Commentary: Should the US be like France & Germany?

[sigma]

Originally Posted by Ed Arcuri

Double digit unemployment and years on waiting lists for life saving medical care. Count me in!
Cheers,
Ed
"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it's 'free'." P.J. O'Rourke

Because $13,000 for 5 hours in the emergency room (plus a 3 hour wait) were an absolute bargain.

[MonaroSS]

Originally Posted by davidlane

This statement is wrong. GDP nets imports against exports. This reduces our GDP not inflates it.

GDP generally is defined as the market value of the goods and services produced by a country.

GDP = Consumption
+ Investment
+ Government Purchases
+ Net Exports

Consumption is the largest component of the GDP. In the U.S., the largest and most stable component of consumption is services. Consumption is calculated by adding durable and non-durable goods and services expenditures. It is unaffected by the estimated value of imported goods.

Net exports are exports minus imports. Imports are subtracted since GDP is defined as the output of the domestic economy.

Thanks for the GDP lesson but I don't need it. My statement is not wrong.

When you net imports against exports it makes no difference to what I'm referring to. It only makes a difference to that part of a GDP calculation that is relatively small in any case. I was referring to how Chinese produced goods distort the consumption portion which is a very large part of GDP.

This may be hard for you to grasp, but I'll try to explain it. Up until the last few decades most countries production was consumed within their own borders. Yes some countries like the US were more dominant in exporting, but in general countries only imported what they could not source locally or did not have the technological knowhow to produce.

In this environment, because goods produced and goods consumed were an equivalency when comparing different countries it made no difference to combine the two because if it was produced it was also consumed. As the end 'consumption' figure encompassed the local 'production' within it, it was thus also a defacto indicator for that local 'production'. So what could have been called a GDC for Gross Domestic Consumption was seen as a good enough approximation for local production that they called it GDP.

So when you refer to what makes up GDP as below, forget the last three as it is only Consumption that I'm referring to. Now the GROSS imports, which when sold, are thus added to the tally for 'consumption' that distorts the old assumption they were locally produced. It is this new consumption figure which, being made up of end sales for BOTH US produced goods AND an ever larger amount of imported foreign produced goods, is not to be considered the same thing as when consumption was a defacto approximation for local production.

GDP = Consumption
+ Investment
+ Government Purchases
+ Net Exports

But while it is no longer such a defacto approximation for local production people in general, yourself included, do not realise the significance of this shift...

Originally Posted by davidlane

Large manufacturing firms have been producing goods in foreign markets for decades, actually centuries. If not, what's that BMW plant in South Carolina all about? IIRC, That plant turns out product superior to similar plants in Germany, according to BMW's internal quality analysis. M-B builds US branded trucks here, Freightliner. If this is as bad as you say why are these German companies here, and there are hundreds more, in the US?

I can't see anywhere that I said this was bad. I'm at a loss to know what you are even addressing here with these comments... We must have our wires crossed.

Originally Posted by davidlane

God knows we wouldn't want any business to make a profit. How's that working out for GM and Chrysler? Apparently, you've bought into the main stream media, union, political demagogues fairy tale about the US losing manufacturing jobs to, China is usually the culprit, right? How about a few facts. Increased productivity has cost manufacturing job loses in almost every industrialized nation, including China.

I'm glad you want corporations to make profits at any cost. I can tell you probably think the last decade of practices that has caused such a schism in economic morality was a heroic time. On this we can agree to differ. I'm a hard and fast conservative capitalist who also believes in corporate responsibility.

On the exporting of jobs out of America, the whole Chinese economic restructuring is fascinating in ways that you don't seem to grasp. Otherwise you would not use it to try to justify what seems to be your untenable contention that essentially no jobs have been exported from the US to other countries; only that jobs have been lost to improved US productivity. I say untenable because this chart shows that the US is increasingly buying manufactured goods from overseas, but if US manufacturing was getting more efficient for less staff as you claim then those goods would be being made very efficiently and productively in the US. But they are not.



Nonetheless I should clarify that when I referred to Chinese made goods, I was incorrectly being too flippant and using a common misnomer that I in fact set out with this thread to dispel, and that is that countries like Germany and France and Japan are exporting more per capita, and in Germany's case more outright than China. The below chart shows how goods are coming from China AND many other countries into the US displacing what would have been product produced in the US, even if they could have been made by a more productive US industry.

