Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Visa, MasterCard, and AmEx have requirements that they put on anyone who accepts their cards for payment. Included in this is that any dispute over a card-not-present transaction (that is, the merchant has neither swiped the physical card through a terminal nor made a carbon impression of it) will result in the payment being reversed. Another rule says the same thing if the merchant does not have the cardholder’s signature. This means that any dispute over an online transaction is found in favour of the buyer (unless, perhaps, their claim is clearly invalid on it’s face without any investigation). These two provisions are included in the contract for any merchant account that I’ve ever seen (you can see these contracts by going to the online application for a merchant account provider and hitting the link for the contract you’d be agreeing to).

You tell him.  This is correct. PayPal’s Seller Protection Program only applies to some types of chargebacks, some of the time, but when it does apply it is extraordinary because it is protecting the seller even though PayPal is required to refund the money if the buyer does a credit card chargeback.

PayPal’s protection programs are a waste and a sham.  As a buyer, it is totally and utterly foolish to pay with anything other than a CC or a CC funded PayPal payment.  As a seller, send what is described and be honest with your customers and you won’t have any problems. Rita

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details. Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury) Nonsense.  We often enter into agreements where we accept that decisions can be made by arbitration and that we are bound by this decision.  PayPal has just such a clause in their agreement. PayPal’s agreement has a mandatory arbitration clause in it.  They are being challenged in court over this in a class action suit that says PayPal’s actions have been unfair.

Uh – they lost that pretty quickly. Their arbritration clause was voided in 09/02. http://news.com.com/2100-1017-957753.html A

Response:

As a seller, send what is described and be honest with your customers and you won’t have any problems.

There you go, putting unreasonable conditions on everything.

Response:

In other words, a company can have a mandatory arbitration clause, but they must be fair to both in the way they administer it.

The ring on the dartboard for "NO" has to be the same size as the one for "YES".

Response:

We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, so they are already acting like a judge by issuing the refund. A

As usual you seem to be having problems with the English language / comprehension and or both. PP is a service. When you choose to use their service you agree to be bound by their terms of service. One of their TOS is not that they are a collections agency. If they "resolved" a dispute and they did it according to the way they set up their TOS then this is just more "I am a victim so everyone should feel sorry for me" crap. — Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.  –Benjamin Franklin

Response:

We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money,

No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. Again, this is the same for all payment providers. Whether the buyer owes you money is not something they can determine — you need the courts to come up with the definitive answer to that. The payment provider bases their rules for refunds on criteria that are stated such that they can actually know when the criteria are met. PayPal’s user agreement clearly spells out how they determine whether they will refund. Nowhere does it say they will find out who is telling the truth or who owes money to whom. e.g. Buyer complains of non-delivery and there’s no tracking? Refund. PayPal is not making a decision about who is telling the truth or whether the item was actually delivered. They have just specified in their contract with the seller that this is the action they will take when these circumstances coincide. On the other hand, if the seller has tracking showing delivery (and everything else qualifies for the seller protection plan) then the seller doesn’t lose the money. PayPal is not making any claim that they know what was in the box or that the item was as described, etc. They are just following what it says in the contract — under these circumstances, they will do perform this action.

Response:

We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not.

We don’t know that unless we hear the details. But if what you are saying is true, why would they even need statements from the parties involved? A

Response:

bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details.

Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury) But if what you are saying is true, why would they even need statements from the parties involved?

They don’t need anything. There is certain information that the parties can volunteer (e.g. tracking number) that can make a difference to the outcome, but either way PayPal merely matches the circumstances to their clearly-stated criteria for

Response:

Nonsense.  We often enter into agreements where we accept that decisions can be made by arbitration and that we are bound by this decision.  PayPal has just such a clause in their agreement. PayPal’s agreement has a mandatory arbitration clause in it.  They are being challenged in court over this in a class action suit that says PayPal’s actions have been unfair.  There is no challenge to a mandatory arbitration clause; just the way the that PayPal does the arbitration.  In other words, a company can have a mandatory arbitration clause, but they must be fair to both in the way they administer it.

The mandatory arbitration clause refers to disputes between a user and PayPal. That is, rather than sue PayPal you must (first) submit to the arbitration process. The two parties in this arbitration are one PayPal user and PayPal. This clause does not refer to the way disputes between users are decided by PayPal (though this could result in a dispute between one of those users and PayPal, and that dispute would be subject to the mandatory arbitration you’re talking about). PayPal’s process for determining whether to refund the money is not arbitration and does not have to be fair. They agree to provide their service under certain circumstances and not under other circumstances — they are free to do this. With a very few exceptions, the buyer’s continued agreement to the transfer of money is part of these circumstances. Visa, MasterCard, and AmEx have requirements that they put on anyone who accepts their cards for payment. Included in this is that any dispute over a card-not-present transaction (that is, the merchant has neither swiped the physical card through a terminal nor made a carbon impression of it) will result in the payment being reversed. Another rule says the same thing if the merchant does not have the cardholder’s signature. This means that any dispute over an online transaction is found in favour of the buyer (unless, perhaps, their claim is clearly invalid on it’s face without any investigation). These two provisions are included in the contract for any merchant account that I’ve ever seen (you can see these contracts by going to the online application for a merchant account provider and hitting the link for the contract you’d be agreeing to). PayPal’s Seller Protection Program only applies to some types of chargebacks, some of the time, but when it does apply it is extraordinary because it is protecting the seller even though PayPal is required to refund the money if the buyer does a credit card chargeback.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details. Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury)

Nonsense.  We often enter into agreements where we accept that decisions can be made by arbitration and that we are bound by this decision.  PayPal has just such a clause in their agreement. PayPal’s agreement has a mandatory arbitration clause in it.  They are being challenged in court over this in a class action suit that says PayPal’s actions have been unfair.  There is no challenge to a mandatory arbitration clause; just the way the that PayPal does the arbitration.  In other words, a company can have a mandatory arbitration clause, but they must be fair to both in the way they administer it. — Tony Cooper Orlando FL

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details. Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury) But if what you are saying is true, why would they even need statements from the parties involved? They don’t need anything. There is certain information that the parties can volunteer (e.g. tracking number) that can make a difference to the outcome, but either way PayPal merely matches the circumstances to their clearly-stated criteria for But they didn’t ask for a tracking number. They asked for a statement.

So maybe their communication to customers is not as helpful as it could be. But I suspect that they ask such an open-ended question deliberately — the responding parties are more likely to inadvertently reveal any non-compliance with PayPal’s policy. In any case, the fact that they ask this way doesn’t change the policy or how the outcome is determined.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details. Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury) But if what you are saying is true, why would they even need statements from the parties involved? They don’t need anything. There is certain information that the parties can volunteer (e.g. tracking number) that can make a difference to the outcome, but either way PayPal merely matches the circumstances to their clearly-stated criteria for

But they didn’t ask for a tracking number. They asked for a statement. A

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bp wrote We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, No they haven’t. This is the misconception that I am addressing. PayPal’s decision to refund the money has nothing to do with whether the buyer owes you money or not. We don’t know that unless we hear the details. Yes we do. It is never otherwise. In no case does PayPal (nor any other payment service provider) make a decision as to whether the buyer owes money to the seller. It would be utterly impossible to do this without the powers of a court (summonses, subpoenas, the ability to compel witnesses to testify, penalty for perjury) But if what you are saying is true, why would they even need statements from the parties involved? They don’t need anything. There is certain information that the parties can volunteer (e.g. tracking number) that can make a difference to the outcome, but either way PayPal merely matches the circumstances to their clearly-stated criteria for

(oops) for reversing the payment. In any case, you don’t have to take my word for it. Check out the relevant parts of the user agreement. Look at the criteria for reversing a payment.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I had this happen recently.  PayPal "investigated" for over a month (I think an arbitrator simply read each of our statements).  Eventually, PP decided (incorrectly) that the buyer was right You are mistaken. PayPal never decides who is right. They will send a payment under certain conditions and under certain other conditions the payment will be reversed (as described in the user agreement). These conditions have nothing to do with who is right or who owes money to whom. This is the same for any payment service provider. They have neither the resources nor the access to evidence to determine whether the buyer actually owes you the money (nor the authority to force the buyer to pay). Only the courts are equipped to (attempt to) decide who is right or who owes money to whom. No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you. Well, there’s a pretty big difference between collections and refunds. That’s my point exactly. To expect that PayPal will not refund because you can prove that the buyer owes you money is to expect them to operate as a collections agency rather than as a payment service.

We.. they’ve already decided the buyer didn’t owe you the money, so they are already acting like a judge by issuing the refund. A

Response:

No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you. How do you collect accounts payable?? Generally through PayPal. Like I said, I have a contract with them that under certain circumstances they will facilitate payment. But the fact that customer X owes me money does not obligate PayPal to collect it for me (nor even does it prevent them from refunding). If someone has shafted me, there is no-one who is required to take the money from that person for me (unless I have a court order).

It’s an Accounting mockery. AP is money that you owe to other people. A

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I had this happen recently.  PayPal "investigated" for over a month (I think an arbitrator simply read each of our statements).  Eventually, PP decided (incorrectly) that the buyer was right You are mistaken. PayPal never decides who is right. They will send a payment under certain conditions and under certain other conditions the payment will be reversed (as described in the user agreement). These conditions have nothing to do with who is right or who owes money to whom. This is the same for any payment service provider. They have neither the resources nor the access to evidence to determine whether the buyer actually owes you the money (nor the authority to force the buyer to pay). Only the courts are equipped to (attempt to) decide who is right or who owes money to whom. No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you. Well, there’s a pretty big difference between collections and refunds.

That’s my point exactly. To expect that PayPal will not refund because you can prove that the buyer owes you money is to expect them to operate as a collections agency rather than as a payment service.

Response:

No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you. How do you collect accounts payable??

Generally through PayPal. Like I said, I have a contract with them that under certain circumstances they will facilitate payment. But the fact that customer X owes me money does not obligate PayPal to collect it for me (nor even does it prevent them from refunding). If someone has shafted me, there is no-one who is required to take the money from that person for me (unless I have a court order).

Response:

How do you collect accounts payable?? Generally through PayPal. Like I said, I have a contract with them that under certain circumstances they will facilitate payment. But the fact that customer X owes me money does not obligate PayPal to collect it for me (nor even does it prevent them from refunding). If someone has shafted me, there is no-one who is required to take the money from that person for me (unless I have a court order).

You do not collect accounts payable. You collect accounts receivable.

Response:

I sold a DVD disc to a buyer in UK. It is a foreign DVD in foreign language. The description clearly states that it is in foreign language only. The picture also shown that it’s in foreign language. The buyer complain that no English subtitles available. My point is that if a feature not mentioned, by default, it’s not available. in fact, the item is clearly a foreign language title. he goes to paypal and file a "significantly not as described". and I response by disagree with buyer’s claim.. ok, my question is… PayPal now is invesitgating, how does it investigate? pretend to be a buyer, buy from me? what if PayPal agree with me and says the item is "NOT significatnly not as described", and refuse buyer’s claim, does the buyer still allow to claim through ebay’s buyer protection program, what should i do? ebay’s buyer protection program not require buyer to ship back item to seller? the only option is to refund? no protection for sellers at all?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I sold a DVD disc to a buyer in UK. It is a foreign DVD in foreign language. The description clearly states that it is in foreign language only. The picture also shown that it’s in foreign language. The buyer complain that no English subtitles available. My point is that if a feature not mentioned, by default, it’s not available. in fact, the item is clearly a foreign language title. he goes to paypal and file a "significantly not as described". and I response by disagree with buyer’s claim.. ok, my question is… PayPal now is invesitgating, how does it investigate? pretend to be a buyer, buy from me? what if PayPal agree with me and says the item is "NOT significatnly not as described", and refuse buyer’s claim, does the buyer still allow to claim through ebay’s buyer protection program, what should i do? ebay’s buyer protection program not require buyer to ship back item to seller? the only option is to refund? no protection for sellers at all?

I had this happen recently.  PayPal "investigated" for over a month (I think an arbitrator simply read each of our statements).  Eventually, PP decided (incorrectly) that the buyer was right but then the buyer was supposed to return the item and never did or never replied and PP dropped the matter a while later.  Nothing further happened. Ed

Response:

I sold a DVD disc to a buyer in UK.?

That is your problem right there. — Many thanks, Don Lancaster Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552 Please visit my GURU’s LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Response:

I sold a DVD disc to a buyer in UK.? That is your problem right there.

But the fact that the buyer is in another country has nothing whatsoever to do with the problem and is just background information. Well I suppose that is the Jerry Springer generation for you; an attention span that is not even long enough to hear the whole problem out….

Response:

I had this happen recently.  PayPal "investigated" for over a month (I think an arbitrator simply read each of our statements).  Eventually, PP decided (incorrectly) that the buyer was right

You are mistaken. PayPal never decides who is right. They will send a payment under certain conditions and under certain other conditions the payment will be reversed (as described in the user agreement). These conditions have nothing to do with who is right or who owes money to whom. This is the same for any payment service provider. They have neither the resources nor the access to evidence to determine whether the buyer actually owes you the money (nor the authority to force the buyer to pay). Only the courts are equipped to (attempt to) decide who is right or who owes money to whom. No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you.

Response:

No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you.

How do you collect accounts payable??

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I had this happen recently.  PayPal "investigated" for over a month (I think an arbitrator simply read each of our statements).  Eventually, PP decided (incorrectly) that the buyer was right You are mistaken. PayPal never decides who is right. They will send a payment under certain conditions and under certain other conditions the payment will be reversed (as described in the user agreement). These conditions have nothing to do with who is right or who owes money to whom. This is the same for any payment service provider. They have neither the resources nor the access to evidence to determine whether the buyer actually owes you the money (nor the authority to force the buyer to pay). Only the courts are equipped to (attempt to) decide who is right or who owes money to whom. No-one is obligated to collect your accounts payable for you.

