There are unlimited opportunities for work. Some people could be digging holes and others could be filling them in.Not necessarily. Who says that there wont be more doctors if there is more work available for them?
Okay. If you feel that way, fine. It's not worth arguing about. I will merely point out that Anyone can eventually win a war of attrition if they have enough people and material.MSimon wrote:Grant was one of the best Generals ever.
1. He pinned Lee when no one else could.
2. He understood the principle "hold them by the nose, kick them in the pants". Grant held them by the nose and Sherman - under Grant's orders - kicked them in the pants.
3. Lee's casualties were not significantly less than Grant's and Lee was defending.
4. Lee had good things to say about Grant as a General.
5. Grant understood how to co-ordinate large separated armies for best effect.
Grant nominally lost the battle of the Wilderness and advanced. Lee won and retreated.
Grant nullified Lee's great advantage - mobility.
Well, I dont see the relevance of digging and filling holes in this context.Reductio Ad Absurdum.
He is addressing your point that " More work is always good" (or whatever it was you said along these lines.) by proffering a ridiculous example of a condition in which the work is meaningless, and therefore NOT good.Skipjack wrote:Well, I dont see the relevance of digging and filling holes in this context.Reductio Ad Absurdum.
We are talking about treating sick people. That is an action with a purpose. He is talking about digging holes and then filling them again, which does not fullfill a purpose. Therefore he is not making any sense.
Maybe you can elighten me though.
There is lots of work undone. Why aren't you doing it?Skipjack wrote:Yolu dont make any sense Simon.Say. Why aren't you out there digging and filling holes? There are plenty of opportunities for it. Lots of work available and you are shirking your duties.
Grant's genius was subtle. It was not to out maneuver Lee. It was to keep Lee from maneuvering. Now of course that seems trivial except when you consider how many Generals had tried to do it and failed.I will merely point out that Anyone can eventually win a war of attrition if they have enough people and material.
It is Karl Popper without the S at the end.Karl Poppers
So you think that treating sick people is meaningless work?He is addressing your point that " More work is always good" (or whatever it was you said along these lines.) by proffering a ridiculous example of a condition in which the work is meaningless, and therefore NOT good.
work is always good.paid
The doctors’ reasons: reimbursement rates are too low and paperwork too much of a hassle.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/busin ... ealth.html
Now suppose you have profitable patients (covered by cash or insurance) and loss making patients (delivered by government). What will you do?
So true. It was done by other Democrats.Yeah, but medicare and medicaid have already been there in the past. Obama was not the one to introduce those.
So here is the cause of your doctor's pain in 2007. Behind him or her is a 15-year trend of diminishing fees that shows no signs of abating. Graduating med students aren't blind; they see established physicians with busy practices dropping out. Looking ahead they see more headaches--more controls and regulations, more scrutiny, more liability, less money. So what has the resourceful American doc done?
Welcome to the world of alternative medical income. Some docs leave medicine; six weeks of securities-trading classes and you can be a stockbroker. Most try to do something quasi-medical. Three top bailout categories of this sort have emerged: cosmetics, diagnostics and what I call "nothing-really-works-anyway therapies" (NRWATs).
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... z0k8L8A4Yf
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/60713.htmlAs high as 20% of physicians are dissatisfied with practice and are contemplating leaving clinical practice. In the past, one of the barriers for physicians leaving practice was the answer to the question, "How will I replace my income from practicing medicine?"
The new question which is now being asked by physicians is, "How much money am I losing by not leaving and going into business?"
Physicians who are highly intelligent and educated, dedicated, and hard working are learning that they can use these assets in the business world.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/65996.php
So it is. I corrected it above. Fascinating fellow, with fascinating ideas. Another AustrianSkipjack wrote:It is Karl Popper without the S at the end.Karl Poppers
. I especially like his "paradox of tolerance." It exactly mirrors some thinking I did back in the early 90s. Of course he thought of it first, but I thought of it as well without any knowledge of his work. I suppose it's rather obvious, at least to conservatives. We have to deal with this sort of thinking on a regular basis. So you think that treating sick people is meaningless work? [/quote]He is addressing your point that " More work is always good" (or whatever it was you said along these lines.) by proffering a ridiculous example of a condition in which the work is meaningless, and therefore NOT good.
MSimon wrote:Grant's genius was subtle. It was not to out maneuver Lee. It was to keep Lee from maneuvering. Now of course that seems trivial except when you consider how many Generals had tried to do it and failed.I will merely point out that Anyone can eventually win a war of attrition if they have enough people and material.
Mead couldn't do it after Gettysburg. And yet Grant did it in the Wilderness.
Here is a first person account of Grant's tactics:
Campaigning with Grant
What you have bought into is the Southern revisionist histories that started appearing in the "lost cause" era. Also in BHL Hart's otherwise excellent Strategy
In fact though Hart nailed it in his more general thesis when he talked about concentration. The thesis was: in order to get mobility you may need to concentrate the vast majority of your troops on a frontal threat in order to pin the enemy so that the mobile troops could get freedom of action. Or as Patton put it more succinctly - hold 'em by the nose and kick 'em in the pants.
Grant was the nose holder. Sherman was his kick in the pants. And even Hart said Grant was no mere pounder. He was always trying to turn Lee's flank. The operations on the Weldon Railroad are instructive in that regard.