[net.followup] Space Shuttle Children's Fund

klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) (01/30/86)

In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes:

	OOPS! Obvious Typo:

>		Space Shuttle Children's Fund
>		Anerican Security Bank
>		Box 0150
>		Washington, DC 20055
>
	Should read:

		Space Shuttle Children's Fund
		American Security Bank
		Box 0150
		Washington, DC 20055

felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) (02/03/86)

In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>
>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.

Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
for the astronauts' children? 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix               EDIKA            \|/ >
      ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix                                ( O: )
                                                                    /|\ >
Disclaimer:  The views and opinions expressed here are mine...     / | \ 
             Please don't tell my employer...

hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) (02/04/86)

In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>
>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>
>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>for the astronauts' children? 
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 

[flame on, 104%]
The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
our most visible heroes.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
United States we like to take care of our own.

-dave
the Dream is Alive
-- 
David Hsu	Communication & Signal Processing Lab, EE Department
<disclaimer>	University of Maryland,  College Park, MD 20742
hsu@eneevax.umd.edu  {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!eneevax!hsu

"They were the elite, the vanguard of progress.  They would take mankind to
the heights...and perhaps beyond."
			-Arthur C. Clarke, Childhood's End

rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) (02/04/86)

In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes:
>[flame on, 104%]
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.
>
>  /* another vicious attack followed here */
>
I tried this earlier, let me try again:

The phrase "The Dream is Alive" describes a real-life phenomenon.  The
astronauts did not "sacrifice" their personal lives because, as you hinted
above, their families lived the Dream, too.  That is evident in their
unanimous reaction that the Dream must continue despite Challenger.

The families, as I pointed out before, do *not* need your money.  Their
Dream, the Dream that they as families sacrificed so much for, the Dream
that is still alive in their hearts despite their tragic loss -- this Dream
is what needs your money, your effort, your voice, your vote, and (most
of all), your heart.  And mine.

You write documentation 'til 5am and you can get *real* mushy, too.
-- 

The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291)
alias: Curtis Jackson	...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj
			...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj

dee@cca.UUCP (Donald Eastlake) (02/04/86)

Of course all the astronauts government provided life insurance,
except for Christa MacAuliffe (sp?).  Also Llyods of London offers
all astronausts a free $1,000,000 life insurance policy for each
launch and Christa is the only one of the seven to take them up on
it.  But it is a free country and how can you stop people who want
to do something from setting up a Trust fund for the astronauts
children?
-- 
	+1 617-492-8860		Donald E. Eastlake, III
	ARPA:  dee@CCA-UNIX	usenet:	{decvax,linus}!cca!dee

will@anasazi.UUCP (Will Fuller) (02/04/86)

In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>
>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>
>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>for the astronauts' children? 
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
>UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix               EDIKA            \|/ >
>      ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix                                ( O: )
>                                                                    /|\ >
>Disclaimer:  The views and opinions expressed here are mine...     / | \ 
>             Please don't tell my employer...
"Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?"
  - E. Scrooge

-- 
William H. Fuller
{decvax|ihnp4|hao}!noao!terak!anasazi!will

felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) (02/04/86)

>From imag!vmucnam!mcvax!bu-cs!dml Tue Feb  4 06:05:51 1986
>From me
>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 
>
>I feel very sorry for you.  I hope that there are not many people
>like you that do not care or have sympthay for those who have
>suffered a great loss.

I post the response on the net before our "transmission cable" became hot.

First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social
System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help
these childrens.

Second, these childrens, which suffered a great loss indeed, and you could be
sure that I have sympathy for them, looks for me like the childrens or people
which loose parents or friends in such a catastrophe. The tomorow of the
shuttle catastrophe, there were a Airplane Crash in South America: 27 deads...
Be sure that I have a lot of sympathy for them too. But Medias seem to have
forgotten them... And American Fund too.

Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need?
Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I
feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to
make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES
RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt.

I apologize for my poor English, and my response would be more precise if it
was written in french.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Francois Felix INGRAND              Pourquoi tant de haine... 
UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix               EDIKA      
      ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix      

wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) (02/05/86)

In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes:
>In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>>
>>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>>
>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
>
>[flame on, 104%]
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.
>
>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>United States we like to take care of our own.
 
    Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that 
    sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space.  After all,
    they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
    a satellite into orbit.

craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/05/86)

In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes:
>In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>>
>>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>>
>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
>
>[flame on, 104%]
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.
>

I feel you must have misunderstood the comment from Francois Ingrand. He means
that it must surely be the responsibility of the Goverment (who are
responsible for the program on which the 7 died) rather than the
responsibility of the people who so spectacularly watched them die. Yes
it was a terrible tragedy and yes it is nice of you to think of the children.

It was a job - with its risks, what about the guy who dies on the oil rig
supplying energy to the nation or the Red Indian who died because he
complained about selling millions of square miles of land for trifles ?