Well, there’s a pretty big difference between collections and refunds. A

Response:

Question:

"Pumpkinhead" (pumpkin_head060…@hotmail.com) writes: > My parents never give a shit about my education.

WQhat did you do about t…? I mena…did you then decide to take classes of any kind anyway, outside the school ones..? —

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"Hot Pnats" (Sl…@slorp.cum.oh!) writes: > In article <cpa36m$23…@theodyn.ncf.ca>, bc…@FreeNet.Carleton.CA > says… >> "Hot Pnats" (Sl…@slorp.cum.oh!) writes: >> > In article <BDDDD11B.2E592%skle…@yahoo.co.uk>, skle…@yahoo.co.uk >> > says… >> >> > Just contribute…Just post. >> >> > 45. Classes your parents made you take >> >> >     outside school (piano? Ballet? Judo? >> >> >     Boxing? Macrame? Ceramics? What?) – Chloe. >> >> My parents made me take shorthand/typing because they didn’t think doing art >> >> was a practical choice for a future career. I was useless at shorthand >> >> [don't know why because I'm short and I've got hands] but I’m glad I >> >> msaterde the tuping it’s come in handy for usenet. >> > nothing, mah parents were angainst education >> Mine encouraged it and believd that earnign it was part of the education >> too. In other words f yopu wanted college or uni, you paid for it yourself. >> Which I then did. >> As for oher classes, well, lessee. I had ballet a while. >> An older sister chipping in so that me and my younger sister oudl attend. >> Other than that, it wa pretty much at college I did more activities, as in >> chsing my gym classes to do stuff like mountian h9king a weekend; scuba >> diving; modern dance; karate; swimmign lessons instructor level; horse >> riding; fencing; stuff like that. >> Classes were 24 a week and I was stuck there waiting for a ride back home >> 40 plus hours a week, so. Heh. >> At uni I did a bit of racketball and squash, and weights as in nautilus >> and the likes. I also danced a LOT each weekend. >> Or alone at home:) >> At home, my parents woud stress a talent in each oen of us. But once >> someoen was said to ave a goven talent before you were born, you ahd to >> have another. Seemed to eb to develop individuality. > That iz so hard fer me to comprehend hacing a parent that eber stressed > any kind of talent any of us had. Seems like mom did her best to stomp > them owt. I cant recall mah parents eber saying I wuz gud at anyting

As I grew up, I thought it was a sort of education understandign they had agreed upon to try and make happen. Even the 52 foster kids they raised on top of us were told each of what their talent was, and encouraged in developing it. From electrician to construction worker to doctor passing by plumber, cook, etc. If oen did not have the talent for school grades, they still foudn them a talent that woudl of its own get the kid interested in that area cause they were said to be good at it. What was soemtimes discouraging as that again, if one born before you was said to have a talent in arts, say, as good as the next one woudl be at it, be it better than the forst, only the forst one woudl be said to that it was a talent of theirs and encouraged that way. —

Response:

"Sklenge" <skle…@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

news:BDE0EBD4.2EE2B%sklenge@yahoo.co.uk… > Pumpkinhead wrote: >>>> I’ll be >>>> seeing a careers advisor on Monday. >>> What kind of job would you like? >> I don’t know.  Hopefully the advisor will help me realise. > What course are you doing?

Hi.  Mathematics and physics.

Response:

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 10:13:56 GMT, Sklenge sayeth: >> Just contribute…Just post. >> 45. Classes your parents made you take >>     outside school (piano? Ballet? Judo? >>     Boxing? Macrame? Ceramics? What?) – Chloe. > My parents made me take shorthand/typing because they didn’t think doing art > was a practical choice for a future career. I was useless at shorthand > [don't know why because I'm short and I've got hands] but I’m glad I > msaterde the tuping it’s come in handy for usenet.

I was forced to do ballet as a kid as the girls at my School did that while the boys played outside. I always wanted to be outside having fun with the boys and so resented ballet and did it half-assed. My ballet teacher hated my guts. She once grabbed me by the hair and hauled me off my feet across the room. When my Mum found out she had to be restrained from ripping her hair out. — ————————————— http://vilmab.blogspot.com             —————————————

Response:

Pumpkinhead wrote: > "Sklenge"wrote >>>>> I’ll be seeing a careers advisor on Monday. >>>> What kind of job would you like? >>> I don’t know.  Hopefully the advisor will help me realise. >> What course are you doing? > Hi.  Mathematics and physics.

Was the careers advisor any use today?

Response:

>> I’ll be >> seeing a careers advisor on Monday. > What kind of job would you like?

I don’t know.  Hopefully the advisor will help me realise.

Response:

Pumpkinhead wrote: >>> I’ll be >>> seeing a careers advisor on Monday. >> What kind of job would you like? > I don’t know.  Hopefully the advisor will help me realise.

What course are you doing?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Eleonore Beaudoin wrote: > Sklenge (skle…@yahoo.co.uk) writes: > > Eleonore Beaudoin wrote: > >> Sklenge (skle…@yahoo.co.uk) writes: > >>>> Just contribute…Just post. > >>>> 45. Classes your parents made you take > >>>> outside school (piano? Ballet? Judo? > >>>> Boxing? Macrame? Ceramics? What?) – Chloe. > >>> My parents made me take shorthand/typing because they didn’t > think doing art >>> was a practical choice for a future career. I was > useless at shorthand >>> [don't know why because I'm short and I've > got hands] but I’m glad I >>> msaterde the tuping it’s come in handy > for usenet.  >>> > >> Odd, I was reminescing about highschol just last evening, going to > bed, >> and thinking about how in those days, typing classes were > just given to >> poeple categorized at age 14 as "better not think of > a college or uni >> education in your case. How about typing and > hairdressing?" >> The same, promising students (according to the > school system’s belief:)) >> would take sciences and so on, and the > "others" woudl have commerce and >> typing and all that. > > Hahahaaa. I went to a girls’ school and we weren’t taught anything > > boys were taught; so no woodwork, metalwork, physics, football… > > we got taught needlework, cookery, painting and hockey. Our careers > > advice was to become a secretary, teacher, nurse, housewife [if > > pretty] or housekeeper [if ugly]…  sigh them were the days. > Hehahaha, yeah, I had a bit of that too, which stopped before my > highschool where they taught that starting grade nine usually, > calling it "family sciences" L:) > Howqever, I was sent to the only school left that taught latin, and > over there they gave the "family sciences" classes. as an all girl > highschool for that year (parents moved a lot, and I changed schools > each year or so.  Only two years I did in a same school, until > college (two years) and uni (9 years at same uni. No, was not a flunk > thing Tuut:):)) > Anyway. The teachers themselves did not know how to sow anythign save > the straight usual sowing stitches:), or the standard knitting, all > on same "side":). > I happeend to have parents that knew hwo to do everythign from > scartch and watchign them at it was already providing me with more of > that than that eyar did. Besides, that "family sciences" thing was > dropped after a few months of that one eyar, replaced by "fine arts" > which consisted of a huge woman walking in, talking like a total > welfare recepient of the 10th generation:), and woudl ask us all to > get a sheet out of our bnder and draw "whatever". > That was the most borign class I ever had, if there were more "fine > arts" calsses of the kind inmy elementary school years….Blerhh. > We were not allowed the traditional boy’s "stuff" either. I rememebr > that I loved speed and raciong (car racing:)), where I wanted to > learn mechanics.  I asked my father if there was a way to make the > school director in the next highschool, where there was both biys and > girls, teens actually, understand that I meant it and wanted to elarn > that and found it important.  My father tried. He was told that there > was no way cause I wsa an A+ student and had the highest scores in > French and every science class I had, and so on, where that woudl be > a waste. When my father insisted sayign that I had two free hours > each day and coudl easily add the mechanics class, sicne I had no > problem with my average, the dorector answered that the real reason > was that sicne i was all boys, putting a girl in there woudl distract > them boys and make them flunk their mechanics classes (sic) and so I > was refused. > Bt I "revenged" at the farm, building barns, pouring concrete, > replacing roofing, and doing all the "guys’ things" I could, if > asking my faher to teach me mechanics himself was then discarded by > him too:(.  It actually made it though so that hen the yougest of us > girls asked to be taught mechanics, my father had by the receondiered > his position about it being a biys’ thing only, and taught her, at > least. > From my mom, I learned all them family sciences that even teachers > never heard of. I liked learnign of how things used to be done and to > elarn to try and do that myself. From the real patchworks where at 14 > I ahd done 4 already of over 2,500 pieces each, to making pillows > with feathers or duvet, to how to make mattresses, carpets, fishing > nets, how yo buold a lamp (mom considered that aprt a woman’s thing, > and puttign the wire through it a guy’s thing where then I can do > nice useless lamps:)), to even elarning how to mend socks > and..stockings. I forgot the latter if soemwhere in a box is stillan > old antique crochet made just for the purpose of mending a run in > real silk stockings, mppft:) >  >  >> It woudl ahve been useless to teach me to type > anyway by then. >> It would have been too late. > >> I already had used my sister;s typewriter and started typing with > no >> method, and alredy founfd books on shorthand where I learned f > the real >> shorthand scribbles, and foudn it a waste of time as I > had my own coding >> method that was as fast and for some frequently > used words even faster.  >> Course it meant that no oen coudl > decipher it but me, as some elarned >> insistign for me to let them > my notes when they missed a class, despite my >> sayign I woudl sure > wanna, btu they;d not udnerstand a thing. They;d >> giveme the "ya > darn snob:(" dirty look, and then I woudfl hand my notebook >> to > them sayign ‘Fine then!:)" to seethem the next day sigh and say "what > >> does thgis mean? And that? Thanks, but…I think I will ask > soemoen else >> instead a next time":).  >> > >> As for typing…. > >> I shoudl have been thought that as soon as a typewriter was in the > house.  >> > >> As an editor I actuallyd di not need it for the longest time. > >> We were considerd professionals where in thse days that emant > havign >> secretarties and OCEs to type the stuff up for you. > >> I ahd a team of 12 of those typimg my handwritten stuff. > >> But then I coudl foresee the dayw en we woudl be both the writers, > proof >> readers, eitors and publishers, using a pc to do so, and > started taking >> puter lessons for word processing. > >> After goign through 4 different programs in 2 years, as technology > >> "progressed", I saw that too as a waste of time. > >> And when I learned to gain speed and accuracy at a pc keyboard, > kaboom.  >> They decided to not pay for jeytronics anymore and had us > all on the same >> cheap keyvboards as those who barely sue them in > a day. With the actual >> result. > >> Add to that that at work I have a round jeyboard, at home a regular > >> standard one, and that the one I ahve at the common station si et a > >> different model, where all accents and characters for French are > all >> programmed to be in different places, drivign you nuts with > frustration….  >> And see if I care ;-);-) > > Why does French need accents? I’ve got a sweet little portable > > typewriter which has all the accents etc I think I’ll get it out > > again [for all those poison pen letters I need to write]. I’ll post > > a pic – it’s really very quaint. > >> ne ay, I will pay myself my own work and home total three > >> keytronicskeyboard or whatever will eb the bvest in those days for > the >> speed of the keys and the way they "pop back: and get used > evenly no mater >> which you use the most. And then I might fidn it > worth the investing more >> effort. > >> Until then, I just retype endlessly until perfect for what is > professional. > > Typing on an old Imperial typewriter breaks your nails. > I had an old model that already was an antique way then, soemthign > like the first commercial typewriters….Can;t rememebr the  name > but woudl you name it I;d know it;-). > Those you had really hammer the keys in about 5 inches before the lil > character hammers woudl touch the paper:) > That woudl make them jamm woud you type too fast… > But it was on one of those I used to type 150 words per minute:) > I did my uni essays on that old thing:) > Someoen threw it out a window one day, from a third floor aparment, > as he was tired of the hammering sound on his hedache. Was his > machine anyway, his loss. The machine as an antoque was already worth > a few thousands at the time. > —

I wuz teh first girl in teh historee of teh hi skool I went to that took power mechanics. — ———————————————————————— Ms Pnoopie Pnats Usnet Legend http://mspoopiepants.blogspot.com/ ———————————————————————— ———————— Teh REEL Official ASS Gallery http://assgallery.freeserverhost.com

Response:

The Entire Population of Liechtenstein wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Sklenge wrote: >>> 45. Classes your parents made you take outside school (piano? Ballet? Judo? >>> Boxing? Macrame? Ceramics? What?) – Chloe. >> My parents made me take shorthand/typing because they didn’t think doing art >> was a practical choice for a future career. I was useless at shorthand [don't >> know why because I'm short and I've got hands] but I’m glad I msaterde the >> tuping it’s come in handy for usenet. > I wasn’t made to take any classes outside school, so I’m going to change the > subject of this thread and talk about gobbets of mucus instead. > I feel really shit at the moment. Had this flu, seemed to be getting better, > then suddenly it’s got worse again, coughing quite a lot, feel tired and > wrecked and beat-up, eyes stinging for some odd reason, permanent headache, > not much appetite, losing weight. Maybe the long hours combined with not > having time to eat properly, dunno. This morning at work I coughed and a huge > gobbet of mucus came flying out of my throat and landed on the keyboard. At > the time I was adding a line of code to the Deactivate event of a form, so > what emerged on the screen after vainly trying to remove mucus from between > keys was something like: > Private Sub Form_Deactivate() On Error Resume Next > ggggggffffffeeeeeeeeeeeesssreeeeeeerrf44222232rwaaaaaa!! End Sub > Then an error message came up, followed by a Help window. > There is no punchline. Does anyone else have any uninteresting anecdotes > involving mucus?

I alluded to this elsewhere but one of my four or five mucal tales involves a third party. I’ll call him Obadiah. He would take his paper hankies and, after thoroughly filling them with clear nasal fluid, would drape them over a heat source to dry for reuse. We could all learn from his example. I hope you gain control of your exudings asap.

