But you don't always get what >you want and the Cards will have to play the hand dealt to them (pun >intended). You are fortunate that the Astros' great pitchers will not pitch until games 3 & 4. Brandon Backe will start game 1, and will start game 2. The Astros do not have a decent 4th starter, so game 2 will be very hard for the Astros to win. Clements will be available on 3 days rest for game 7, so that's decent for the Astros. But, it does not look as good as a rotation that is set up properly. I feel very fortunate that the Astros are in the NL finals. But, I can't help thinking of how different things would be if you substituted Andy Pettitte for Backe, and Backe for ?. Ah well, that's part of the fun. I think the Cards have a real advantageprobably 60-40. Dan M. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Caminiti Smiles
> Behalf Of Robert G. Seeberger > > How about those Astros?!! An impressive win, no doubt. How bad is the NL East that the Braves run away with it every year but can never win in the playoffs? As a Cardinals fan, I was hoping to play the Braves as I think we match up better against them. As Jose Lima showed on Saturday night, the Cardinals lineup is definitely vulnerable to a hot pitcher and the Astros have several. But you don't always get what you want and the Cards will have to play the hand dealt to them (pun intended). - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Electoral College (Was: Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis)
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 08:07:25AM -0400, JDG wrote: > It should be self-evident that your advice would be to concentrate on > the largest States. Not at all. Perhaps if you think overly-simplistically like the Bush administration... -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 07:24:35AM -0400, JDG wrote: > That is, while one poll of 50-46 would be "within the margin of error" > - having six such polls would lead you to say with some confidence > that candidate A is slightly ahead, probably by around 50-46. Fine, if true, but your analysis is not based on such definitive data. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
At 07:10 PM 10/12/2004 +1000 Andrew Paul wrote: >> From: Erik Reuter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> The data is really too close to call. People can analyze all >> they want, it doesn't change the fact that the polls are >> within the margin of error. Using a large number of polls can substantially reduce the number of error. That is, while one poll of 50-46 would be "within the margin of error" - having six such polls would lead you to say with some confidence that candidate A is slightly ahead, probably by around 50-46. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Electoral College (Was: Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis)
At 02:39 AM 10/12/2004 -0400 Bryon Daly wrote: >> >And of course if all the states did this, then it wouldn't be a >> >disadvantage to anyone. >> >> No, it would disproportionately benefit the largest States.For example, >> 1/52nd of the vote in California would move one Electoral Vote - or about >> 2%.You would need to move 1/9th of the vote, about 11%, in Colorado to >> similarly pick up an Electoral Vote. In Alaska, that would be 1/3rd. >> It would clearly be much more profitable to campaign in California than in >> smaller States under such circumstances. > >But 1/52 of CA's registered voters (using year 2000 figures from here: >http://www.fec.gov/pages/2000turnout/reg&to00.htm ) is 300K voters. >1/9 of CO's registered voters is 250K voters, and 1/3 of AK's >registered voters is 158K voters. So smaller states would require >less voters to be convinced in order to shift one EV. I don't think >I'd call that disproportionally benefitting the large states. Byron, I'd like you to perform a simple thought experiment. Imagine that your proposed proportional system were in place this year, and that you are an advisor to the Kerry (or Bush) campaigns, advising on what locations to visit and on what media markets to buy air time.You may wish to consider recent voting results in your answer. It should be self-evident that your advice would be to concentrate on the largest States. JDG ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 07:10:48PM +1000, Andrew Paul wrote: > Our recent election turned out to be a mini-landslide for the > incumbent conservative Liberal party. Newspaper headlines on the > morning of the poll were still calling it a 50/50 race, based on some > professional polls. What was the margin of error of the poll? Quantify your "landslided", how much did the winner get? > I was wondering if the public may have been clever enough to have been > a bit mischievous during the polling, by making it appear closer, they > may well have squeezed another billion or two out of our formerly > stingy PM, Before I were to consider this rather unlikely possibility, I would first consider the possibility that the election was rigged. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