>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>United States we like to take care of our own.
>
Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education,
free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can 
be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all.

It is a great shame that inorder to move the people to 'taking care of their
own' the people have to see 7 people die in an explosion on Television.
People die all the time pushing forward frontiers and working for a greater
ideal, dieing on TV shouldn't be the pre-requisite for acknoledgement.



Craig.
-- 
UUCP:	 ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster,
DARPA:	 craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs 	  |	  Department of Computing,
JANET:	 craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp		  |	  Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK.
Phone:	 +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146   	  |	  LA1 4YR
Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research

aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP (02/06/86)

>>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>
>>I feel very sorry for you.  I hope that there are not many people
>>like you that do not care or have sympthay for those who have
>>suffered a great loss.
>
>I post the response on the net before our "transmission cable" became hot.
>
>First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social
>System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help
>these childrens.

Please try to understand, Americans, that people from other
countries may be more than a bit surprised to find out that
some of the astronaut's families will receive very little
indemnity from NASA, and that someone does not automatically
get up in Congress to vote them a living.

But people from other countries are also surprised to see
newsitems on American TV about people living in a cave in a
park in Manhattan, or having nowhere to live at all. Somebody
had better take care of your own.

jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/06/86)

In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>	A trust fund has been established ...
>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>for the astronauts' children? 

No, Francois.  The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they
wish to do so.  This is a voluntary trust:  unlike Social Security
and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to.  Assez bien?
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}

credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond) (02/06/86)

>>>>
>>>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>>>
>>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>>
>>
>>United States we like to take care of our own.
> 
>    Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that 
>    sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space.  After all,
>    they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
>    a satellite into orbit.

More to the point, don't blame him: he lives in a country (France)
where the ASSUMPTION is that bereaved children will be taken care of
from public funds, and there's no need to start a special collection.

wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (02/06/86)

In article <328@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:

>First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social
>System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help
>these childrens.

First of all, I'm responding to your comments with my own personal
views and feelings about American society and the reasons why we
do things. You will no doubt find that some or even many Americans
will argue with what I have to say in general or in this particular
instance. 

Whatever the shortcomings and limitations of our current social
welfare programs, the suggestion that a fund be set up for the
children was made in a spirit of compassion for the families
involved and as a living memorial for seven people who seem to
many of us Americans to be heroes. Perhaps we're talking about
cultural differences here, Francois. Americans frequently contribute
to one charity or another when a loved one or a friend's loved one
dies or make a contribution in memory of a national figure. This
is neither right nor wrong, it's simply the way we Americans are.

We don't "have to" set up a fund to help these children because
social welfare programs, insurance, etc. won't provide for their
futures; we choose to set up such a fund and contribute to it as
a celebration of the astronauts' sacrifices and as a celebration
of our solidarity as a people in the face of tragedy.
 
>Second, these childrens, which suffered a great loss indeed, and you could be
>sure that I have sympathy for them, looks for me like the childrens or people
>which loose parents or friends in such a catastrophe. The tomorow of the
>shuttle catastrophe, there were a Airplane Crash in South America: 27 deads...
>Be sure that I have a lot of sympathy for them too. But Medias seem to have
>forgotten them... And American Fund too.

The media in this country pay more attention to the shuttle tragedy
than to the crash in South America because it's more newsworthy to
citizens of our country. I'm sure the South American crash received a
lot of coverage in South American countries. And I'm sure you Frenchmen
provide greater coverage to stories that are of particular interest to
the French people or that touch the French people in a special way.

Human tragedy is human tragedy, whether it happens to national figures
like the astronauts or to the faceless people living in the house down
the street. In spite of the seemingly routine nature of space shuttle
flights, I think many Americans have supported the space program, 
have felt that the peaceful exploration of space is a national
priority, and have viewed the astronauts as ambassador/heroes. So the
death of these seven people touched us in a special way.
 
>Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need?
>Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I
>feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to
>make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES
>RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt.

The creation of a memorial fund, as I've pointed out, springs from an
American tradition of people helping other people at a grass-roots
level. At least that's the way it seems to me as an American citizen
who grew up in the heartland. When a neighbor dies of a heart attack,
you make a contribution to a medical charity that supports research
into heart disease in the neighbor's name. If you think this is
evidence of a meanness of spirit in the American people or a poverty
of solutions, you don't understand what we are as a people.

                         -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly

chapman@miro.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU (Brent Chapman) (02/06/86)

In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes:
>In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
>>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>>
>>>	A trust fund has been established by the American Security
>>>	Bank in Washington DC.  The funds gathered are to be used
>>>	to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7
>>>	astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle.
>>
>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
>
>[flame on, 104%]
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.
>
>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>United States we like to take care of our own.
>
>-dave
>the Dream is Alive
>-- 

I'm in one hundred (and four :-)) percent agreement with Dave.  Mr. Ingrand,
are the people of France so poor (and uncaring) that your _government_ would
have to create a fund under similar circumstances?