Response:

Eleonore Beaudoin wrote: > Sklenge writes: >> Hahahaaa. I went to a girls’ school and we weren’t taught anything boys were >> taught; so no woodwork, metalwork, physics, football… we got taught >> needlework, cookery, painting and hockey. Our careers advice was to become a >> secretary, teacher, nurse, housewife [if pretty] or housekeeper [if ugly]… >> sigh them were the days. > We were not allowed the traditional boy’s "stuff" either.

From my perspective I was glad. I was definitely not interested in boys stuff, having grown up with two brothers I realized that boy stuff was not something I wanted to have much to do with. I was mostly glad because it meant I could ‘freewheel’ at school. My parents were fairly hostile to me learning how to bake cakes and scramble eggs at school because this was something they felt ought to be taught in the home. Funny though, because I didn’t learn how to cook from school or my mother – I learned by finding myself in Hull without access to a live in skivvy and no money to eat out all the time. It’s amazing how quickly a starving female can learn how to cook minced cow. Anyway I’m a lazy female so *not* having to do things is much more my style than having to do things. > I rememebr that I > loved speed and raciong (car racing:)), where I wanted to learn mechanics. I > asked my father if there was a way to make the school director in the next > highschool, where there was both biys and girls, teens actually, understand > that I meant it and wanted to elarn that and found it important. My father > tried. He was told that there was no way cause I wsa an A+ student and had the > highest scores in French and every science class I had, and so on, where that > woudl be a waste. When my father insisted sayign that I had two free hours > each day and coudl easily add the mechanics class, sicne I had no problem with > my average, the dorector answered that the real reason was that sicne i was > all boys, putting a girl in there woudl *distract* them boys and make them > flunk their mechanics classes (sic) and so I was refused.

Would it have helped if you’d've worn some kind of abaya? > Bt I "revenged" at the farm, building barns, pouring concrete, replacing > roofing, and doing all the "guys’ things" I could, if asking my faher to teach > me mechanics himself was then discarded by him too:(. It actually made it > though so that hen the yougest of us girls asked to be taught mechanics, my > father had by the receondiered his position about it being a biys’ thing only, > and taught her, at least.

"Revenge" is a kind of wild justice. My dad would have been really pleased to teach me anything, especially car mechanics. He managed to train me how to change a wheel and check oil/water and replace a bulb and check fuses but I’m still completely ignorant of what happens in there. I put petrol in and a magic box makes a lot of noise and I’m transported to http://www.hdprint.co.uk/streetcam.htm [webcam of nearby town]. I’m happy to believe this is all done by magic. > From my mom, I learned all them family sciences that even teachers never heard > of. I liked learnign of how things used to be done and to elarn to try and do > that myself. From the real patchworks where at 14 I ahd done 4 already of over > 2,500 pieces each, to making pillows with feathers or duvet, to how to make > mattresses, carpets, fishing nets, how yo buold a lamp (mom considered that > aprt a woman’s thing, and puttign the wire through it a guy’s thing where then > I can do nice useless lamps:)), to even elarning how to mend socks > and..stockings. I forgot the latter if soemwhere in a box is stillan old > antique crochet made just for the purpose of mending a run in real silk > stockings, mppft:)

I knitted a jumper once. And made a kind of Elizabethan frock out of some old curtains when I was incredibly sick with a fluey cold – I don’t know why I did it or how I did it – mostly using a hand cranked sewing machine and hand sewing. I still wear it to this day [although not this very moment].

Response:

> Sklenge writes: >> Eleonore Beaudoin wrote: >> Typing on an old Imperial typewriter breaks your nails.

Pix now available! http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/sklenge/album?.dir=/44d0 > I had an old model that already was an antique way then, soemthign like > the first commercial typewriters….Can;t rememebr the  name  but woudl > you name it I;d know it;-).

Remington? > Those you had really hammer the keys in about 5 inches before the lil > character hammers woudl touch the paper:) > That woudl make them jamm woud you type too fast… > But it was on one of those I used to type 150 words per minute:) > I did my uni essays on that old thing:) > Someoen threw it out a window one day, from a third floor aparment, as he > was tired of the hammering sound on his hedache. Was his machine anyway, > his loss. The machine as an antoque was already worth a few thousands at > the time.

I’m amazed it was worth that much. I picked up my Remington for

Question:

SNIP (tidying only). Interesting academic approach. Care to enlighten the masses on what it  is? Well given many of these scholars want their book or paper to "stand-out" from the crowd so as t o be noticed, they tend to be less than reliable (several of those "scholars" vacillate between polytheism, monotheism and pantheism over a period of several years). Theories are fluid because more information is always coming to light. Otherwise, there’d be nothing left for anyone to say on the subject.

They are theories. SO it does not matter if I believe them. Or that you do. I base my views on reading a large number of sources. There are over 1000 names (and descriptions) of known "Celtic" gods. Descriptions seldom match. While you have several like Ogmous/Ogma and Epona that are common in most groups, you are hard pressed to actually come to the impression that all "gods" are one (given many of them are goddesses as well) Well, if you approach it from Christian or Islamic monotheism. Are you suggesting a monotheistic diety cannot have male and female attributes?

Except that the fact that actual GODS and GODESSES were named and that each was related to each other in some way. Even the "demi gods" like the Tuatha were destinct (lets not get into the debate over what they were or were not in the mythology). They were the people of the Goddess Danu (thus it is implied that there could.or were more deities). Based on what? Based on my observations. Based on comparing with other IE groups that share similar cultural structures. What would those observations be?

Norse and "Aryan" cultures were/are polytheistic. That’s a good start. Both had similarities with the various cultural aspects too. Polytheism or Pantheism is a more likely model than Monotheism. Because?

As for one thing the "Celts" (and I will "" till we speak of a specific group) seem to have had a belief in the "spirits" of the land to begin with (thus pantheism is similar to that) on top of Deity and ancestor. As evidenced by the MANY MANY names for rivers and the like that are "attributed" to "gods". And your pre-monk written references consist of? (aside from the limited descriptions given by Caesar and Strabo for instance) I did not say I had any. What I said is they are untrustworthy sources. Given even the monk sources tend to on closer inspection show "censorship" (deliberate crossing out and rewriting for example) just because they talk of things that can be interpreted as monotheistic one should no see it as such. You fail to list your sources. What are they?

Why should I list the sources here when you have yet to my knowledge listed any to support your side? No other IE groups during the pagan period would be considered as Monotheistic (henotheisitic perhaps but that is not monotheism). Thus why should the various "Celtic" groups? Why not? That’s tantamount to dated hostorians saying: "Columbus didn’t come to the new world before 1492, so no one else could have."

No actually it is not. It is taking the avaliable evidence and extrapoloating it. There (and I will keep saying this) is a VAST difference between Henotheisim and Monotheisim! One excludes the possibility of other deities one does not. I said this is my view. It is also the view of a number of other scholars and "Celtic pagan spiritualists" as well. Such as?

Searles, Isaac Bonewitts (for the "Celtic" pagan spiritualists). A number of historians who I can not place my hands on the correct spelling of their names at this point. I’d say Miranda J Green was one off the top of my head but I could be mistaken on that.

Response:

Said "scholars" usually have a reason for saying this. Usually a less than achademic one. Interesting academic approach. Care to enlighten the masses on what it is?

Well given many of these scholars want their book or paper to "stand-out" from the crowd so as t o be noticed, they tend to be less than reliable (several of those "scholars" vacillate between polytheism, monotheism and pantheism over a period of several years). I base my views on reading a large number of sources. There are over 1000 names (and descriptions) of known "Celtic" gods. Descriptions seldom match. While you have several like Ogmous/Ogma and Epona that are common in most groups, you are hard pressed to actually come to the impression that all "gods" are one (given many of them are goddesses as well) Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely Possibly. However, one would hope that we are not allowing dislike for  other monotheistic faiths to cloud the judgement, eh? I have no dislike for monotheisim (was brought up an athiest). I don’t agree that the "celts" were at most (if any) periods before christ "monotheistic". Certain deities may have had a promenance (and it changed who over time). BUT I find thatthe modern interpretation of "many faces to one" is not a good one. Based on what?

Based on my observations. Based on comparing with other IE groups that share similar cultural structures. Polytheism or Pantheism is a more likely model than Monotheism. Many of the sources are from post pagan "Celticity" in that they interpret what a monk wrote down. Thus there was a general monotheistic bent to it already. And your pre-monk written references consist of? (aside from the limited descriptions given by Caesar and Strabo for instance)

I did not say I had any. What I said is they are untrustworthy sources. Given even the monk sources tend to on closer inspection show "censorship" (deliberate crossing out and rewriting for example) just because they talk of things that can be interpreted as monotheistic one should no see it as such. No other IE groups during the pagan period would be considered as Monotheistic (henotheisitic perhaps but that is not monotheism). Thus why should the various "Celtic" groups? I said this is my view. It is also the view of a number of other scholars and "Celtic pagan spiritualists" as well.

Response:

Said "scholars" usually have a reason for saying this. Usually a less than achademic one. Interesting academic approach. Care to enlighten the masses on what it is? Well given many of these scholars want their book or paper to "stand-out" from the crowd so as t o be noticed, they tend to be less than reliable (several of those "scholars" vacillate between polytheism, monotheism and pantheism over a period of several years).

Theories are fluid because more information is always coming to light. Otherwise, there’d be nothing left for anyone to say on the subject. I base my views on reading a large number of sources. There are over 1000 names (and descriptions) of known "Celtic" gods. Descriptions seldom match. While you have several like Ogmous/Ogma and Epona that are common in most groups, you are hard pressed to actually come to the impression that all "gods" are one (given many of them are goddesses as well)

Well, if you approach it from Christian or Islamic monotheism. Are you suggesting a monotheistic diety cannot have male and female attributes? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely Possibly. However, one would hope that we are not allowing dislike for  other monotheistic faiths to cloud the judgement, eh? I have no dislike for monotheisim (was brought up an athiest). I don’t agree that the "celts" were at most (if any) periods before christ "monotheistic". Certain deities may have had a promenance (and it changed who over time). BUT I find thatthe modern interpretation of "many faces to one" is not a good one. Based on what? Based on my observations. Based on comparing with other IE groups that share similar cultural structures.

What would those observations be? Polytheism or Pantheism is a more likely model than Monotheism.

Because? Many of the sources are from post pagan "Celticity" in that they interpret what a monk wrote down. Thus there was a general monotheistic bent to it already. And your pre-monk written references consist of? (aside from the limited descriptions given by Caesar and Strabo for instance) I did not say I had any. What I said is they are untrustworthy sources. Given even the monk sources tend to on closer inspection show "censorship" (deliberate crossing out and rewriting for example) just because they talk of things that can be interpreted as monotheistic one should no see it as such.

You fail to list your sources. What are they? No other IE groups during the pagan period would be considered as Monotheistic (henotheisitic perhaps but that is not monotheism). Thus why should the various "Celtic" groups?

Why not? That’s tantamount to dated hostorians saying: "Columbus didn’t come to the new world before 1492, so no one else could have." I said this is my view. It is also the view of a number of other scholars and "Celtic pagan spiritualists" as well.

Such as? — Casey & Finnigan – purveyors of fine Single Malt Highland whisky brewed on the wild west coast of Canada in a MacUisdin bathtub "I’m sick of this room and everyone in it!" – Bender Dopeler effect:  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.  ~Author unknown "Everything’s gone wrong since Canada came along!" – MAC (Mothers Against Canada)

Response:

The Oral tradition of the Celts was so good though that many of these writings were commited to paper by Celtic Christians. Modern fairy tales are really these religious teachings which transmit the virtues and morals of the Celtic people somewhat scewed by Christian thought. When you read of Rose Red and Snow White you are really reading about Goddesses.

Except of course ren it depends WHICH goddess you are talking about .. the "Celts" after all were polytheistic!

Response:

The Oral tradition of the Celts was so good though that many of these writings were commited to paper by Celtic Christians. Modern fairy tales are really these religious teachings which transmit the virtues and morals of the Celtic people somewhat scewed by Christian thought. When you read of Rose Red and Snow White you are really reading about Goddesses. Except of course ren it depends WHICH goddess you are talking about .. the "Celts" after all were polytheistic!

There have been some interesting arguments made that the Celts were monotheistic and that the ‘deities’ were simply different faces for the one god. Similar to the Christian trinity. — Casey & Finnigan – purveyors of fine Single Malt Highland whisky brewed on the wild west coast of Canada in a MacUisdin bathtub "I’m sick of this room and everyone in it!" – Bender Dopeler effect:  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.  ~Author unknown "Everything’s gone wrong since Canada came along!" – MAC (Mothers Against Canada)

Response:

Except of course ren it depends WHICH goddess you are talking about .. the "Celts" after all were polytheistic! There have been some interesting arguments made that the Celts were monotheistic and that the ‘deities’ were simply different faces for the one god. Similar to the Christian trinity.

Perhaps (I do not agree) but more likely  "henotheistic" ie one god out of many is picked. Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely

Response:

Perhaps (I do not agree) but more likely  "henotheistic" ie one god out of many is picked. Some scholars are definitely thinking the monotheistic ‘multi-face God’ which does have some merit in that the Celts often ascribed numerous ‘faces’ or atributes to a deitiy. Said "scholars" usually have a reason for saying this. Usually a less than achademic one.

Interesting academic approach. Care to enlighten the masses on what it is? Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely Possibly. However, one would hope that we are not allowing dislike for other monotheistic faiths to cloud the judgement, eh? I have no dislike for monotheisim (was brought up an athiest). I don’t agree that the "celts" were at most (if any) periods before christ "monotheistic". Certain deities may have had a promenance (and it changed who over time). BUT I find thatthe modern interpretation of "many faces to one" is not a good one.

Based on what? Many of the sources are from post pagan "Celticity" in that they interpret what a monk wrote down. Thus there was a general monotheistic bent to it already.