> From: Erik Reuter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The data is really too close to call. People can analyze all > they want, it doesn't change the fact that the polls are > within the margin of error. > Our recent election turned out to be a mini-landslide for the incumbent conservative Liberal party. Newspaper headlines on the morning of the poll were still calling it a 50/50 race, based on some professional polls. The election campaign had turned into one very large pork-barrel, with both parties throwing money at any group who they thought might be swayed by a few dollars. This included cheques for hundreds of dollars from the government turning up in peoples bank accounts just weeks before the election, which I found a little disturbing. And billions being promised during speeches (at one stage our PM was reckoned to be promising $100 million dollars per minute during his campaign launch speech). I was wondering if the public may have been clever enough to have been a bit mischievous during the polling, by making it appear closer, they may well have squeezed another billion or two out of our formerly stingy PM, particularly in regard to Medicare and Education, two issues the Labour party had used as the basis for its campaign. Given this sort of possible behaviour, and that polls cost nothing, and mean nothing for the pollees, how much credence should we place in them? Andrew PS. For what its worth, and noting we have had no Australian casualties in Iraq as yet, the Iraq war seemed to have almost zero impact on the election result. It was the economy, stupid. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: The Electoral College (Was: Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis)
> From: Warren Ockrassa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I'd agree with EC concerns. There are better systems in place now in > other countries that we'd do well to consider. I'm fond of runoff > elections. Had they been in place in 2000, Gore would have taken the > house. (Since most dual votes for Nader would have reverted to single > ones for Gore.) > I am not sure how the details of voting in the USA but we (Australia) use a system of preferences. When one votes, you mark your choices in order, say 1 through to 5. So say I voted: Kerry 3 Nader 2 Bush4 Kennedy 5 Washington 1 All the 1's are counted first, and basically the 3rd, 4th and 5th placed on this count are eliminated. In this case, if Washington finished 3rd, my vote would turn into a vote for Nader. If Nader had finished 4th, my vote would then turn into a vote for Kerry, etc etc, until it turned into a vote for one of the top 2 finishers.This way, everyone ends up voting for the winner, or 2nd place, and the winner always has a more than 50% (nominal - 2 person preferred basis). Using this system, all those who voted for Nader in 2000, would have had their votes given to their second (third etc) choice, which may have had a bearing on the outcome. It has its own flaws of course, but it does allow a slightly more subtle outcome, in terms of letting the voter express his preference, without his vote being essentially valueless if he does not vote for one of the top two candidates. It gets complex when one gets 78 candidates, as in our recent Senate elections in NSW, and so we have this 'above the line' voting thing, where the parties file their preferences for you, and you just put a 1 by their name, and follow their preference decisions. This results in all sorts of horse trading, and can result in the lazy voter ending up electing someone they didn't really want, but that is not the systems fault, more the voters. In our recent elections, the HEMP party (Help End Marijuana Prohibition), stuffed up its filing of preferences, and ended up giving all its preferences to all the parties most opposed to it, which caused some general mirth, and no doubt the smoking of many consolation spliffs at HEMP party HQ. Andrew ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: VW, was Re: Vacation claims
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:41:31 +0200, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 5, 2004, at 9:51 PM, Julia Thompson wrote: Next, I don't know anyone with a BMW or Mercedes well enough to, well, you know. ;) But I know several people with VWs -- would that count? Depends on the model. Beetles? I prefere mine, nicely polished with a little bit of shiny chrome as a solid piece of steel and technology without the frills. Sonja :o) GCU: Meeep, meeep. My dad used to have a VW Westfalia camper. Plenty of room for all sorts of activities... Jean-Louis GSV Camping (for example class) My parents still own one of those, but we only use it for daytrips. One of these days I'll borrow it. But I'm not the camping type of person. I'd rather be pampered in a hotel, with pool.. and pool bar. ;o) Sonja GCU: Hotel tiger ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