Brent Chapman
chapman@miro.berkeley.edu
ucbvax!miro!chapman

barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin) (02/07/86)

In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes:
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.  They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.
>
>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>United States we like to take care of our own.

Hmm, did we create such a trust fund for the families of deceased
draftees in the Viet Nam War?  Or how about the families of Americans
killed by terrorists, who were used as unwitting representatives of the
US.  At least the astronauts died admirably, pursuing their dreams, and
they were aware that there were such risks.

Yes, I was horrified at the disaster.  However, I am bothered by the
fact that the entire country seems to think this is the worst disaster
in history.  Most airline disasters kill more people, and victims of
such accidents generally did not expect trouble, yet we do not agonize
over them.  I do not mean to sound unfeeling, I just wish to be
realistic about this.
-- 
    Barry Margolin
    ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
    UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar

guy@slu70.UUCP (Guy M. Smith) (02/07/86)

In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP>, wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes:
>     they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
>     a satellite into orbit.

How do you but (butt?) a satellite into orbit. Is this what a ram drive is all
about:-).

galenr@shark.UUCP (Galen Redfield) (02/08/86)

[I delete some re-quoting for brevity]

In an amazing display of diplomacy and insight, Dave Hsu writes (or rants):
>Francois Felix INGRAND writes:
>>klr@hadron.UUCP writes:
>>>	A trust fund has been established...
>>>	to provide financial assistance to the children...
>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 
>>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>>Francois Felix INGRAND       (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-(     \ | / 
>
>[flame on, 104%]
>The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a
>fund for the families of deceased astronauts.

It's true!  We'll take up any noble cause at the drop of a hat.  It's the
American Way to try solving any problem, even bereavement, by pouring money
on it.  And nobody better criticize us for it!

>                                               They sacrificed their private
>lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore;

Sure they did.  They didn't care if anyone even noticed.  They did it for
totally selfless reasons.  They didn't think it would be heroic, exciting, or
interesting.  They weren't even thinking about succeeding.  They just wanted
to pursue the common dream of all mankind.  (I did not realize that starving
people in Ethiopia wanted to explore.  Thanks for pointing that out, Dave.)

>                                                                  in the end
>they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some
>of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind
>our most visible heroes.

Yes, thank you, unseen families, for losing your loved ones.  We really do
appreciate it.  Thanks a lot, good job.  Have some money as a token of our
gratitude.  Now we'll all feel better.  

>
>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>United States we like to take care of our own.
>
>-dave
>the Dream is Alive
>--

Boy, Dave, you sure put that French guy in his place.  That'll teach him to
ask questions on the net about American social conditions!

Warm regards,
Galen.

ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) (02/08/86)

In article <328@lifia.UUCP>, felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes:
> 
> First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social
> System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help
> these childrens.

We don't really have a single 'Social System'.  It is more like a
collection of interacting systems.  Insurance is one system (usually
privately funded, but often not).  Government aid is another.  Public
funds are yet another.  These all tend to work without any coordination
between them.  Often this means that their actions are either redundant
or lacking.  In the case of astronauts, since their profession has
high risks, private insurance companies would be unwilling to take
on those risks without very high payments.  I think that NASA provides
the 'insurance' that the families would normally be able to purchase.
(If someone knows, they may want to explain how this really works.)

The comments that "the children don't need the money" imply that
there are some form of benefits available to them.

The forming of a fund is, as often as not, for the expression of
the sympathies of the donors.
> 
(...)
> Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need?
> Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I
> feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to
> make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES
> RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt.

There is little else that most folks can do.  I may be on the other side
of the continent from them, and I may not be able to contact them,
and they might not want to be contacted by several million strangers,
but I can show my concern by a donation to a fund.  Cash is the
universal medium, the children can convert it into whatever form
of monument they desire.
> 
> I apologize for my poor English, and my response would be more precise if it
> was written in french.
>
I would like to encourage you to post in your native language.  I
would have benefitted from (trying) to read it.  Prehaps a bi-lingual
standard could be addopted:  The English version first, as it is the
customary language of the net, and the native language following.

It would be helpful both as a reference for clarification, and for
practice for those of us who are in need of practice for our
French (or other language of your choice..)

(Not to mention furthering the ideal of a multi-lingual and
multi-cultural net/world)

-- 
E. Michael Smith  ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems

This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything.

gsmith@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Gene Ward Smith) (02/10/86)

In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes:
>    Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that 
>    sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space.  After all,
>    they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
>    a satellite into orbit.


  Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember
Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any
fatalities in thier space program as yet.



ucbvax!brahms!gsmith    Gene Ward Smith/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720
ucbvax!weyl!gsmith      "When Ubizmo talks, people listen."

craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/10/86)

(klr@hadron)

>>>	A trust fund has been established ...