And your pre-monk written references consist of? (aside from the limited descriptions given by Caesar and Strabo for instance) — Casey & Finnigan – purveyors of fine Single Malt Highland whisky brewed on the wild west coast of Canada in a MacUisdin bathtub "I’m sick of this room and everyone in it!" – Bender Dopeler effect:  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.  ~Author unknown "Everything’s gone wrong since Canada came along!" – MAC (Mothers Against Canada)

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Except of course ren it depends WHICH goddess you are talking about .. the "Celts" after all were polytheistic! There have been some interesting arguments made that the Celts were monotheistic and that the ‘deities’ were simply different faces for the  one god. Similar to the Christian trinity. Perhaps (I do not agree) but more likely  "henotheistic" ie one god out of many is picked. Some scholars are definitely thinking the monotheistic ‘multi-face God’ which does have some merit in that the Celts often ascribed numerous ‘faces’ or atributes to a deitiy.

Said "scholars" usually have a reason for saying this. Usually a less than achademic one. Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely Possibly. However, one would hope that we are not allowing dislike for other monotheistic faiths to cloud the judgement, eh?

I have no dislike for monotheisim (was brought up an athiest). I don’t agree that the "celts" were at most (if any) periods before christ "monotheistic". Certain deities may have had a promenance (and it changed who over time). BUT I find thatthe modern interpretation of "many faces to one" is not a good one. Many of the sources are from post pagan "Celticity" in that they interpret what a monk wrote down. Thus there was a general monotheistic bent to it already.

Response:

Except of course ren it depends WHICH goddess you are talking about .. the "Celts" after all were polytheistic! There have been some interesting arguments made that the Celts were monotheistic and that the ‘deities’ were simply different faces for the one god. Similar to the Christian trinity. Perhaps (I do not agree) but more likely  "henotheistic" ie one god out of many is picked.

Some scholars are definitely thinking the monotheistic ‘multi-face God’ which does have some merit in that the Celts often ascribed numerous ‘faces’ or atributes to a deitiy. Hard to tell with oral traditions, but given other IE groups polytheistic is most likely

Possibly. However, one would hope that we are not allowing dislike for other monotheistic faiths to cloud the judgement, eh? — Casey & Finnigan – purveyors of fine Single Malt Highland whisky brewed on the wild west coast of Canada in a MacUisdin bathtub "I’m sick of this room and everyone in it!" – Bender Dopeler effect:  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.  ~Author unknown "Everything’s gone wrong since Canada came along!" – MAC (Mothers Against Canada)

Response:

i’ve been reading some of the messages posted here and in simmalar groups, and am amazed at how closed minded and idiotic those who claim to be enlightened can be, of course there are celtic runes(and no i don’t mean ogham or any thing else when i say rune i mean rune) how could there not be, after all the peak of their civilazation lasted 2,000 years and they were spread all across the eurapean continent, as well as scotland and ireland. so how can anything eurapean, or germanic not have celtic roots, the reason the links can’t be found is because such knowledge was burried if not destroyed to avoid persecution from the christian menace

We have archeological evidence that the Celts were indroduced to Runes only after the Norse invaded them in the north of Ireland. The Danes and Anglo-Saxons introduced their version of the alphabet when they invaded. Before that the Celtic Druids wrote in Greek. Before that the entire world was based on oral tradition, the Ogham being used only to mark territory, or to commemorate an event at a site. Ogham was also used on wood for accounting purposes. That’s it. There is historical evidence to back this up by both the Greeks and the Romans who called Celtic lands the lands of Legend. Legend because there was no writing only stories told. Furthermore, commiting sacred teachings of the Druids to writing was considered to be sacreligious. Only after the Greeks introduced the benefits of recording were the Druids persuaded to use it. The Oral tradition of the Celts was so good though that many of these writings were commited to paper by Celtic Christians. Modern fairy tales are really these religious teachings which transmit the virtues and morals of the Celtic people somewhat scewed by Christian thought. When you read of Rose Red and Snow White you are really reading about Goddesses.

Response:

i’ve been reading some of the messages posted here and in simmalar groups, and am amazed at how closed minded and idiotic those who claim to be enlightened can be, of course there are celtic runes(and no i don’t mean ogham or any thing else when i say rune i mean rune) how could there not be, after all the peak of their civilazation lasted 2,000 years and they were spread all across the eurapean continent, as well as scotland and ireland. so how can anything eurapean, or germanic not have celtic roots, the reason the links can’t be found is because such knowledge was burried if not destroyed to avoid persecution from the christian menace

Response:

i’ve been reading some of the messages posted here and in simmalar groups, and am amazed at how closed minded and idiotic those who claim to be enlightened can be,

And you’ve come here to enlighten us. Welcome brother! We need another weekend sage with all the answers and none of the facts. of course there are celtic runes(and no i don’t mean ogham or any thing else when i say rune i mean rune) how could there not be, after all the peak of their civilazation lasted 2,000 years and they were spread all across the eurapean continent, as well as scotland and ireland. so how can anything eurapean, or germanic not have celtic roots, the reason the links can’t be found is because such knowledge was burried if not destroyed to avoid persecution from the christian menace

The Celts invented the airplane as well as rocketry in or abouts 240 BC. Unfortunately, they buried these as well. Currently, archeologists are excavating in Fife to find the first nuclear reactor invented by the Celts in or abouts 245 AD, but buried not long after the arrival of Patrick because they knew Christ disliked nuclear power. They say it’s only a matter of time before it’s found. — Casey & Finnigan – purveyors of fine Single Malt Highland whisky brewed on the wild west coast of Canada in a MacUisdin bathtub "I’m sick of this room and everyone in it!" – Bender Dopeler effect:  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.  ~Author unknown "Everything’s gone wrong since Canada came along!" – MAC (Mothers Against Canada)

Response:

yelled from the fourth floor ward window, and subsequently was sedated: *i’ve been reading some of the messages posted here and in simmalar *groups, and am amazed at how closed minded and idiotic those who claim *to be enlightened can be, of course there are celtic runes(and no i *don’t mean ogham or any thing else when i say rune i mean rune) how *could there not be, after all the peak of their civilazation lasted *2,000 years and they were spread all across the eurapean continent, as *well as scotland and ireland. so how can anything eurapean, or *germanic not have celtic roots, the reason the links can’t be found is *because such knowledge was burried if not destroyed to avoid *persecution from the christian menace That is speculation. There is no proof of Celtic Runes, buried or otherwise. T9W

Response:

i’ve been reading some of the messages posted here and in simmalar groups, and am amazed at how closed minded and idiotic those who claim to be enlightened can be, of course there are celtic runes(and no i don’t mean ogham or any thing else when i say rune i mean rune) how could there not be, after all the peak of their civilazation lasted 2,000 years and they were spread all across the eurapean continent, as well as scotland and ireland. so how can anything eurapean, or germanic not have celtic roots, the reason the links can’t be found is because such knowledge was burried if not destroyed to avoid persecution from the christian menace

The Celts probably did have runes of one sort or another.. But there is no surviving proof of any celtic rune system apart from Ogham.  And while I’d agree there is likely no European culture that doesn’t have some Celtic influence, I’d hesitate to say all have celtic roots. There is a difference between being influenced by and arising from.   If you do have some proof other than conjecture based on the long history and wide range of the Celts, I’m sure many here would enjoy seeing it.  Just because they were there does not mean they had runes- Though I would agree they more likely did than didnt’, there is no proof that I am aware of.  Even the tales of the founding of Scotland that the clan I am descended from was at the head of… I always qualify that claim with a statement about reliability of the few records left from that time.  Available records may point to Fergus Mor leading the Scots expedition from Ireland, but those records may well be mere legend.  Same thing with celtic runes.  There is no more evidence for that than there is for me being descended from the leader of the Scots exodus from Ireland to Scotland.

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – LOL, I had filed a FVF on 1 winner from a dutch auction. I didnt pay any attention to the fees, But it was 21 cents. 1 month later the guy finally pays me without letting me know he would. Excuse was he moved and had a different email now. But anyway, I contact eBay to let them know and reverse the FVF credit on that transacction. Remember this is a dutch auction. All they needed to do was to just bill me the 21 cents. Instead here is an email explaining how they ended up charging me the 21 cents. talk about adding work to themselves. figure this out…. quoted from email from ebay.. "I checked your account, and I will assure you that the final value fee charges associated with item snipped< are correct. On May 8th the above item ended, and you were charged a $2.31 final value fee. Later, on June 17th, you filed for partial credit. We credited you $2.31, and then charged you $1.89, making your total credit $0.42. On June 27th you reversed the credit for one of the bidders that sent payment. So we credited your account for $1.89 that we originally charged you, and then charged you $2.10. So the reversal was $0.21, which was half of the original credit."

Bureaucracy strikes again.

Response:

You win. You have the stupidest subject line ever on this newsgroup. YABE

Why thank you! I try!

Response:

I’ll agree with the subject line being stupid.  First of all the CORRECT spelling is President Ronald REAGAN.   He also had a democrat party controlled house of representatives, with a democrat party controlled senate.   There’s the real reason for his screwed up accounting and increases in government spending!

Response:

Couldn’t agree more!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ll agree with the subject line being stupid.  First of all the CORRECT spelling is President Ronald REAGAN.   He also had a democrat party controlled house of representatives, with a democrat party controlled senate.   There’s the real reason for his screwed up accounting and increases in government spending!

Response:

I’ll agree with the subject line being stupid.  First of all the CORRECT spelling is President Ronald REAGAN.   He also had a democrat party controlled house of representatives, with a democrat party controlled senate.   There’s the real reason for his screwed up accounting and increases in government spending!

Blame it on the poor old Dems  -  how about the defense contractors who put him in office in Calif & the White House???  Star Wars made them a ton of $$$$ and ran out debt out of sight. But we got the old "evil empire" who turned out not to be the real evil ones after all. Ronnie was a snake charmer for sure – charmed us, the Repubs and the Dems. John

Response:

LOL, I had filed a FVF on 1 winner from a dutch auction. I didnt pay any attention to the fees, But it was 21 cents. 1 month later the guy finally pays me without letting me know he would. Excuse was he moved and had a different email now. But anyway, I contact eBay to let them know and reverse the FVF credit on that transacction. Remember this is a dutch auction. All they needed to do was to just bill me the 21 cents. Instead here is an email explaining how they ended up charging me the 21 cents. talk about adding work to themselves. figure this out…. quoted from email from ebay.. "I checked your account, and I will assure you that the final value fee charges associated with item snipped< are correct. On May 8th the above item ended, and you were charged a $2.31 final value fee. Later, on June 17th, you filed for partial credit. We credited you $2.31, and then charged you $1.89, making your total credit $0.42. On June 27th you reversed the credit for one of the bidders that sent payment. So we credited your account for $1.89 that we originally charged you, and then charged you $2.10. So the reversal was $0.21, which was half of the original credit."

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn  Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See  the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts  in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded  little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into  submission again. They sound really scarey!  Whatever shall we do?? Hide cuddlers!!! Yeah, right… Snig x you want i should have some friends pay them a "visit"?

Nah – we can hug them to death right here *ninjahugs* lady.  yes i am still alive, but bearly.;-) bill "cuddleninja" thater  KiTA

Email me then, daft bugger – it’s been way too long!  Please? Snig x

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell.

Thanks for ignoring me, anonymous OJ simpson group member. (BTW. 100% not guilty.) They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided.

We are always public about our trolling tactics, like Brechtian theatre or modern day presentational skills gurus we believe in "telling ‘em what you’re gonna tell ‘em, then tell ‘em, then tell ‘em what you’ve told ‘em." Just substitute the ‘e’ in tell with ‘ro’, and you’ve got it. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

They believe they own their brothers. Heh heh heh. Thanks Anonymous,  this is very interesting.

It certainly is. That was a polite way of putting it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – alt.accounting? (This looks to me the most trollripe of them all, actually. There are no troll threads there now, but the group is not moderated, and someone got offended and started talking about "I would hate to block la de da" when someone just said "bullshit"). Just a few of my favorites. See what you think. I think alt.accounting might be a good idea for a joint attack. It needs study first maybe. Thinking objectively, what parameters should a group have to make it the ideal group for one of our attacks? A little bit of Practical Trollology is called for: 1. Size.  It should be big enough to make it possible to get a response but no so big that we are unable to impact on the volumes too much. Alt.support.childfree is too big, it has a cruising poste volume of about double that of soc.singles. A group like alt.esperanto beginner is small and is quite the right size to be dominated by a single troll, it doesn’t need a concerted effort; we would just end up talking amongst ourselves without an audience. 50 postes or less per day is far too small, 500 per day (I mean without our involvement) is too big. 100-200 is about right. Alt accounting is on the small side .. Hey you’re there already! Decision made, then. I’ll join you in a minute. Uncle Davey Shawn Pickrell Other regulars please note – I removed a number of x-post addresses before posting this.

As I mentioned in the quoted text, this is actually too small a group to give us a good run for our money, but we can prrobably get it up to the right volumes with a bit of friendly collaboration, which, I am glad to say, AFOJS seems to be providing. It has not been finalised which group is going to be added to the template, as this is something we sort out democratically. I am all for consensus in corporate governance. Uncle Davey — http://bible.ort.org/webmedia/t2/2217.ra "mekhashefah lo tekayeh" – "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" (Exodus 22.17) "The invisible hand works better when there is a mix of companies, but companies which become large and monopolistic and get involved with politicians upset the equilibrium, and for that reason as well as aesthetic reasons I like the middle sized business sector. Small business tends to be populated with thickoes, and the large corporate world with arseholes, but in the middle it’s great, because you get both." (Uncle Davey, 26/03/2002) my heart leaps up when i behold a rainbow in the sky: so was it when my life began; so is it now i am a man; so be it when i shall grow old, or let me die! the child is father of the man and i could wish my days to be bound each to each by natural piety. (william wordsworth, 26/03/1802)

Response:

you want i should have some friends pay them a "visit"? *ninjahugs* lady.  yes i am still alive, but bearly.;-) bill "cuddleninja" thater  KiTA

Good to see you, Bill.  Hope you can stick around. *hugs* — Princess fmomoon, the Music Witch Navy Mom I live in my own little world but, it’s okay, they know me there.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn  Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See  the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts  in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded  little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into  submission again. They sound really scarey!  Whatever shall we do?? Hide cuddlers!!! Yeah, right… Snig x you want i should have some friends pay them a "visit"? *ninjahugs* lady.  yes i am still alive, but bearly.;-) bill "cuddleninja" thater  KiTA

Dear Bill: Thanks for stopping by! Best wishes in coping with whatever problems you may be having. **hugs** for a long-time Cuddleland veteran, —-Alex Kovnat, KiTA     TFT

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

Thanks Anonymous,  this is very interesting. alt.accounting? (This looks to me the most trollripe of them all, actually. There are no troll threads there now, but the group is not moderated, and someone got offended and started talking about "I would hate to block la de da" when someone just said "bullshit"). Just a few of my favorites. See what you think. I think alt.accounting might be a good idea for a joint attack.