US goods balance with selected trading partners

Originally Posted by davidlane

Interesting and telling comment, and totally collectivist. The revenue goes to the German company, however in your mind it belongs to the government and the people. Neither one of whom actually, independently engages in any activity that generates the revenue. The reason the export figures are important is because your hypothesis, flawed though it may be, is totally based on this statement.

Ummm No. One person's telling may be another person's delusion.

The revenue from products manufactured in Germany and sold as exports goes 'through' companies and non incorporated small businesses to then be paid in large part to staff (who are German people and who circulate their wages into the German economy - thus to other German people) as wages (and from which you keep telling me high taxes then go to the German Government) as well as to their suppliers who also pay most of it in wages (with more German people, more government taxes) to their staff etc...

I see the real world facts that are true and demonstrable, as I've just proven.

I think you may see collectivism like McCarthy saw reds under the beds....

Originally Posted by davidlane

The one thing that France did years ago that was smart, having no coal or natural gas, they opted to produce their electricity with nuclear power plants.

They choose what they thought was the best design and replicated that design in plants all over France. The design was a Westinghouse, a US company IIRC, design. Mean while, thanks to the Eco-Nazis, hand wringing do gooders for whom no solution is good enough, political demagoguery and some of the dumbest, IMO, energy legislation in this corner of the universe, the US is importing 9,756,000 barrels of oil per day, based on the '08 total.
In march '09 43% of the US trade deficit was oil imports. $11.98Billion.

Well at least you think one thing another country does could be an example for the US to examine in seeking solutions to it's problems. That's a start.

[davidlane]

Originally Posted by davidlane

In the old days the US calculated GNP, Gross National Product. We made the change to facilitate comparisons of the GDP numbers of other countries. Primarily the ones whose virtues you're touting.



This statement is wrong. GDP nets imports against exports. This reduces our GDP not inflates it. Here's a definition:

Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)

Economic growth is measured in terms of an increase in the size of a nation's economy. A broad measure of an economy's size is its output. The most widely-used measure of economic output is the Gross Domestic Product (abbreviated GDP).

GDP generally is defined as the market value of the goods and services produced by a country. One way to calculate a nation's GDP is to sum all expenditures in the country. This method is known as the expenditure approach and is described below.

Expenditure Approach to Calculating GDP

The expenditure approach calculates GDP by summing the four possible types of expenditures as follows:
GDP = Consumption
+ Investment
+ Government Purchases
+ Net Exports

Consumption is the largest component of the GDP. In the U.S., the largest and most stable component of consumption is services. Consumption is calculated by adding durable and non-durable goods and services expenditures. It is unaffected by the estimated value of imported goods.

Investment includes investment in fixed assets and increases in inventory.

Government purchases are equal to the government expenditures less government transfer payments (welfare, unemployment payouts, etc.)

Net exports are exports minus imports. Imports are subtracted since GDP is defined as the output of the domestic economy.

Alternative Approaches to Calculating GDP

There are three approaches to calculating GDP:

* expenditure approach - described above; calculates the final spending on goods and services.

* product approach - calculates the market value of goods and services produced.

*income approach - sums the income received by all producers in the country.

These three approaches are equivalent, with each rendering the same result.

Citation http://www.quickmba.com/econ/macro/gdp/



Large manufacturing firms have been producing goods in foreign markets for decades, actually centuries. If not, what's that BMW plant in South Carolina all about? IIRC, That plant turns out product superior to similar plants in Germany, according to BMW's internal quality analysis. M-B builds US branded trucks here, Freightliner. If this is as bad as you say why are these German companies here, and there are hundreds more, in the US?



God knows we wouldn't want any business to make a profit. How's that working out for GM and Chrysler? Apparently, you've bought into the main stream media, union, political demagogues fairy tale about the US losing manufacturing jobs to, China is usually the culprit, right? How about a few facts. Increased productivity has cost manufacturing job loses in almost every industrialized nation, including China. In term even you might understand, if I can produce the same or more goods with two employees that I used to need three for, there's one job gone. This allows the manufacturer to increase quality, among other things, and profits while holding or reducing price. The most dramatic illustration of this, IMO, is Moore's Law.

Moore's Law, states that the number of transistors on a chip will double about every two years.