(Francois Felix INGRAND)

>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>for the astronauts' children? 

(Joseph S. D. Yao)

>No, Francois.  The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they
>wish to do so.  This is a voluntary trust:  unlike Social Security
>and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to.  Assez bien?

Look we are getting racist again, this and other similar postings
are begining to look as if people are about to start on the old
trans-Atlantic slanging match. It must be at least 2 months since
we last did this over net.internat.

The different attitudes of people in many European Countries to those of 
Americans are articles of faith. We believe we are right, you believe that
you are right. There appears to be no room for discussion, so we
resort to insults - it is very easy to do.

Accept one thing  --  your beliefs are only right because you believe in them.

Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has
left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to
free medical treatment etc...  Many people consider the money paid out
for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate
and starve. I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the
French are Jealous of American space exploration. It's about time we
all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different 
drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't
fit.


Craig.

-- 
UUCP:	 ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster,
DARPA:	 craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs 	  |	  Department of Computing,
JANET:	 craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp		  |	  Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK.
Phone:	 +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146   	  |	  LA1 4YR
Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research

budd@boring.uucp (Tim Budd) (02/10/86)

>>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>>United States we like to take care of our own.

As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this
almost painfully embarrassing.  When one compares the health care system in
Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the
social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a 
job America does of ``taking care of its own''.

--tim budd

pete@stc.co.uk (02/10/86)

Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:
Xref: ukc net.space:1995 net.columbia:844 net.sf-lovers:7042 net.followup:2079
Xpath: ukc eagle

In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes:
>    Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that
>    sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space.  After all,
>    they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
>    a satellite into orbit.

        Oh dear.

        1: A comparison of the relative sizes of France and the USA
           makes it pretty obvious that Ariane is a considerable
           achievement.

        2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way
           in space?

        3: Look to your laurels; the Japanese are right at your heels
           Right Now on space technology - 2 of the Halley's Comet
           probes are from Japan. (and Giotto, the best bet, is
           European!)


        It seems to me that this discussion belongs in
        net.politics, 'cos what we're talking about is the difference
        in political philosophy between a laissez-faire system and a
        paternalist system; and whether one leads to the abandonment
        of the weak to their own devices (the 'Sod you, I'm all
        right' system) and the other to the stifling of initiative (the
        'Don't worry son, the State will look after you, just be good'
        system).

        Please can the discussion be carried on elsewhere?

        7 brave humans died on the Challenger; we all respect their
        courage, but some of us are wondering why you have to die live
        on TV to raise the conscience of a nation.

        BTW, I read Robert Forward's 'Dragon's Egg' over the weekend
        and got a shock in the first few pages - is he on the net and
        what do they know at Hughes and JPL that we don't?
-- 
	Peter Kendell <pete@stc.UUCP>

	...!mcvax!ukc!stc!pete

	`When your achievements match your expectations,
	 it's time to move on.'

hom@uvacs.UUCP (Hugues O. Morel) (02/10/86)

I don't see what France has to do with this, and I want you to know that some other
Frenchmen out there find the idea of a fund for the astronauts' children a very
good one.

As a matter of fact, the american space program is leading the way for the progress
of all the other nations of the world and we share its victories and sometimes its
failures in the same way you do, believe it or not.

You may be proud to know that the pionner spirit is one of the first characteristics
that come to our mind when we think of the USA ...

Hugues Morel

A Frenchman at the University of Virginia

kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) (02/11/86)

In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes:
>>>>	A trust fund has been established ...
>
>>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>>for the astronauts' children? 
>
>>No, Francois.  The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they...
>
>Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has
>left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to
>free medical treatment etc...  Many people consider the money paid out
>for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate
                                                                     ----------
How true!   :-) 
 
>and starve. I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the
>French are Jealous of American space exploration. It's about time we
>all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different 
>drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't
>fit.
>
-- 
Keith Dancey,                                UUCP:   ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!kgd
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory,
Chilton, Didcot, Oxon  OX11 0QX             
                                            JANET:       K.DANCEY@uk.ac.rl
Tel: (0235) 21900   ext 5716

ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (02/12/86)

>   Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember
> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any
> fatalities in thier space program as yet.
> 
Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?)
to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had
fatalities in their program as well.

-Ron

jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/12/86)

In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes:
>(klr@hadron)
>>>>	A trust fund has been established ...
>(Francois Felix INGRAND)
>>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund
>>>for the astronauts' children? 
>(Joseph S. D. Yao <jsdy@hadron>)
>>No, Francois.  The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they
>>wish to do so.  This is a voluntary trust:  unlike Social Security
>>and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to.  Assez bien?
>
>Look we are getting racist again, this and other similar postings
>are begining to look as if people are about to start on the old
>trans-Atlantic slanging match. It must be at least 2 months since
>we last did this over net.internat.