It needs study first maybe. Thinking objectively, what parameters should a group have to make it the ideal group for one of our attacks? A little bit of Practical Trollology is called for: 1. Size.  It should be big enough to make it possible to get a response but no so big that we are unable to impact on the volumes too much. Alt.support.childfree is too big, it has a cruising poste volume of about double that of soc.singles. A group like alt.esperanto beginner is small and is quite the right size to be dominated by a single troll, it doesn’t need a concerted effort; we would just end up talking amongst ourselves without an audience. 50 postes or less per day is far too small, 500 per day (I mean without our involvement) is too big. 100-200 is about right. Alt accounting is on the small side .. Hey you’re there already! Decision made, then. I’ll join you in a minute. Uncle Davey Shawn Pickrell

Other regulars please note – I removed a number of x-post addresses before posting this. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

It’s that Y=0 learning curve at work again. Shawn Pickrell

Response:

So, what exactly are they trolling for?  and if we respond to their messages, it costs us what?  Is this malicious, or are they just wasting our time and theirs. Thanks JB

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again. It’s that Y=0 learning curve at work again. Shawn Pickrell

Listen: I made a ple of money with Enron, and those who lost their lifesavings, misunderstandings happen every day. OUT

Response:

It is best to not respond to trolls, the best description I’ve heard is that trolls are energy creatures.   So, what exactly are they trolling for?  and if we respond to their messages, it costs us what?  Is this malicious, or are they just wasting our time and theirs.

"Live long and prosper." To reply remove no spam from my e-mail address. —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

LOL!  You call that trolling?  I thought they were rather sweet. — Lady Gayle, PiTA ~A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand~ TFT

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. LOL!  You call that trolling?  I thought they were rather sweet.

could do with some additional, suitably flippant talents. — Prof. Timo Salmi ftp & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5 Department of Accounting and Business Finance  ; University of Vaasa Perfesser’s nauseating puns:  ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/ts/tspun23.zip

Response:

It is best to not respond to trolls, the best description I’ve heard is that trolls are energy creatures.

Mmmmm … energy. Delicious! Shawn Pickrell

Response:

If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into submission again.

They sound really scarey!  Whatever shall we do?? Hide cuddlers!!! Yeah, right… Snig x

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you haven’t done so yet, killfile or ignore Uncle Davey and Shawn  Pickrell. They are soc.singles morons here to troll and disrupt your newsgroup. See  the thread "Humiliating situation" in soc.singles. The last dozen or so posts  in the thread are about who to troll and how they decided. soc.singles is 100% owned by alt.fan.oj-simpson. ss is like our retarded  little brother that escapes and causes trouble before we can beat him back into  submission again. They sound really scarey!  Whatever shall we do?? Hide cuddlers!!! Yeah, right… Snig x

you want i should have some friends pay them a "visit"? *ninjahugs* lady.  yes i am still alive, but bearly.;-) bill "cuddleninja" thater  KiTA

Response:

Question:

Troll.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you want to see "real" prodigies look outside of the world of rock/blues into the classical realm. I’m not up on current trends but I remember a time when Japan was turning out boatloads of mega technical violinists, many of them below 10 years old. My computer is an amazing technical player too. It can play the same song over and over again exactly without a single mistake. Daniel.

Response:

  See!!!!!  You never know whats gonna happen when they grow up.HA HA!!!!!  How about Shannon Curfman. They play her off as a Prodigy and she certainly is nothing special,just a Johnny Lang imitator without the

Response:

I was in a guitar store in Tallahassee a couple months ago noodling around on a guitar.  This kid came in with his Dad and started playing.  He started whipping up on SRV and Hendrix.  Turns out his name was Rick Lollar.  He had just been featured in the local paper as a prodigy.  He has a web site if anyone wants to check him out.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

Response:

  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

Response:

  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

That’s all there IS out there, is pre-teen blues prodigies! Used to be you had to be sort an intenerant, seedy, low-life night-crawler to play the blues, now all you need is to be able to drink milk out of a glass, and not a sippee-cup. I’m gonna go soak my liver in a vat of cheap whiskey, now. Lee’ me ‘lone. Blind Legless "Two Train" Dan

Response:

Check out this youngun. WWW.NICKSTERLING.COM Barry

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

Response:

Stephan Lessard of the Dave Matthews Band is a bass prodigy. He was the last member of the band and joined at 16 yrs old. He is only 23 now.

Response:

Don’t know if you’d call ‘em prodigies, but…While at the Sarasota Blues Jam last year we saw a group from Jacksonville, I believe their name was "Thunder and Lightning," or something to that effect.  They were quite good and ranged in age from 16-18.  One 16 year old played keyboard and sax. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.  His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.  Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

Response:

says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Don’t know if you’d call ‘em prodigies, but…While at the Sarasota Blues Jam last year we saw a group from Jacksonville, I believe their name was "Thunder and Lightning," or something to that effect.  They were quite good and ranged in age from 16-18.  One 16 year old played keyboard and sax.  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.  His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.  Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

progidy? i dont think so.. that should be reserved for guys like Tony Williams who started with Miles Davis at 17…

Response:

Check out this youngun. WWW.NICKSTERLING.COM

I saw Nick at a guitar show in Phoenix a couple of years ago, I’m guessing he would have been about 8 or 9 at that time. As I was wandering the show, I passed by one booth and note there is a group of guys standing around and I can hear someone noodling around some blues riffs.  I stop to see what is the attraction – there is this kid, full sized Strat in hand, laying out some tasty licks.  One of the adults asks him "do you know any Jimi Hendrix…"   Kid lays into Voodoo Chile (slight return).  Funny, picture all of the adults standing around simultaneously sigh, bow heads and slump shoulders and shuffle away dragging feet. (sound of air escaping…) HAW! Tom

Response:

  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies???

the day i went into a guitar store and saw a 14-15 year old kid play steve howe’s ‘the clap’ in A music store, i said to myself ’screw the fast technical playing..-i’ll never be this good..’    if this kid was able to play this technical, there must be lots of other prodigies out there…therefore, i continued playing but my focus was now to try to play my way.. the least influences possible.. even though i’m now 37 and i just play/jam for fun, i can’t really say that i play bad..but that kid kinda’ve put me in a different direction.. georgio — Remove the *NOSPAM* part in my email if you reply..

Response:

Well Georgio don’t let that kids chops get you down …… I would bet you a dollar to a doughnut you have a lick or two he might have trouble with. — Charles Johnston AB7SL – Ham Radio Pages http://www.ab7sl.com

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.   His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.   Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies??? the day i went into a guitar store and saw a 14-15 year old kid play steve

howe’s ‘the clap’ in A music store, i said to myself ’screw the fast technical playing..-i’ll never be this good..’    if this kid was able to play this technical, there must be lots of

other prodigies out there…therefore, i continued playing but my focus was now to try to play my way.. the least influences possible.. even though i’m now 37 and i just play/jam for fun, i can’t really say

that i play bad..but that kid kinda’ve put me in a different direction.. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – georgio — Remove the *NOSPAM* part in my email if you reply..

Response:

   if this kid was able to play this technical, there must be lots of other prodigies out there…therefore, i continued playing but my focus was now to try to play my way.. the least influences possible.. even though i’m now 37 and i just play/jam for fun, i can’t really say that i play bad..but that kid kinda’ve put me in a different direction..

That sounds like a great outlook to me. I’m kind of similar. I was helped along in this way of thinking by years of classical lessons (both on clarinet and piano). I was practicing 4 hours a day on the piano at the same time as there were guys doing 12+. Sick! The time commitment for that level of playing prowess is huge and wasn’t what I was looking for (changed my major to accounting… ). If you want to see "real" prodigies look outside of the world of rock/blues into the classical realm. I’m not up on current trends but I remember a time when Japan was turning out boatloads of mega technical violinists, many of them below 10 years old. Kirk

Response:

  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years.

[snip] Think its the ritalin?

Response:

If you want to see "real" prodigies look outside of the world of rock/blues

into the classical realm. I’m not up on current trends but I remember a time when Japan was turning out boatloads of mega technical violinists, many of them below 10 years old. My computer is an amazing technical player too. It can play the same song over and over again exactly without a single mistake. Daniel.

Response:

 Whatever ever happened to the little guy that hung out with Steve Vai???  I think his name was Thomas Mcraughlin or something like that.                                           Grady

Response:

 Whatever ever happened to the little guy that hung out with Steve Vai???  I think his name was Thomas Mcraughlin or something like that.

Thomas McRocklin! HAhahaha!! I think he took my order at Wendy’s last week…got it wrong too…;) Dan Chernow Guitarist/Instructor BCM ‘94

Response:

Nathan Cavaleri from Australia is a child prodigy. Check out this article if you want: http://imusic.artistdirect.com/showcase/contemporary/nathancavaleri.html

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – says… Don’t know if you’d call ‘em prodigies, but…While at the Sarasota Blues Jam last year we saw a group from Jacksonville, I believe their name was "Thunder and Lightning," or something to that effect.  They were quite good and ranged in age from 16-18.  One 16 year old played keyboard and sax.  A couple of days ago on Regis there was an 11-year-old kid playing an Eric Clapton song quite well. He has been playing guitar for 4 years. No sheetreading just playing by ear.  His guitar was something like a Les Paul, he said daddy got it for him for $5000. I think the kid’s name was Truelove. Not a bad name for a future bluesplayer.  Anyway, do you guys know of other guitar prodigies??? progidy? i dont think so.. that should be reserved for guys like Tony Williams who started with Miles Davis at 17…

Response:

Question:

Whats the protocal for having a ‘company mascott’ (being that of an animal) and writing off any expesnes incurred with the ‘mascott’?

Response:

Whats the protocal for having a ‘company mascott’ (being that of an animal) and writing off any expesnes incurred with the ‘mascott’?

I would deduct the costs as marketing or advertising.   Although you would need to be aware of the costs that may be associated with a capital item.  I.E.: mascot costume, signs, etc. that have a life span of more than 12 months.  These would be capitalized and depreciated. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA  (Athens,  Georgia) This advice is general in nature and not meant as specific tax or accounting advice. Because all relevant facts may not have been provided, please seek appropriate professional advice prior to taking any action based on this information.

Response:

Question:

I am an 80% holder in an 80/20 partnership and have made loans to the partnership via credit cards held in my name.  Could someone explain to me how this should be accounted for from an income pespective?   Specifically, the interest though it is charged to me, should be a business expense should it not?   The way it is set up now, I am writing checks to myself and then paying the credit card bills from my personal account.  This means I’m liable for personal income taxes on all amounts. Also, the debt is not charged to the partnership, so the minority partner doesn’t share his part of the liability.  I know this isn’t right. My accountant (which was just retained last year) reclassed one card that I had specifically registered to the business, as a personal obligation (because my name was guaranteeing it) and reclassed all payments to that card as guaranteed payments to me, yet all expenses on the card were business related. If I were to reclass all of these credit card accounts to the business, it would result in a net loss for this year, and my partner would end up claiming 20% of that loss.  This isn’t right either. Does anyone have a solution that will give me the proper credit for financing this cash business without falsly taxing me? Also, how does one "shop" for an accountant.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I am an 80% holder in an 80/20 partnership and have made loans to the partnership via credit cards held in my name.  Could someone explain to me how this should be accounted for from an income pespective?   Specifically, the interest though it is charged to me, should be a business expense should it not?   The way it is set up now, I am writing checks to myself and then paying the credit card bills from my personal account.  This means I’m liable for personal income taxes on all amounts. Also, the debt is not charged to the partnership, so the minority partner doesn’t share his part of the liability.  I know this isn’t right. My accountant (which was just retained last year) reclassed one card that I had specifically registered to the business, as a personal obligation (because my name was guaranteeing it) and reclassed all payments to that card as guaranteed payments to me, yet all expenses on the card were business related. If I were to reclass all of these credit card accounts to the business, it would result in a net loss for this year, and my partner would end up claiming 20% of that loss.  This isn’t right either. Does anyone have a solution that will give me the proper credit for financing this cash business without falsly taxing me?

Without more facts I am hesitant to make any recomendation, however I will say that it *appears* that something is not being accounted for correctly.  You need local professional help. Also, how does one "shop" for an accountant.