Citation Moore's Law Made real by Intel innovation, Intel US right with plants all over the world.

http://www.intel.com/technology/mooreslaw/

Next let's look at who's lost what, regards manufacturing jobs in the US and China.

China Losing More Manufacturing Jobs Than U.S. But Adding Service Jobs at a Rapid Pace

China is losing more manufacturing jobs than the United States. For the entire economy between 1995 and 2002, China lost 15 million manufacturing jobs, compared with 2 million in the U.S., The Conference Board reports in a study released today.

“As its manufacturing productivity accelerates, China is losing jobs in manufacturing – many more than the United States is – and gaining them in services, a pattern that has been playing out in the developed world for many years,” concludes The Conference Board study.

According to Robert H. McGuckin, Director of Economic Research at The Conference Board and co-author of the study: “Increased unemployment has also accompanied the restructuring of the industrial sector, but per capita income has risen over the period.”

Citation http://www.conference-board.org/util...?press_id=2432



Interesting and telling comment, and totally collectivist. The revenue goes to the German company, however in your mind it belongs to the government and the people. Neither one of whom actually, independently engages in any activity that generates the revenue. The reason the export figures are important is because your hypothesis, flawed though it may be, is totally based on this statement.



The one thing that France did years ago that was smart, having no coal or natural gas, they opted to produce their electricity with nuclear power plants.
They choose what they thought was the best design and replicated that design in plants all over France. The design was a Westinghouse, a US company IIRC, design. Mean while, thanks to the Eco-Nazis, hand wringing do gooders for whom no solution is good enough, political demagoguery and some of the dumbest, IMO, energy legislation in this corner of the universe, the US is importing 9,756,000 barrels of oil per day, based on the '08 total.
In march '09 43% of the US trade deficit was oil imports. $11.98Billion.

Citation

US Trade Gap Widens on Oil Imports

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. trade deficit widened for the first time in eight months during March, as the price and use of imported oil both climbed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1242...googlenews_wsj

IIRC, at one time the value of US software exported was significantly under reported in the GDP. i.e. if a $100 software sale occurred the value reported was the value of the media it was delivered on. On a CD this would be $2-3.

One parting question. What's up with vcs2600's Avatar? Why the poster for Hitler's "peoples car"

Originally Posted by MonaroSS

Below is the article. Highlight the parts in red that you consider to be "bashing America" and show exactly why it's untrue and malicious to America and I will make a retraction.

The rest of your post doesn't warrant much comment as for example a country using 25% of the world's oil reserves, but with only 3% themselves, can't significantly reduce oil imports by more drilling at home.....

"Most Americans if asked that question, "Should the US be like France & Germany" would have a knee jerk reaction of something like "hell no". But some interesting numbers came to light when I did a bit of research for one of the threads about GM importing cars from China.

We all know that the idea of exporting jobs to China is a hot button topic and many threads here at GMI have spent countless hours debating how hard it is to compete with lower Chinese wages. And this is seemingly especially true for the auto industry and has been brought up many times concerning UAW wages and benefits and also came up during the Presidential Election regarding healthcare policy and whether American industry is further burdened when other countries are not.

So I looked up the CIA World Fact Book online and got the figures. Following is what I found and what can be deduced from them:

Highest Dollar Value Exporting Countries
Rank; Country; Exports US$; Date

1 Germany; $1,530 Billion; 2008
2 China (PRC); $1,465 Billion; 2008
3 United States; $1,377 Billion; 2008
4 Japan; $776 Billion; 2008
5 France; $761 Billion; 2008

Germany, China and the US are the top three, so clearly America still exports a lot of it's worker's product. But that is only half the story because it gets really interesting when we look at the per worker ratios.

As to which countries are taking the most work from exports per head of population, below are the populations and below that is the $ value of goods sold adjusted to 300 million people (if each country was the same size as the US population).

Population Size

China 1,338,156,900
United States 306,420,000
Japan 127,630,000
Germany 82,062,200
France 65,073,482

Therefore dollars of Exports per 300 million people

Germany $5,597 Billion
France $3,512 Billion
Japan $1,833 Billion
United States $1,377 Billion
China $328 Billion

The above indicates the ratio of dollars earned per person from exports in each country, which means the dollars earned per person from jobs taken from workers in other countries.