Craig,
I'm quite distressed that you could read the above as slanging
anybody, or being at all racist.  Please read it again, without
any prejudgments about Americans being whatever.  All I said
was that some Americans specifically wanted to help some other
people.  It is quite clear that this faculty is in no wise
limited to either Americans or to space children.  Examples
of the first you are possibly more familiar with than I, and
include the recent benefit concerts for the starving folk in
Africa, much like the one in the States.  Examples of the latter
can be heard all over here, in the almost incessant benefits
being given for the poor, the ill, the disabled, the homeless,
or practically any distressed group one can imagine.  This seems
to be related to the American brand of socialism, which is to
say that those who have often (and unfortunately not always)
will make a point of giving to some central fund to make sure
that those who have not, might.
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}

craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/12/86)

In article <1076@rlvd.UUCP> kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) writes:
>>free medical treatment etc...  Many people consider the money paid out
>>for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate
>                                                                     ----------
>How true!   :-) 
> 
Repeat after me :-

	I must learn how to spell before making a complete arse of myself


100 times


Craig.

-- 
UUCP:	 ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster,
DARPA:	 craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs 	  |	  Department of Computing,
JANET:	 craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp		  |	  Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK.
Phone:	 +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146   	  |	  LA1 4YR
Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research

wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (02/13/86)

In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes:

>Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has
>left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to
>free medical treatment etc...  

What makes you think many Americans don't feel this way? 

>Many people consider the money paid out
>for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate
>and starve. 

And many people in this country (including some of us who count
ourselves on the left side of the political spectrum) don't. You folks
in Britain support a figurehead Royal Family. Is that a gross waste of
money to you?

>I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the
>French are Jealous of American space exploration. 

So the person who made this statement was insensitive and boorish.
S/he certainly doesn't speak for all Americans.

>It's about time we
>all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different 
>drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't
>fit.

Fine, as long as Europeans are willing to refrain from forcing THEIR
ideas on us as Americans. At least that's how some of us took
Francois' posting. I've often had Europeans visiting this country make
rude comments about the "American way of life." The Ugly American
concept needs to be extended to include the Ugly European, the Ugly
Asian, ...

And I agree with the recent poster who suggested this be moved to
another  group; it has little to do with net.space anymore.

                              - Cheers, Bill Ingogly

wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) (02/13/86)

In article <805@bute.tcom.stc.co.uk> pete@stc.UUCP (Peter Kendell) writes:
>In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes:
>>    Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that
>>    sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space.  After all,
>>    they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but
>>    a satellite into orbit.
>
>        Oh dear.

    I didn't know people still said that in public.

>
>        1: A comparison of the relative sizes of France and the USA
>           makes it pretty obvious that Ariane is a considerable
>           achievement.

   Of course Ariane is not totally French - it is the product of the Euro-
   pean Space Agency, of which France is the most active participant.

>
>        2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way
>           in space?

   I give up, why?  I certainly never said they should.

>
>        3: Look to your laurels; the Japanese are right at your heels
>           Right Now on space technology - 2 of the Halley's Comet
>           probes are from Japan. (and Giotto, the best bet, is
>           European!)

   There are some pretty good reasons the US did not send a probe to 
   Halley.  One of the major ones was funding, of course.  Another
   major one is the Halley did not present itself as a particularly
   interesting comet due to its approach relative to the Sun.  What
   the US has proposed is the (I probably have this somewhat garbled) 
   Tempel 2 Comet Rendezvous Mission.  I don't know what its status is
   since the Challenger malfunctioned.  This probe is designed to go out
   to the asteroid belt (doing a close in asteroid fly-by in the process,
   as a result of which, I think the mission has had appended Asteroid Fly-by
   to its name, I believe), pick up Tempel 2 and stay with it as it approaches 
   the Sun, reaches perihelion and then goes back to aphelion.  It will be in 
   close proximity to Tempel 2 for several MONTHS.  The Halley probes will be 
   in close proximity for several minutes, or maybe hours depending what you
   want to call "close," due to their high angle of interception.  Comet
   researchers generally agree that the Tempel 2 mission is of much higher
   scientific significance than the Halley missions, because the comet
   will be observed going from a nearly virgin state, then to a highly
   excited state and back again.  Of course, history is not rich with
   Tempel 2 lore, so this mission does not have the allure of a Halley
   mission.

   And now, a message to our French speaking viewers:

   J'ai poste une article il y a deux semaines, un peu pres, disant
   que la France n'est pas un des champions de l'exploration de l'espace.
   Je crois exactement le contraire.  Je l'ai ecrit en reponse a un francais qui
   a ecrit une article qui etait, a mon avis, insultant, surtout juste
   apres le disastre Challenger. 

   Si je vous ai insulte, je m'excuse.  Je n'ai que admiration pour l'ESA.

   Excusez mon francais, s'il vous plait.