I would suggest you ask your attorney, banker, insurance agent, business friends, etc for referrals.  Then meet with a few and chose the one you feel most comfortable with.  Do NOT price shop or you will almost always get what you pay for.  However just because the person is the most expensive does NOT mean they are the best. Drew Edmundson, CPA (NC) to reply remove NOSPAM

Response:

It is a hassle.  What I have done is set up term loans from the LLC to me personally at a fixed interest rate.  The LLC gets a fixed payment schedule, the interest is deductible to the business and there is less accounting involved. However, I have been careful not to set up the loans with anywhere near a credit card interest rate.  Chances are I will pay down my personal credit cards faster than the LLC will pay off the term note.  Declare the interest income as interest income on your personal return and take the 80% interest expense through the business. The best way is to have a credit card issued under the name of the business and use that for all business related charges.  However, my personal credit cards have a much higher credit limit than my business credit card, so for those large purchases it ends up on the personal card. Word of mouth is the best way to shop for an accountant.  Ask other business people in the community who they use and if they are happy with the service. — Eric Schueler South Beach Business Services, LLC P.O. Box 425 Grayland, WA 98547 Remove the dash (-) when replying to this E-mail address – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I am an 80% holder in an 80/20 partnership and have made loans to the partnership via credit cards held in my name.  Could someone explain to me how this should be accounted for from an income pespective? Specifically, the interest though it is charged to me, should be a business expense should it not? The way it is set up now, I am writing checks to myself and then paying the credit card bills from my personal account.  This means I’m liable for personal income taxes on all amounts. Also, the debt is not charged to the partnership, so the minority partner doesn’t share his part of the liability.  I know this isn’t right. My accountant (which was just retained last year) reclassed one card that I had specifically registered to the business, as a personal obligation (because my name was guaranteeing it) and reclassed all payments to that card as guaranteed payments to me, yet all expenses on the card were business related. If I were to reclass all of these credit card accounts to the business, it would result in a net loss for this year, and my partner would end up claiming 20% of that loss.  This isn’t right either. Does anyone have a solution that will give me the proper credit for financing this cash business without falsly taxing me? Also, how does one "shop" for an accountant.

Response:

The easiest solution to me would be for you to present your credit card bill to the partnership on a monthly basis for reimbursement.  The partnership would issue a check to you (no 1099 though) and you would pay the bill.  As long as you can justify the business nature of the reimbursed expenses you should have no problem with the IRS should your partnership ever come under audit.  You mention interest expense, this would be treated as above but make sure you’re only reimbursed for the portion of interest related to the business expenses. As far as sharing a loss with your partner, that’s decided in the partnership agreement.  You can have different sharing of losses and gains as long as it is set up in the partnership agreement. How to shop for an accountant?  Recommendations from friends, other business people.  Look for someone with an understanding of your business (I.e. retail, manufacturing, real estate…etc.) and someone who you feel comfortable with and can talk to.  An accountant (CPA) can be more than a bookkeeper or tax preparer.  A good CPA can help you set-up your business, introduce you to more customers, help your business productivity and cash flow.  As well as personal financial planning.  Good luck in your search. Greg Chilcote, CPA

Response:

Question:

Bob: Can you cite anything making independence an issue in tax preparation? Some years ago laws prohibited CPA ads and solicitation. They fell to constitutional free speech challenges. We may disagree with what is legal because we live in different states. However, while many of my tax limit petitions successfully changed laws, there are still many unconstitutional laws on the books. If any of them restricted my right to bill this way, I would feel it was my duty to get it thrown out.         Mike Block – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s not about personal freedom, it’s the independence (actual and percieved). We have that obligation when we hold ourselves out as CPAs to the public. Ethics is touchy, and I may misunderstand the LAWS in my state, but I think one can lose one’s license for billing practices such as yours. Anyway, good luck in court. On your Mar. 6. 1998 reply posting, you indicate that you bill new clients (that have their tax returns prepared by other accountants) a fee of 1/3 of the tax savings resulting from your review of those returns and the amending (or correcting) of the returns. Is it ethical under local State Board of Accountancy, local CPA Society and American Institute of CPA rules to bill clients based on a percentage of tax savings? State Board of Accountancy says it is ONLY LEGAL to bill a percentage of tax saved in cases like tax appeals. I bill regular fully detailed standard rates, BUT LIMIT THEM to a percentage of tax saved for new clients, with returns prepared by OTHERS (including self-prepared returns). Big government has badly impaired our personal  freedom. However, I feel sure we are still free to discount rates for those who cannot pay,  or when we feel we do not otherwise provide adequate value, or for any other reason we choose. For example, except for audits, I can offer new clients completely free service for a year. The $500 bill mentioned was based on time. 1/3 of the tax saved, on a return prepared by another CPA, would have justified  bill 4+ times as high. I feel sure that telling prospective clients that I limit fees this way is not illegal and will go to court If challenged.

Michael Block,C.P.A.,QuickBooks Prof. Advisor biz.comp.accounting co-moderator 954-566-7540 275 E Oakland Pk Blvd, Ft Lauderdale,FL 33334  Demand Voter Approval of All Tax Increases!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am trying to gather data regarding accountant’s fees.  I would like to know the average fee charged by accounting/bookeeping services in your area.  If the fee is computed on a monthly basis, what would it convert to for an hourly rate? All answers appreciated, I am just beginning my career handling the books for a small company in my area (northern WV/southern OH) and I do know that they were paying a CPA $750 a month to handle the weekly payroll for fifteen employees. They are also paying the 2.67% to the bank to handle the recievables for them (basically selling the invoices to the bank and maintaining a security account to cover bed debts).  I don’t know how much more they are paying to have monthly balance sheets and income statements prepared, but it was obviously enough to justify hiring someone to do it in house.

My fees are 3-4x what I pay in salaries. This means $20/hour for a junior secretary to $60/ for experienced accountants (not CPAs) to $120/ for me (35 years national and local firm tax dept and own practice). I feel good CPAs should be able to save more than their cost in taxes and increased net income.  For new clients, who have returns prepared by others, I limit fees to 1/3 of tax saved. Today a new client paid $500 for a revised 1120S and 1040 that saved $6,000+. Michael Block,C.P.A.,QuickBooks Prof. Advisor biz.comp.accounting co-moderator 954-566-7540 275 E Oakland Pk Blvd, Ft Lauderdale,FL 33334  Demand Voter Approval of All Tax Increases!

Response:

Hi Michael Block, CPA: On your Mar. 6. 1998 reply posting, you indicate that you bill new clients (that have their tax returns prepared by other accountants) a fee of 1/3 of the tax savings resulting from your review of those returns and the amending (or correcting) of the returns. Is it ethical under local State Board of Accountancy, local CPA Society and American Institute of CPA rules to bill clients based on a percentage of tax savings? I was under the impression that this was not allowed; but I have been inactive now for over 5 years and the rules may have been changed or I was wrong in the first place.

I have not been an AICPA or state society member for a long time. The State Board of Accountancy says it is ONLY LEGAL to bill a percentage of tax saved in cases like tax appeals. I bill regular fully detailed standard rates, BUT LIMIT THEM to a percentage of tax saved for new clients, with returns prepared by OTHERS (including self-prepared returns). Big government has badly impaired our personal  freedom. However, I feel sure we are still free to discount rates for those who cannot pay,  or when we feel we do not otherwise provide adequate value, or for any other reason we choose. For example, except for audits, I can offer new clients completely free service for a year. The $500 bill mentioned was based on time. 1/3 of the tax saved, on a return prepared by another CPA, would have justified  bill 4+ times as high. I feel sure that telling prospective clients that I limit fees this way is not illegal and will go to court If challenged. Michael Block,C.P.A.,QuickBooks Prof. Advisor biz.comp.accounting co-moderator 954-566-7540 275 E Oakland Pk Blvd, Ft Lauderdale,FL 33334  Demand Voter Approval of All Tax Increases!

Response:

It’s not about personal freedom, it’s the independence (actual and percieved). We have that obligation when we hold ourselves out as CPAs to the public. Ethics is touchy, and I may misunderstand the LAWS in my state, but I think one can lose one’s license for billing practices such as yours. Anyway, good luck in court. Bob B. Greensboro, NC – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi Michael Block, CPA: On your Mar. 6. 1998 reply posting, you indicate that you bill new clients (that have their tax returns prepared by other accountants) a fee of 1/3 of the tax savings resulting from your review of those returns and the amending (or correcting) of the returns. Is it ethical under local State Board of Accountancy, local CPA Society and American Institute of CPA rules to bill clients based on a percentage of tax savings? I was under the impression that this was not allowed; but I have been inactive now for over 5 years and the rules may have been changed or I was wrong in the first place. I have not been an AICPA or state society member for a long time. The State Board of Accountancy says it is ONLY LEGAL to bill a percentage of tax saved in cases like tax appeals. I bill regular fully detailed standard rates, BUT LIMIT THEM to a percentage of tax saved for new clients, with returns prepared by OTHERS (including self-prepared returns). Big government has badly impaired our personal  freedom. However, I feel sure we are still free to discount rates for those who cannot pay,  or when we feel we do not otherwise provide adequate value, or for any other reason we choose. For example, except for audits, I can offer new clients completely free service for a year. The $500 bill mentioned was based on time. 1/3 of the tax saved, on a return prepared by another CPA, would have justified  bill 4+ times as high. I feel sure that telling prospective clients that I limit fees this way is not illegal and will go to court If challenged. Michael Block,C.P.A.,QuickBooks Prof. Advisor biz.comp.accounting co-moderator 954-566-7540 275 E Oakland Pk Blvd, Ft Lauderdale,FL 33334 Demand Voter Approval of All Tax Increases!

Response:

Hi Michael Block, CPA: On your Mar. 6. 1998 reply posting, you indicate that you bill new clients (that have their tax returns prepared by other accountants) a fee of 1/3 of the tax savings resulting from your review of those returns and the amending (or correcting) of the returns. Is it ethical under local State Board of Accountancy, local CPA Society and American Institute of CPA rules to bill clients based on a percentage of tax savings? I was under the impression that this was not allowed; but I have been inactive now for over 5 years and the rules may have been changed or I was wrong in the first place. I look forward to hearing from you on this question; and if others out there have an opinion about this, by all means post it to the newsgroup. Best regards, Al Gershen, Grants Pass, OR, USA Have a good day (or night) on the web. Also, WEBTV "really" works great!

Response:

Hello, I am trying to gather data regarding accountant’s fees.  I would like to know the average fee charged by accounting/bookeeping services in your area.  If the fee is computed on a monthly basis, what would it convert to for an hourly rate? All answers appreciated, Mike

Response:

Hello, I am trying to gather data regarding accountant’s fees.  I would like to know the average fee charged by accounting/bookeeping services in your area.  If the fee is computed on a monthly basis, what would it convert to for an hourly rate? All answers appreciated, Mike

I am just beginning my career handling the books for a small company in my area (northern WV/southern OH) and I do know that they were paying a CPA $750 a month to handle the weekly payroll for fifteen employees. They are also paying the 2.67% to the bank to handle the recievables for them (basically selling the invoices to the bank and maintaining a security account to cover bed debts).  I don’t know how much more they are paying to have monthly balance sheets and income statements prepared, but it was obviously enough to justify hiring someone to do it in house. Ernie

Response:

Question:

 In other words, because we’re FREE, our health care costs more.  I say let the socialists who want to control me, and convert me  into a high-yield government resource, go to EUROPE.

        What is this often stated American FREEDOM ?         No no, I’m serious, I’d like to hear what You people         think freedom is, and how come e.g. the Northern         European countries are less free.         Jochen         PS. If I didn’t make it clear, this is not a flame-bait. —

Response:

"Americans have never journeyed to Canada for health care," states the Society leader. "Why should they when they’ve got the best in the world right here?" WRONG!!!  Americans regularly attend the Montreal Neurological Institute.  But your papers don’t care to write about it because they feel that their readers don’t care to see that.  Also, last autumn investigations have revealed widespread fraud by Americans embezzling health insurance cards from Canadian provincial plans, either individually or trafficked by fraud rings.  UPI Clarinet covered this, and other Canadian readers can corroborate from reading their local newspapers (it is very, very widespread).

I should add to Gary’s comments (and I should say that I’m glad to see him responding; I had a very nice and fruitful discussion of the positive and negative aspects of Canadian health care with him a few months ago) that people here in Buffalo go to Canada for treatment; specifically Toronto. Hospitals in that city are trying to attract more affluent patients from Buffalo; it’s a win-win situation for both of them because a) Buffalo patients can get treatment for cancer and other such diseases that they would normally have to travel to New York for, and b) the Toronto hospitals get more money because they charge rates that are higher than those charged Canadians yet lower than those in the US. world’s biggest company town.  The health insurance industry and the CMA doctors’ monopoly was in on it, too, ‘cos the former still sells additional private benefits without the risks of basic (now making more money) while the doctors are ALL private and set the insurance rates,

And there we see what I think is the real danger of adapting the Canadian system to the US. Gary is unapologetic about the CMA’s monopoly power that has come about as a result of socialized basic health-insurance (is that a proper term for it, Gary?). It’s an interesting phenomenon. The AMA opposes Canadian-style health care by promoting charges against the Canadian system that turn out to be either a) totally groundless, or b) ridiculously exaggerated through omissions of crucial information. These invariably come to light and are exposed as such. It almost seems as if the AMA were trying to lose on purpose. Why? Well, Conquest’s Law, formulated by the conservative American historian Robert Conquest (and not, as some have thought, his older brother Norman ) and quoted here on Usenet in a few sigs, tells us that the behavior of any large organization can best be predicted by asssuming it to be controlled by a cabal of its enemies. Is that the case with the AMA? Could it be controlled by a cabal of closet "pseudo-socialists"? Maybe, but not the sense we usually think of socialists. The AMA is curiously silent on the vast increase in power over the health care system in Canada that the CMA has been given, in the form of the licensing of practitioners and providers, through Canada’s single-payer system. Gary has recounted here stories of MDs wanting to practice specialties in a particular geographical area of Canada being denied licenses for that purpose because an older doctor in that region in the same specialty has trouble keeping his appointment book full. Of course, that usually has something to do with the sparse population density of many areas of Canada, but keep in mind that that does not in most cases translate to the US. This may be guided by the perfectly laudable principle of ensuring an efficient distribution of health-care resources, but there is no reason to assume that it always has to be so. In fact, it would be in the CMA’s best interest to, if it needed to, protect older and perhaps less competent doctors from competition from younger specialists. And how sure are we that there isn’t something like this going on? Or that they are arbitrarily restricting supply for their members benefit regardless of complaints about competence (and people who say that that would result in the doctor getting chastised have a lot more faith than I do in doctors’ ability and willingness to police themselves, and their responsiveness to complaints from non-medical people), much as certain unions of skilled professionals in the US deliberately keep membership low so as to ensure plenty of work for their members. You can bet, if Dr. X who’s been practicing, say, cardiology, in Moose Jaw without any competition for twenty-five years hears that Dr. Y has just finished a residency in cardiology and is planning to open a practice in that in the area, that if Dr. X, as a dues-paying life member of the CMA, makes a few calls to friends or other people higher-up in the organization with the power to make or influence the making of licensing decisions, Dr. Y will suddenly encounter all kinds of heretofore unseen bureaucratic delays. So it is likely to imagine that the AMA would develop the same sort of power if the US adopted single-payer-only on a much greater scale and with much less benevolence than the CMA has shown. I don’t think the American public would like the idea of a wealthy organization of professionals in a profession most of them have at best mixed feelings about, accountable only to its own members, having the ability to exercise whim and caprice over such a crucial element of the health-care system. And yet the AMA never mentions that when it preaches the evils of Canadian health care, but instead relies on arguments about waiting periods and other alleged atrocities so specious that the CMA (which, coincidentally, has a lot of links with the AMA) writes letters to the New York Times refuting them quite decisively. Hmmm. (Anybody for adding alt.conspiracy to the newsgroups line?) It would indeed be ironic if such proven and devoted defenders of free-market capitalism as the John Birch Society and other conservative individuals and organizations were to turn out to only be serving as useful idiots for the establishment of yet another American monopoly.

