Sanford: Again, good pointsexcept it's a bit of a blanket assumption that women aren't into Kipling. And it's possible, just possible, to be into a cute, cartoon mongoose without being into Kipling.
I think that you're right that we don't really disagree ... but I do think that, while our direction is similar, the paths we take tend to differ dramatically. For instance: I firmly believe that the rise in medical costs ascribable to skyrocketing malpractice insurance premiums is a chiefly a function of medicine and medical care that is at times unacceptable to the modern public. And I think that it takes a surfeit of confidence in our medical system and a lack of faith in our judicial system to argue otherwise.
Now, I'm not saying that malpractice insurance companies aren't using an increase in malpractice lawsuits as justification for raising their rates. Just like I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't argue against the statement that the rise in rates likely outpaces the increase in amounts paid out due to the greater number of suits (think of how unusual it would be for any company to NOT take advantage of a situation like that to make a profit). All I'm saying is those increased premiums are most firmly rooted in the modern public's expectations concerning medical care.
I usually avoid personal testimonies, since they're often too local to be of any wider benefit. But I'm thinking of something that happened to me, where I went to the doctor for something and got a prescription for a medication with which I was unfamiliar. I left his office and went home, where I Googled the name of the pills and realized that the medicine I was prescribed was for symptoms that were almost exactly the opposite from mine. Later, I went back to the office, where another doctor was now on duty. I explained the situation and showed her the prescription; her eyes widened and she told me that she had no idea what the other doctor had been thinking, and that I was lucky I was smart enough to have done that bit of research. I knew what she meant; I had seen that the chief effects of the mis-prescribed medication boiled down to significantly worsening my condition. That is, if the medicine I was prescribed worked, then I would've gotten worse, not better. She then asked if she could discard the prescription and I said that was OK ... but had I actually gotten the pills from the pharmacy and taken even a single one, this story would've had a very different ending.
I'm more of a Nader person too, Sanford, but I do think it's pretty clear where we differ ....