>
>        7 brave humans died on the Challenger; we all respect their
>        courage, but some of us are wondering why you have to die live
>        on TV to raise the conscience of a nation.

   If I recall correctly, the Apollo One Crew did not die "live on TV," and
   the conscience of the nation was still raised.  
   

mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) (02/14/86)

In article <850@brl-smoke.ARPA> ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes:
>>   Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember
>> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any
>> fatalities in thier space program as yet.
>> 
>Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?)
>to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had
>fatalities in their program as well.
>
>-Ron

	Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European,
then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except
as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are
no people.

	--MKR

goddard@rochester.UUCP (Nigel Goddard) (02/14/86)

In article <260@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) writes:

>or practically any distressed group one can imagine.  This seems
>to be related to the American brand of socialism, which is to
>say that those who have often (and unfortunately not always)
>will make a point of giving to some central fund to make sure
>that those who have not, might.

You seem to be confusing socialism with charity.

This example underlines the fundamental difference between our European
and North American contributors, a difference subtle but profound which
has lead to acrimonious exchanges over the Challenger fund.  As a
European currently living in the U.S.A. it has become clear to me that
the major seperation is over the question of the individual versus the
collective.  That Joseph Yao can call the above formulation a 'brand of
socialism' is but an example of the difficulty people here have thinking
in terms of the collective.  He would have the individual retaining the
right to decide whether or not to provide for those in need.  In the the
U.S.A. this is seen to be an indication of a caring society that takes
care of its own (at least if the needy are given to some of the time).
From a European persepective (at least mine) this is no more than charity,
a word which has severe negative connotations as a social policy.  Any
collective approach, where the collective (society as a whole) decides
whether or not to provide for those in need is seen here as a fundamental
attack on individual rights and liberties, encroachment of government to
areas outside its proper sphere.  Again from my European viewpoint such
a collective framework (at least to some extent) is not only necessary
but entirely obvious and natural, and poses no threats to my rights or
liberties, and indeed is a proper activity of government (being the
representative of society).

Now one can argue the rights and wrongs of both viewpoints, but my
purpose here is to elucidate the basis for the constant misunderstandings
apparent in this issue.  After many discussions here in the U.S. it
seems to me that just as many in Europe do not see the limitations of
their democratic institutions and do not understand an emphasis on
indivdual rights, many in the U.S.A. do not see the limitations of
their power as individuals and do not understand the nature of the
collective.  These viewpoints are so deeply rooted in historical
experience and culture that we will not come to any consensus and
would be well advised to accept that other peoples see the world in
other ways.  The original query from France that sparked this whole
debate could have been taken at face value as a question from another
culture, rather than as an attack on the U.S.

For the sake of clarity I have had to make gross generalisations about
U.S. and European attitudes.  Of course there is a wide spectrum of
opinion on both sides of the Atlantic, but the categorisation is
useful.

Cheers

Nigel



Internet:	goddard@rochester.arpa
UUCP:		{decvax, allegra,  seismo, cmc12}!rochester!goddard
Phone:		[USA] (716) 275-5766 
School:		Department of Computer Science; University of Rochester;
		Rochester, NY 14627

-- 

Internet:	goddard@rochester.arpa
UUCP:		{decvax, allegra,  seismo, cmc12}!rochester!goddard
Phone:		[USA] (716) 275-5766 
School:		Department of Computer Science; University of Rochester;
		Rochester, NY 14627

jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/17/86)

I had thought I was more or less quoting Alexis de Toqueville,
another European in l'ESA, in referring to America's peculiar
brand of socialism.  (You might call it "statistical socialism.")
Prob'ly misquoted.  I was educated partly in an English Benedictine
monastery (here in the States), and know something about the
individual power of the collective versus the collective power
of individuals.  I should, perhaps, have thought that the people
to whom I was responding knew less than I assumed; but the
question seemed to presume some pre-knowledge of American
social systems.

I wish to declare, as a result of several postings, that I did
not wish to insult anybody with my original posting, but merely
to respond to what appeared to be an insult from one who should
know better.  Later postings showed that he was not, in fact,
as aware of these differences as I had erroneously assumed, and
that therefore no insult had been intended.

CAN WE STOP THIS NOW PLEASE?
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}

nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (02/17/86)

>>>   Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember
>>> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any
>>> fatalities in thier space program as yet.
>>> 
>>Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?)
>>to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had
>>fatalities in their program as well.
>>
>>-Ron
>
>	Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European,
>then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except
>as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are
>no people.

The French flew a cosmonaut on a Soviet flight well before we
allowed allies on ours.
-- 
James C. Armstrong, Jnr.	{ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa

"But Doctor, we're on that island!"
"Oh my word!"			who said them, what story?

hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) (02/18/86)

In article <263@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) writes:
>
>I wish to declare, as a result of several postings, that I did
>not wish to insult anybody with my original posting, but merely
>to respond to what appeared to be an insult from one who should
>know better.  Later postings showed that he was not, in fact,
>as aware of these differences as I had erroneously assumed, and
>that therefore no insult had been intended.
>
>CAN WE STOP THIS NOW PLEASE?
>-- 
>
>	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}

ditto.

-dave
-- 
David Hsu	Communication & Signal Processing Lab, EE Department
<disclaimer>	University of Maryland,  College Park, MD 20742
hsu@eneevax.umd.edu  {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!eneevax!hsu

"Godzilla has been spotted in Sector 5!"

mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) (02/18/86)

In article <1129@abnji.UUCP> nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) writes:
>>>>   Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember
>>>> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any
>>>> fatalities in thier space program as yet.
>>>> 
>>>Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?)
>>>to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had
>>>fatalities in their program as well.
>>>
>>>-Ron
>>
>>	Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European,
>>then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except
>>as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are
>>no people.
>
>The French flew a cosmonaut on a Soviet flight well before we
>allowed allies on ours.
>-- 

>James C. Armstrong, Jnr.	{ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa

	Yes, but being guest ballast on someone else's flight is not the
same. If that French astronaut had gone up in smoke, I doubt that too
many people would have blamed the French space program, except to the
extent that "he shouldn't have been going to space to begin with."
 --MKR

roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) (02/18/86)

In article <6769@boring.UUCP> budd@boring.UUCP (Tim Budd) writes:
>>>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the
>>>United States we like to take care of our own.
>
>As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this
>almost painfully embarrassing.  When one compares the health care system in
>Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the
>social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a 
>job America does of ``taking care of its own''.
>
>--tim budd

The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do.
-- 
*** Speak for the company?  Naaaah, it's hard enough speaking for ME! ***

 ... "What were you expecting, rock'n'roll?"                                  

Roger B.A. Klorese
Celerity Computing, 40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701, (617) 872-1772        
UUCP: seismo!harvard!bu-cs!celtics!roger
ARPA: roger%bu-cs!celtics@harvard.ARPA

ed@wgivax.UUCP (02/21/86)

Is there a newsgroup which discusses technical and commercial aspects
of the shuttle, rather than social/geopolitical aspects? If not, wouldn't
it be useful to discriminate between those disparate concerns?

kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) (02/21/86)

In article <967@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes:
>>As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this
>>almost painfully embarrassing.  When one compares the health care system in
>>Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the
>>social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a 
>>job America does of ``taking care of its own''.
>>
>>--tim budd
>
>The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do.


That is a proud boast and Americans are certainly generous people.  Does it
always work, I wonder?
-- 
Keith Dancey,                                UUCP:   ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!kgd
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory,
Chilton, Didcot, Oxon  OX11 0QX             
                                            JANET:       K.DANCEY@uk.ac.rl
Tel: (0235) 21900   ext 5716

allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) (02/24/86)

	All of the Challenger Astronauts were covered by insurance policies.
	Ms McAuliff was covered by a policy for a million dollars in case
	of a fatal accident. Do her children really need a trust fund ?

	All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude
	that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people
	in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary
	precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude
	and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ?

-- 
	Kurt W. Allen
	3M Center
	ihnp4!mmm!allen

hijab@cad.UUCP (Raif Hijab) (02/25/86)

In article <971@dcl-cs.UUCP>, craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) writes:
> Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education,
> free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can 
> be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all.
> 

Hear! Hear! Just What I have wanted to say.

jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/25/86)

In article <1116@rlvd.UUCP> kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) writes:
>In article <967@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes:
>>The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do.
>That is a proud boast and Americans are certainly generous people.  Does it
>always work, I wonder?

No, unfortunately not.  I don't think there's anything we mortals
do that always works, eh?  That's why we've all got different ways
of trying things: because your ways work better than ours -- some-
times -- and our ways work better than yours -- sometimes.
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}

dls@mtgzz.UUCP (d.l.skran) (02/26/86)

>> 
>> Summary: Taking Care of Your Own
>> Xref: ucbvax net.space:4057 net.columbia:1844 net.followup:3860
>> 
>> In article <971@dcl-cs.UUCP>, craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) writes:
>> > Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education,
>> > free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can 
>> > be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all.
>> > 
>> 
>> Hear! Hear! Just What I have wanted to say.
>> 
I am astounded that anyone talks about "free" services. Nothing is free.

This debate is fundamental to defending space exploration, scientific
reserach, artistic endevour, or any non-essential activity.

If we must wait until everyone has a college education, or a high school
education, or whatever, we will wait FOREVER.

If we wait until everyone lives in a palace, or even a small house, we will
wait FOREVER.

If we wait until everyone has the best possible medical care, we will not
only wait FOREVER, but we will be bankrupt almost immediately as we
chase an ever higher standard of care.

The simple truth is that better housing, better education, and
better medical care for all are worthy goals that deserve serious
attention.

But they do not deserve ALL our attention, or all our efforts.
If we do not understand this basic point, we have sold out
our children's and grandchildren's future.

Dale Skran
Speaking for himself

che@ptsfb.UUCP (Mitch Che) (02/28/86)

In article <558@mmm.UUCP> allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) writes:
>
>	All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude
>	that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people
>	in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary
>	precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude
>	and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ?
>
Oh? It is the nature of most of us to treat death rather "dramatically"
with services, memorials, etc.  I respect your opinion to ignore this,
but my attitude is somewhat different.  To paraphrase: "You see,
Mr. Allen, I would insist on a decent burial even if it were your
body lying back there."

-- 
Mitch Che
Pacific Bell
---------------------------------------
disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer, too
(415) 823-2438
uucp: {ihnp4,dual}!ptsfa!ptsfb!che

cyrill@scicom.UUCP (Cyro Lord ) (02/28/86)

In article <967@celtics.UUCP>, roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes:
> 
> The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do.
> -- 
Well, i'm still waiting to hear about the Childrens Fund for the
250 some odd U.S. Army personal that died in a plane crash on
there way home. Of course, they are only just plain folks, most
with out college degrees, working without fan fair, out of the
press view, without PR, for little money. As for America taking
care of it's own, 'Sorry Charlie, only the BEST get to be STARKISSED'.

Or if I may, what a bunch of crap.

scott@cstvax.UUCP (Scott Larnach) (02/28/86)

In <267@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP says :-
> ... I don't think there's anything we mortals
> do that always works, eh?  That's why we've all got different ways
> of trying things: because your ways work better than ours -- some-
> times -- and our ways work better than yours -- sometimes.

I heartily applaud *somebody* in this discussion who isn't being
totally chauvinistic. If you could take the best of Europe, and
the best of America, and get them to work together without trying
to knife each other in the back all the time, what a team we would
have!

Most Americans and most Europeans, I think, believe in essentially the
same things -- freedom of expression and action within the law being
the most important. The source of the tensions between us is not the
people, it's the _Governments_.

We criticise American social policy. Indeed I think it leaves a lot to
be desired. But I certainly wouldn't shout about ours (Britain's).
We did feel it necessary to have Band Aid, didn't we? We have many
charities to look after the aged, the disabled, the homeless, and so
on, funded by private subscription, because *our* social policy doesn't
do the job.

You can't always draw conclusions about the populace from Governmental
policy. I could easily say that American politicians can _buy_ success in
American politics. But then in this country we do it either by rigging the
electoral boundaries (our obsolete system) or by having a war. Our 
government, after all, was elected by a *minority* of the voting
population. Does this make our system better than the USA's?

Summary: flame the politicians by all means, they are paid to take it,
	 but keep an open mind about the people.
-- 
Scott Larnach			Janet: scott@uk.ac.ed.cstvax
Edinburgh Unix Support		Arpa:  scott@cstvax.ed.ac.uk
Tel:	+44 31 667 1081 x2629	Uucp:  scott@cstvax.uucp

vgfranceschi@watcgl.UUCP (Valerio Franceschin) (03/02/86)

> In article <558@mmm.UUCP> allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) writes:
> >
> >	All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude
> >	that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people
> >	in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary
> >	precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude
> >	and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ?
> >
> Oh? It is the nature of most of us to treat death rather "dramatically"
> with services, memorials, etc.  I respect your opinion to ignore this,
> but my attitude is somewhat different.  To paraphrase: "You see,
> Mr. Allen, I would insist on a decent burial even if it were your
> body lying back there."

My my, how the crap continues to fly in this newsgroup.  I'm sure that
Kurt Allen didn't mean that the astronauts aren't worthy of a "decent
burial", or that memorials wouldn't be appropriate.  His point that some
people are being overly dramatic is well taken!  To treat the Challenger
disaster as the most significant event of our times is absurd.  It is
equally absurd to elevate the human beings on board to some god-like
status.  Yes, their deaths were saddening, but so are all deaths.

jimc@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/04/86)

May I suggest transferring this to net.flame?  My finger is getting tired
pressing ^N so much.

-- 
James F. Carter            (213) 206-1306
UCLA-SEASnet; 2567 Boelter Hall; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA 90024
UUCP:...!{ihnp4,ucbvax,{hao!cepu}}!ucla-cs!jimc  ARPA:jimc@locus.UCLA.EDU

ed@wgivax.UUCP (03/05/86)

I must "cancel my subscription" to this newsgroup, since I have now
read two months of news re: columbia, space, aviation, and have found
nothing but editorial comment on geopolitical and social aspects of
the shuttle program, space technology, astrophysics, and commercial 
space exploration. The creation of a newsgroup for the communication
of information of a non-editorial nature would be beneficial.
Good day.