Response:

"Americans have never journeyed to Canada for health care," states the Society leader. "Why should they when they’ve got the best in the world right here?" WRONG!!!  Americans regularly attend the Montreal Neurological Institute.  But your papers don’t care to write about it because they feel that their readers don’t care to see that. I should add to Gary’s comments

Hi, Dan, good to see you again! (-; that people here in Buffalo go to Canada for treatment; specifically Toronto.

Vermonters go to Quebec all the time; it is actually helping to sustain the English-speaking sector of the medical industry there. the Toronto hospitals get more money because they charge rates that are higher than those charged Canadians yet lower than those in the US.

Actually, that ties in with my remark elsewhere that while claims to the provincial health insurance (OHIP, here) are guaranteed, cash payments and direct claims to American private insurance is not and thus there is the added overhead.  In fact, my buddy’s practice (he’s a junior partner, but on the verge of promotion) declared cash-only for non-insured last year after getting the stiff from a number of claims to American insurance companies.  This time last year, I freighted to them a used credit card machine bought at a defunct video store on 72nd St. at Columbus Avenue in NYC (remember that there is overhead from accepting plastic, too). Since our health care facilities are private, I certainly have no problem with them looking for more customers than they can get locally … in fact, by serving a wider market it can justify the presence of low-demand specialties that we don’t have the domestic population to supply with business … free trade! (-; Interestingly, I have a clearance from my company (self-insures, but they’re huge so no fear of getting stiff on my part) that our 80/20 can apply to cash billings generated in Canada … the cost is cheaper than doing 80/20 here, and less than what HMO’s charge when they are able to take welk-in business (btw, is that common?).  It also gives me a sick day or an extra vacation day here and there to do errands back north of the border. (-; world’s biggest company town.  The health insurance industry and the CMA doctors’ monopoly was in on it, too, ‘cos the former still sells additional private benefits without the risks of basic (now making more money) while the doctors are ALL private and set the insurance rates, And there we see what I think is the real danger of adapting the Canadian system to the US. Gary is unapologetic about the CMA’s monopoly power that has come about as a result of socialized basic health-insurance (is that a proper term for it, Gary?).

Well, if "socialized" national self-insurance in the same manner of "socialized" national self-defence … (culture, eh?) It’s not a matter of being unapologetic as much as cynical realpolitik (e.g., there was no good reason not to arm Saddam when he was beating on the Ayatollah & Co.).  The CMA is bigger than the Law Societies up north (maybe why malpractice has not moved towards the American mode, probably for better in this case).  Also, my ethnic background happens to be Chinese (family name was anglicized coming to Canada in 1900’s, like what happened to a lot of Ukrainians …) and I got to know lots of doctors from my parents’ circle, as well as their children … some are really hardcore CMA types — in once case, the father came from Taiwan and had to restart his medical education from 3rd year through residency despite being a Chief Surgeon in Taipei and for an Aramco hospital in Saudi Arabia; now, he’s retired and one of the Manitoba MA’s most vicious gatekeepers regarding qualifications. It almost seems as if the AMA were trying to lose on purpose. Why? Could it be controlled by a cabal of closet "pseudo-socialists"? Maybe, but not the sense we usually think of socialists.

It could be a matter of defending your best present position …  as an analogy, Intel has written a lot of papers and articles decrying MCM’s (multi-chip modules) in the high tech press, yet they have a number of tightly-secured labs (no big secret here) to catch up on that very sort of technology. The AMA is curiously silent on the vast increase in power over the health care system in Canada that the CMA has been given, in the form of the licensing of practitioners and providers, through Canada’s single-payer system.

More critical is the CMA’s role in setting the insurance rates … why Canadian doctors take home the same net pay as their American cousins once you factor the gross pay differences due to malpractice insurance. And yet the AMA never mentions that when it preaches the evils of Canadian health care, but instead relies on arguments about waiting periods and other alleged atrocities so specious that the CMA (which, coincidentally, has a lot of links with the AMA) writes letters to the New York Times refuting them quite decisively. Hmmm. (Anybody for adding alt.conspiracy to the newsgroups line?)

Oh, thanks for reminding me … in an Alt.conspiracy vein, the AMA may have been silent for more than a year so that people can forget what they’ve been saying (despite its mass propagation, as in the John Birch article) and have a Canadian card to play in the health care poker game … I was shocked to see that letter from the CMA’s president in the Times in March, because it would not be there sans clearance from the AMA (i.e., not their territory).  Most of the recent Canada-bashing seems to be echoes of people repeating old information that has been refuted in newspapers and magazines of record/repute (NYT, Economist, etc.). It would indeed be ironic if such proven and devoted defenders of free-market capitalism as the John Birch Society and other conservative individuals and organizations were to turn out to only be serving as useful idiots for the establishment of yet another American monopoly.

Actually, it would be funny if Rush Limbaugh didn’t know the role of the Canadian Conservatives in our health insurance setup, took shots at it, then gets a phone call from Peter Lougheed or Bill Davis … (-; gld — Gary L. Dare                            Montreal Canadiens, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

             Eight Myths about National Health Insurance   "Health Assurance" — Jan/Feb issue of _In Health_, by Anthony Schmitz   "When pollsters asked U.S. citizens if they’d prefer Canadian health       care over their own, 72 percent said yes. As for the number of             Canadians who’d choose the U.S. system: 3 percent"   "`You’ve got to remember, you’ve got a waiting list as well, but it’s   not as obvious. If you’re poor and you don’t have insurance, you don’t       go to a surgeon. In the States you ration by ability to pay.’"   Would a Canadian umbrella leak in the United States?   "Socialized health and medical services," said the politician, "are   incompatible with the rights and responsibilities inherent in a free   and democratic society." The year was 1959, and the speaker was J.   Donovan Ross, Alberta’s Minister of Health. Remarkably, Canada’s   citizens disagreed. By 1966 the government had declared itself the   nation’s only health insurer, and by 1971 every Canadian had full,   free coverage.   Now Americans are jealous. Anyone bold enough to endorse Canada as a   suitable model, however, can expect an argument. Here are eight   objections and the rejoinders.   WOULDN’T NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE AMOUNT TO "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE,"   FULL OF BUREAUCRATS TELLING OUR DOCTORS HOW TO TREAT US?   The thought of handing Washington power over everyone’s health is   indeed a little spooky. Who can forget the government’s attempt to   "simplify" our income tax forms by adding a mass of befuddling new   instructions?   But look at U.S. health care now. Our doctors already obey legions of   intrusive bureaucrats: Insurance officials regularly demand that your   doctor call for permission to go ahead with treatment. Medicare   officials dictate precisely how long patients can stay in the   hospital. The number of U.S. health care administrator has climbed 3.5   times faster than the number of doctors. In Canada, there are no   meddling insurers, while the government’s main power is in raising   money and paying bills, with minimal monitoring for outlandish   practices. "No one second-guesses me," says the president of British   Columbia’s medical association. "I’ve got clinical freedom."       [While the answer doesn't say so explicitly Canada's system is not     "socialized medicine" [as a Cronkite TV special quickly pointed     out to its audience, trained to fear anything "social" let alone     socialism (which had as much to do with the former Soviet bloc as     does "democracy"; they called themselves that too)] the doctors     are not employed by the state; the doctors and hospitals are     private, but the state, being the sole "buyer", has been given a     lot of power by Canadians to negotiate the prices with the doctors     an hospitals for their services and care. Bite your lip before     reading the next question. –HB] DON’T WE ALREADY HAVE THE WORLD’S BEST HEALTH CARE?   It’s certainly the most expensive. In 1987, we spent $2,050 per   citizen on health care. Canada spent an average of $1,480, most   European nations even less.   Unfortunately, spending the most hasn’t made us the healthiest.   Canada, culturally most like the United States, has an infant   mortality rate 25 percent lower. Their rate of heart disease death is   20 percent lower. Their average life span –77.1 years– is almost two   years longer   WHY NOT JUST FINE-TUNE OUR EXISTING SYSTEM SO IT REACHES ALL THE   PEOPLE WHO AREN’T NOW COVERED?   Many proposals for full U.S. health coverage would require all   businesses (except the smallest) to insure the health of their   workers, with the government looking out for everyone else.   Such fine-tuning can improve our system but won’t really fix its   biggest problem: the billions of dollars we waste every year on   paper-shuffling. (Even the picky Consumers Union recently came to   that same conclusion and endorsed a Canadian-style plan.) In Canada,   according to the latest study, citizens each spent $18 a year for   "administrative" costs," while each of us spent $95 — for a total of   $20 billion more than we would have with Canadian-style care. That’s   not all. Our doctors, hospitals, and nursing homes spend much more   –$62.1 billion by a 1983 estimate– filing out insurance forms,   billing patients, and collecting.  

Response:

[3] Jan/Feb 1991 _In Health_ magazine, which adds that in Canada, according to a recent study, citizens each spent $18 a year for "administrative costs," while each of us spent $95 — for a total of $20 billion more than we would have with Canadian-style care.  Our doctors, hospitals, and nursing homes spend much more — $62.1 billion by a 1983 estimate — filing out insurance forms, billing patients, and collecting. The article notes that compared to other countries, "[The U.S. health care "system"] is certainly the most expensive. In 1987, we spent $2,050 per citizen on health care. Canada spent an average of $1,480, most European nations even less. "Unfortunately, spending the most hasn’t made us the healthiest. Canada, culturally most like the United States, has an infant mortality rate 25 percent lower. Their rate of heart disease death is 20 percent lower. Their average life span — 77.1 years — is almost two years longer" Similar conclusions were reached by a Business magazine [See "Condition Critical" cover story, Business Today, Fall, 1990, which summarized in hard numbers in its charts how "America spends the most... but gets the least"]

Response:

[1] The General Accounting Office [GAO] stated in a 1991 report that "If the universal coverage and single-payer features of the Canadian system were applied in the United States, the savings IN ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ALONE would be MORE THAN ENOUGH to finance insurance coverage for the millions of Americans who are currently uninsured. There would be ENOUGH LEFT OVER to permit a reduction, or possibly even the elimination, of co-payments and deductibles" [In These Times, June 26-July 9, 1991. My added emphasis] The article also notes that "In 1970 both Canada and the U.S. spent about 7.4 percent of their gross national products on health care. By 1989, The U.S. spent 11.6 of its national income on health and Canada only 8.9 percent. Yet in Canada more health care service was delivered per person than in the U.S., according to a recent report by the U.S. General Accounting Office"

Response:

Billing, administration, and insurance overhead as percentage of total spending: U.S.:           22% Canada:         13.7% U.K.            11.1% and Percentage of premiums consumed by overhead: Private Insurance Companies:              12% (overhead & profits) Public payers (e.g. Medicare, Medicaid):   3% Canadian provincial insurance plans:      under 1%

Response:

** Topic 447    Socialized Medicine?    3 responses ** techie       alt.activism     6:13 am  Jun 19, 1993 ** (at cellar.org)      (From News system) **   **   ** IF WE DON’T STOP THEM, THEY’LL DESTROY AMERICAN MEDICINE **   **     "Now a Presdential team, led by Hillary Rodham Clinton, is determined   ** to apply socialism’s losing strategy to the American medical system.   ** What they plan to do amounts too performing crippling surgey on a   ** patient who needs only to be  left alone." "John Kennedy made federally guaranteed health care for older American a key element of his presidential campaign platform. But even Medicare, a boon for tens of millions of the elderly — not to mention doctors and hospitals — was enacted over the strident opposition of the AMA. Calling it `SOCIALIZED MEDICINE,’ the AMA enlisted a HOLLYWOOD ACTOR NAMED RONALD REAGAN to help block the program on Capitol Hill. "`If you and I don’t stop’ Medicade, Reagan warned on a phonograph record the AMA sent to doctors’ wives, `WE’LL SPEND OUR SUNSET YEARS TELLING OUR CHILDREN and children’s children what it was like in America when men were free.’" FROM                  What’s Blocking HEALTH CARE REFORM?          For all the finger pointing, the real culprit may be            lawmakers’ addiction to medical industry money.                   By Vicki Kemper and Viveca Novak. —  Excerpted from Common Cause magazine, Jan-March 1992, —             (Vol 18 Number 1, cover story).