Clearly Germany and France are leagues ahead of the next two being Japan and the US, followed way behind by China. So if you are worried which worker in what other country is more likely to be doing work you could be then don't buy German (machinery, vehicles, chemicals, metals and manufactures, foodstuffs, textiles ) or French (machinery and transportation equipment, aircraft, plastics, chemicals, pharmaceutical products, iron and steel, beverages).

Most importantly, given the huge leadership of Germany in earning export dollars, the US should forget about trying to emulate China by lowering middle class wages but instead emulate whatever Germany and France are doing right as they make money AND pay high wages.

The US imports $2,190 Billion and exports only $1,377 Billion, that's the problem. Either cut imports OR improve your individual worker export levels to just that of France and the US would be exporting $3,512 Billion and have a balance of trade in the US's favour of $1,322 Billion extra cash to spend. If you could match Germany the US would have $3,402 Billion cash left over to bank each year.

So how does the US become as good at exporting as France and Germany? You could start with free healthcare to cut manufacturing costs and free higher education to massively push up the level of qualifications and living standards of US workers....

The simple fact is that GM could be making high quality BMW level cars profitably right in Detroit if they used American made robots and automated lines run not by UAW labourers but by educated American engineers and technicians. And other engineers and technicians would be making money designing and producing those robots and machines made with American machine tools made by American engineers and technicians in high tech American foundries and so on and so forth...

So here is the burning question:

Is it time for American manufacturing to move into the 21st century and not just relocate to southern states where it's cheaper and easier to still live in the 20th century?"

Most if not all your points are repudiated in a posts prior to your repost of your hypothesis. If you're not US bashing you're doing a convincing imitation. As to your original question "Should the US be like France & Germany?" From the countries that brought the world not one, but two world wars in twenty-five years, in my opinion the answer isn't no, but hell no!

[davidlane]

Originally Posted by MonaroSS

Thanks for the GDP lesson but I don't need it. My statement is not wrong.

When you net imports against exports it makes no difference to what I'm referring to. It only makes a difference to that part of a GDP calculation that is relatively small in any case. I was referring to how Chinese produced goods distort the consumption portion which is a very large part of GDP.

This may be hard for you to grasp, but I'll try to explain it. Up until the last few decades most countries production was consumed within their own borders. Yes some countries like the US were more dominant in exporting, but in general countries only imported what they could not source locally or did not have the technological knowhow to produce.

In this environment, because goods produced and goods consumed were an equivalency when comparing different countries it made no difference to combine the two because if it was produced it was also consumed. As the end 'consumption' figure encompassed the local 'production' within it, it was thus also a defacto indicator for that local 'production'. So what could have been called a GDC for Gross Domestic Consumption was seen as a good enough approximation for local production that they called it GDP.

So when you refer to what makes up GDP as below, forget the last three as it is only Consumption that I'm referring to. Now the GROSS imports, which when sold, are thus added to the tally for 'consumption' that distorts the old assumption they were locally produced. It is this new consumption figure which, being made up of end sales for BOTH US produced goods AND an ever larger amount of imported foreign produced goods, is not to be considered the same thing as when consumption was a defacto approximation for local production.

GDP = Consumption
+ Investment
+ Government Purchases
+ Net Exports

But while it is no longer such a defacto approximation for local production people in general, yourself included, do not realise the significance of this shift...




I can't see anywhere that I said this was bad. I'm at a loss to know what you are even addressing here with these comments... We must have our wires crossed.




I'm glad you want corporations to make profits at any cost. I can tell you probably think the last decade of practices that has caused such a schism in economic morality was a heroic time. On this we can agree to differ. I'm a hard and fast conservative capitalist who also believes in corporate responsibility.

On the exporting of jobs out of America, the whole Chinese economic restructuring is fascinating in ways that you don't seem to grasp. Otherwise you would not use it to try to justify what seems to be your untenable contention that essentially no jobs have been exported from the US to other countries; only that jobs have been lost to improved US productivity. I say untenable because this chart shows that the US is increasingly buying manufactured goods from overseas, but if US manufacturing was getting more efficient for less staff as you claim then those goods would be being made very efficiently and productively in the US. But they are not.



Nonetheless I should clarify that when I referred to Chinese made goods, I was incorrectly being too flippant and using a common misnomer that I in fact set out with this thread to dispel, and that is that countries like Germany and France and Japan are exporting more per capita, and in Germany's case more outright than China. The below chart shows how goods are coming from China AND many other countries into the US displacing what would have been product produced in the US, even if they could have been made by a more productive US industry.

US goods balance with selected trading partners





Ummm No. One person's telling may be another person's delusion.

The revenue from products manufactured in Germany and sold as exports goes 'through' companies and non incorporated small businesses to then be paid in large part to staff (who are German people and who circulate their wages into the German economy - thus to other German people) as wages (and from which you keep telling me high taxes then go to the German Government) as well as to their suppliers who also pay most of it in wages (with more German people, more government taxes) to their staff etc...

I see the real world facts that are true and demonstrable, as I've just proven.

I think you may see collectivism like McCarthy saw reds under the beds....




Well at least you think one thing another country does could be an example for the US to examine in seeking solutions to it's problems. That's a start.

Like I posted recently in another thread, I'm going to do myself a favor and quit responding to your posts. You either have an inability to read and comprehend English or you enjoy contradicting anything anyone with a differing opinion posts, regardless of facts. Several of which you ignored in responding my post as well as others posts.

[MonaroSS]

Originally Posted by davidlane

Like I posted recently in another thread, I'm going to do myself a favor and quit responding to your posts. You either have an inability to read and comprehend English or you enjoy contradicting anything anyone with a differing opinion posts, regardless of facts. Several of which you ignored in responding my post as well as others posts.

Now I won't have to waste my time banging my head against a brick wall.

Thank you....

[schmallz]

Originally Posted by ksr

I'd say the Mercedes C-Class.

RETARD ALERT!

[t-rex]

you momzers are still yapping about this crap?

davidlane... you're mere millimeters from a straight jacket, buddy. Not because of your beliefs, but because you don't know when to stop.

Jeeze, even I take a breather after a long rant where I insult EVERYBODY...

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by ksr

You don't have a "right" to health care. Some people take far better care of themselves than others. Why should everyone share in their expense? I'll never understand why a lot of people don't seem to think that they should have to pay for their health care. It's YOUR health.

"Some people take better care of themselves"

My son was born with kidney problems. It wasn't a lifestyle problem of mine or my wife's. It was just a birth defect. It's cost over $100,000 in surgeries and other treatments to keep him alive so far. That has NOTHING to do with taking care of yourself.

Some people develop cancer for no reason, including kids.

Some people develop MS or ALS or MD for no reason, including kids.

Some people get hurt in freak accidents, or car accidents, or assaults.

So either you haven't thought very hard about other people's health coverage, or you don't give a damn about anyone else. I don't care which it is, either way the result is that I disagree with you.

We all pay now, either through our employers or insurance that we purchase ourselves or for Medicare/Medicaid.

There's this big myth about a lack of coverage in the US, and polls will show that a large majority of people think that the US has a big problem with health care and that most people don't have it. Yet when you make the question personal and ask someone if they're satisified with their own health care plans, about 85% of people are.

The problem isn't the lack of coverage, it's the costs. Our medical expenses for a family, not even counting my son's kidney problems are over $10,000 a year. That's just insurance and routine medical care.

And that 85% figure leaves out 15% of the population, including some friends and relatives of mine working at $8, $10, and $15 an hour jobs that just can't afford their own health insurance. One friend of mine developed kidney stones (like my son, he was born with the disorder) and now has a $9,000 Emergency Room bill. Technically the hospital can't do anything, if he doesn't pay it they can't seize any of his possessions. But the debt will blow his credit rating to hell, so he's going to be paying a few dollars per month out of his income from here to eternity to get rid of the debt. And he still can't afford health insurance.

I'm quite aware that socialized medicine can be a world class screwup. But if you think the way things are in the US with health care currently is anything less than a world class screwup, then you haven't been paying attention.

[Exploder]

Speaking of health care, I just remembered:

What about the Geisinger health care system?

And I remembered how Louisiana managed to slash health care costs there even though Bobby Jindal is by all means a neocon fascist?

[Exploder]

Thought I'd bump this thread...certainly there is something worth discussing about what I brought up? If only to let myself understand this better.

[Ed Arcuri]

Originally Posted by Michael_S

"Some people take better care of themselves"

My son was born with kidney problems. It wasn't a lifestyle problem of mine or my wife's. It was just a birth defect. It's cost over $100,000 in surgeries and other treatments to keep him alive so far. That has NOTHING to do with taking care of yourself.

Some people develop cancer for no reason, including kids.

Some people develop MS or ALS or MD for no reason, including kids.

Some people get hurt in freak accidents, or car accidents, or assaults.

So either you haven't thought very hard about other people's health coverage, or you don't give a damn about anyone else. I don't care which it is, either way the result is that I disagree with you.



The problem isn't the lack of coverage, it's the costs. Our medical expenses for a family, not even counting my son's kidney problems are over $10,000 a year. That's just insurance and routine medical care.

And that 85% figure leaves out 15% of the population, including some friends and relatives of mine working at $8, $10, and $15 an hour jobs that just can't afford their own health insurance. One friend of mine developed kidney stones (like my son, he was born with the disorder) and now has a $9,000 Emergency Room bill. Technically the hospital can't do anything, if he doesn't pay it they can't seize any of his possessions. But the debt will blow his credit rating to hell, so he's going to be paying a few dollars per month out of his income from here to eternity to get rid of the debt. And he still can't afford health insurance.

I'm quite aware that socialized medicine can be a world class screwup. But if you think the way things are in the US with health care currently is anything less than a world class screwup, then you haven't been paying attention.

You've raised excellent points. We will always need to have a method in place to help some people with medical care. My concern is that we are rushing headlong into creating a monster without asking pertinent questions. Among those questions:
Are "outcomes" determined the same way in socialized systems as here?
They are not. Many European counties do not include new born infants in their numbers. Thus, children who die early in life are not counted in their statistics and their life expectancies appear longer when they are not.
Of the 47 million people who are routinely alleged to have "no health care" how many do not?
None. There is a difference between health care and medical insurance. The actual number of Americans who did not have medical insurance for one day in 2007 is believed to be no more than 8 million according to the CBO. The difference in the numbers results from the questions asked, misunderstanding of the questions (some on Medicare and Medicaid answered "no" as they thought they were asked about private medical insurance), the number of people who are not legally in the country, and those who choose not to insure. There were several other data measures which were inflated to promote the 47 million number.
How long are surgical waits in this country versus others with different systems?
Are medical professionals entering or leaving the profession here or elsewhere and why?
What accounts for the diminution of cost for cosmetic suregeries? Might it be the fact that neither the government nor private insurance will pay and we have, therefore, a market system for these procedures?
What is the state of pharmaceutical research in countries with socialized systems? If it is robust, what methods did those governments employ to maintain creativity in a socialized environment?
What affect has Wal Mart had with its in-store clinics and low prescription prices? Might we find a model in that to adapt our system to work better for all?
You will, no doubt, have additional questions that need to be addressed. Whatever we do, I sincerely hope it is better thought out than the TARP or the Auto Task Farce.
Cheers,
Ed
Haste makes waste.

[Leehyori]

thank you so much for your post
simulation taux banque credit immobilier de France - Credit immobilier de France, simulation credit immobilier. Résultat mitigé pour le crédit immobilier de France.simulation taux banque credit immobilier de France

[twistuvim]

Thanks for that awesome description! Have fun at Houston!

[khefer]

Why are people for the government supporting the auto industry because Japan supposedly does it, but not for the government providing health and human services because other countries do it?

[Ed Arcuri]

Originally Posted by sigma

Because $13,000 for 5 hours in the emergency room (plus a 3 hour wait) were an absolute bargain.

A three hour wait?
My dentist's sister waited 6 months for a life saving operation, she needed permission from her "HMO" for the procedure. She had it done but traveled all the way across the country to get the operation after that 6 month wait. Had she waited another 6 months, she would have been denied completely as she would have been "too old."
My dentist's sister lives in Denmark and her HMO is the Danish government.
The operation was performed in a private hospital.
There are countless examples of people living under nationalized systems who come here for care or to work in the health care field.
The nationalized systems have learned some lessons about how best to do these things and we may learn from a study of them. I believe that we should study their experience carefully and implement the elements that work, while rejecting those that don't. Our own health care is quite good and can be improved if we do it right.
Ideological stampedes are not a good idea on this important topic.
Cheers,
Ed
The National Health Service is the reason Britons pull their own teeth.