Response:

EIGHT MYTHS about National Health Insurance (Pt II)     An office visit that’s $52 in Seattle is $18 in Vancouver     (Canada).  That’s because, among other things, they’ve given their     government power to bargain with doctors and hospitals over fees.     “before you reflexively holler "No new taxes," consider what     you’re already paying…in existing state and federal taxes,     insurance premiums, payroll deductions, deferred wages,     deductibles, copayments, and ordinary cash transactions with     doctors and hospitals. Canadians pay their once in taxes but get     more care — for $600 *LESS* OUT OF EACH CITIZEN’S EARNINGS. Last     year our country spent $640 billion on health care. With a     Canadian-style system, at Canadian rates, we could cover everyone     for $365 billion.  ” "Here are eight objections and the rejoinders." "Health Assurance" — Jan/Feb issue of _In Health_, by Anthony Schmitz   "When pollsters asked U.S. citizens if they’d prefer Canadian health       care over their own, 72 percent said yes. As for the number of             Canadians who’d choose the U.S. system: 3 percent"   "`You’ve got to remember, you’ve got a waiting list as well, but it’s   not as obvious. If you’re poor and you don’t have insurance, you don’t       go to a surgeon. In the States you ration by ability to pay.’"   THERE’S NO WAY THE GOVERNMENT CAN PAY FOR EVERY AMERICAN’S   CARE WITHOUT RAISING TAXES THROUGH THE ROOF.   The federal government *would* have to come up with billions of   dollars more than the $115 billion it now spends on its health   programs for the poor and aged. Some could come from income taxes,   some from luxury taxes on cigarettes or cosmetic surgery. In Canada,   several provinces charge a small monthly premium.   But before you reflexively holler "No new taxes," consider what you’re   already paying. That grand total of $2,050 we spend per citizen doesn’t   come out of thin air. It comes in dribs and drabs out of your own   earnings — in existing state and federal taxes, insurance premiums,   payroll deductions, deferred wages, deductibles, copayments, and   ordinary cash transactions with doctors and hospitals. Canadians pay   their once in taxes but get more care — for $600 *less* out of each   citizen’s earnings. Last year our country spent $640 billion on health   care. With a Canadian-style system, at Canadian rates, we could cover   everyone for $365 billion.   WOULDN’T NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE MEAN THAT AMERICANS WHO ARE NOW   FULLY INSURED MIGHT HAVE TO SETTLE FOR LESS?   In Canada, provincial insurance covers all health costs except dental   care, eyeglasses, prescription drugs, ambulance service, and private   hospital rooms, — so many Canadians do end up buying some private   insurance. A policy to cover all of these things runs about #40 to $40   a month.   In fact, however, most people in the United States don’t really have   full coverage. Overall, American insurance now covers just 74 percent   of the costs of doctors’ services, 39 percent of dentists’ services,   and 25 percent of prescription drug charges. We pay the rest out of   pocket.   WOULDN’T FREE CARE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO RUN TO THE DOCTOR FOR EVERY   ACHE AND PAIN?   People who get free treatment *do* go to the doctor and hospital about   a third more often than those who have to pay a share of their medical   bills.   Still, Canadians — who pay nothing at the doctor’s — have a lower   per-person health bill than we do. That’s because, among other things,   they’ve given their government power to bargain with doctors and   hospitals over fees. An office visit that’s $52 in Seattle is $18 in   Vancouver.   DOESN’T LETTING DOCTORS SEND PATIENTS’ BILLS STRAIGHT TO THE   GOVERNMENT LEAD TO MORE NEEDLESS TREATMENTS AND TESTS?   When patients get free care and doctors can charge no more than a set   amount per treatment, the tide does tend to run toward more and more   treatment. Studies in Canada have shown jumps in the number of   doctors’ billings –and in their incomes– after the government froze   their fees.   But the same thing’s now going on in this country — except here   federal regulators *and* private insurers have been trying, with even   less success, to keep a lid on physicians’ incomes. Last decade   American doctors increased their cut of the national income by 40   percent while Canadian doctors captured only another 10 percent.   ISN’T THE PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY JUST TOO BIG   AND POWERFUL TO KILL?   Dismantling the health segment of our insurance industry would be   "politically thorny," in the quiet words of one advocate for a   national plan. Some 1,200 firms now sell more than $192 billion in   health insurance. They’d put up a hard fight. Not only has the industry   grown eightfold since Canada shut down its own health insurers, but our   government leaves politicians more open to lobbyists than does   Canada’s parliamentary system.   Still, there’s no legal barrier to making health insurance an American   public service. The states have broad powers to legislate business   affairs and to promote citizens’ health. Likewise, the federal   government can use its control of tax revenues   — as it does with highway funds — to set standards for the states.  

Response:

  " Taking a Look at the German Prescription "  by Henrik Bering-Jensen     How realistic is it to talk about adopting another country’s health     care system?  Not very, according to John Iglehart, the national     correspondent for the New England Journal of Medicine…     Every country has distinct political, economic and social     characteristics that make such copying difficult.

I’ll concur with that … on the surface, Canada and France and Germany use the most expensive approach of providing pure health insurance, uncontrolled, to pay for private doctors and hospitals. No HMO’s, except for a small clone of the British National Health Service in France to cover the poorest French (their system has a schedule of copayments and deductibles, and is closest to that you Americans have as private insurance).  However, people need less of it … thus lower costs.     Many of the problems that beset the United States are not     really health problems as such, but social problems.  For instance,     the American health care system has to deal with a percentage of     sickness and injury brought on by violence or self-destructive     behavior that is high compared with othe industrialized countries.

Okay, but there is also the fact that Canadian, French and German people are encouraged to practice preventive medicine (not forced) and get an annual checkup … so the insurance pays $50 now to save $5000 later.  Only a small number of American coverage as come to recognize that.     Furthermore, according to Schwartz [ of Health Policy International ]     treating everyone with the maximum high-tech care available     invariably sends costs up in proportion to the level of social     pathologies that cause health problems.

Okay … but also remember that a lot of high tech advances in the U.S. came about because people didn’t get simple stuff checked out earlier, and it mushroomed in all sorts of wild and wonderful ways. But other high tech care, other countries are nose-to-nose with the U.S. … infant care is led by the Germans, and Canadians are leaders in neurology (lots of Americans go to the Montreal Neuro- logical Institute … private).  In other words, because we’re FREE, our health care costs more.  I say let the socialists who want to control me, and convert me  into a high-yield government resource, go to EUROPE.

Most of the European systems (like Canada) were installed by their pro-business parties to the cries and derisions of socialists. You have to remember that values can differ between societies … me and Gerald Olchowy are a couple of the most pro-business Canadians on USENET yet we don’t equate basic health needs with ownership of a VCR … but we’re not Americans. gld — Gary L. Dare                            Montreal Canadiens, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

      "We hear a great deal about the supposed wonders of the Canadian socialized medicine system, " notes Mr. Mcmanus. "Yet the inevitable problems of government control over medicine have come home to roost in Canada, as they already have in Britain and other nations where government controls medicine."

Doctors in Canada are all private.  Hospitals are mostly private non-profit and public.  Britain is entirely different, they have what is essentially a national HMO (actually, HMO is based on the UK National Health Service).     The Birch Society isn’t alone in pointing out that Canadian patients must now pay for services they thought would be "free." They never were free of course, because Canadians have been heavily taxed to pay for them.

When state taxes, health insurance and various "user fees" are added to federal tax rates, Americans come out marginally ahead of their Canadian cousins.  Such comparisons are constantly being grinded on Soc.culture.canadas … retail prices are better in the U.S. because of higher volume purchasing (w/10+ times more people!) and efficient distribution (Canada has more middlemen involved, but that is in the process of changing thankfully). With "free" medical care, many more Canadians applied for it; and doctors who are paid based on case load are either rushing patients through or supplying services that are not called for.

Doctors are paid on a per-procedure basis just like in the U.S. because the system is only insurance.  It is true that all costs are covered and billing is invisible … I’ve always thought that it was a shortfall.  However, Canadians use LESS health care and are a healthier society … that offsets use of the most expensive approach possible, all insurance and no HMO’s.  Padding of bills is happening in the U.S., not Canada … in that respect, I’m glad that Canadian society is more innocent and naive … "Americans have never journeyed to Canada for health care," states the Society leader. "Why should they when they’ve got the best in the world right here?"

WRONG!!!  Americans regularly attend the Montreal Neurological Institute.  But your papers don’t care to write about it because they feel that their readers don’t care to see that.  Also, last autumn investigations have revealed widespread fraud by Americans embezzling health insurance cards from Canadian provincial plans, either individually or trafficked by fraud rings.  UPI Clarinet covered this, and other Canadian readers can corroborate from reading their local newspapers (it is very, very widespread). He cites a recent NEW YORK TIMES report listing lengthly waiting periods in Canada for various types of surgery.

This was in early March and the article said no such thing.  In fact, I’ve referenced that same article by John F. Burns to show quite the opposite.  Small markets have otherwise ALWAYS affected Canada’s infrastructure. And he also points to another report showing that the government-run medical bureau in Western Canada recently sent 200 patients to Seattle for treatment it could not supply.

There is no such thing as a "government-run medical bureau" anywhere in Canada.  The "system" is only insurance paying out to a private health care infrastructure (payment =/= practice!) *after the fact*. Nobody in Canada, France or Germany is told how to spend their benefits.  Because of transient demand in this one case many years ago (but you wouldn’t know that in America), where all local private doctors were busy, people were reminded that they could get their procedure done elsewhere and can apply for reimbursement (it is, after all, just insurance).  In fact, those British Columbians had the flexibility of coverage that a lot of Americans would not have had. And they were free individuals acting on their own, not herded cattle as the speaker would suggest. Most Americans don’t know that our system of health CARE is private, and always has been, but the basic health INSURANCE is public … and not because of socialists, but because Canada is set up like the world’s biggest company town.  The health insurance industry and the CMA doctors’ monopoly was in on it, too, ‘cos the former still sells additional private benefits without the risks of basic (now making more money) while the doctors are ALL private and set the insurance rates, plus prohibited HMO’s (U.S. HMO practice is derived from the British National Health Service, which is REAL socialized medicine).  Only the Liberals and Conservatives were in power to enact the insurance transition; the socialist NDP were out of power everywhere, anywhere. OHIP was the cornerstone of a five-term Conservative dynasty under John P. Robarts and William G. Davis in Ontario. We have real socialists up north, not strawman "liberals", and they wanted a National Health Service like the British have … a method found in private form as HMO in the U.S.  The "Canadian system" is a backstab upon them, but that hasn’t stopped them from running around trying to take the credit; American redbaiters have eaten it up, apparently. gld — Gary L. Dare                            Montreal Canadiens, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

IF WE DON’T STOP THEM, THEY’LL DESTROY AMERICAN MEDICINE     "Now a Presdential team, led by Hillary Rodham Clinton, is determined to apply socialism’s losing strategy to the American medical system. What they plan to do amounts too performing crippling surgey on a patient who needs only to be  left alone."        So states John F. McManus, the national  president of the John Birch Society. The organization has frequently spoken out about the dangers inherent in socialized medicine and is continuing to do so in the face of stepped-up movement in that direction by the Clinton Adminstration."We hear a great deal about the supposed wonders of the Canadian socialized medicine system, " notes Mr. Mcmanus. "Yet the inevitable problems of government control over medicine have come home to roost in Canada, as they already have in Britain and other nations where government controls medicine."      The Birch Society isn’t alone in pointing out that Canadian patients must now pay for services they thought would be "free." They never were free of course, because Canadians have been heavily taxed to pay for them. With "free" medical care, many more Canadians applied for it; and doctors who are paid based on case load are either rushing patients through  or supplying services that are not called for. "The system is breaking down."        "Americans have never journeyed to Canada for health care," states the Society leader. "Why should they when they’ve got the best in the world right here?" He cites a recent NEW YORK TIMES report listing lengthly waiting periods in Canada for various types of surgery. And he also points to another report showing that the government-run medical bureau in Western Canada recently sent  200 patients to Seattle for treatment it could not supply.     According to the Birch Society leader, the cost of American health care has risen "because of too much government involvement already. If we don’t stop them, they’ll drive the cost through the roof while they throw the quality out the window."       "If you want a good example of the harm federal control does, take a look at education in America," insists Mr. McManus. "Federal aid started flowing to education 40 years ago and the quality has gone sharply down hill ever since.. Wisdom dictates that Americans refuse to allow other bureaucrats to get their hands on medicine." The Birch Society contends that less government, not more, would help to make our nation’s health care system even finer. John F. McManus National President of the John Birchh Society 770 Westhill Blvd. Appleton, WI 54915-5787 Call 1-800-JBS-USA1 and have a major credit ready for our $5.00 Informational packet. —— The Cellar BBS – (215) 539-3043

Response:

IF WE DON’T STOP THEM, THEY’LL DESTROY AMERICAN MEDICINE    "Now a Presdential team, led by Hillary Rodham Clinton, is determined to apply socialism’s losing strategy to the American medical system. What they plan to do amounts too performing crippling surgey on a patient who needs only to be  left alone."

Excerpts from "Insight" magazine, June 28, 1993    " Taking a Look at the German Prescription "  by Henrik Bering-Jensen      How realistic is it to talk about adopting another country’s health      care system?  Not very, according to John Iglehart, the national      correspondent for the New England Journal of Medicine…      Every country has distinct political, economic and social      characteristics that make such copying difficult.      Many of the problems that beset the United States are not      really health problems as such, but social problems.  For instance,      the American health care system has to deal with a percentage of      sickness and injury brought on by violence or self-destructive      behavior that is high compared with othe industrialized countries.      Furthermore, according to Schwartz [ of Health Policy International ]      treating everyone with the maximum high-tech care available      invariably sends costs up in proportion to the level of social      pathologies that cause health problems.      But once these pathologies are factored out, he says, the American      system compares very nicely with other systems in terms of both      results and costs ".   In other words, because we’re FREE, our health care costs more.   I say let the socialists who want to control me, and convert me   into a high-yield government resource, go to EUROPE.   I truly hope Clinton DOES implement his plan this year.  It should   polish off what’s left of the job market and economy, and INCITE   a REVOLUTION.

Response: