| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390409 is a reply to message #390407] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 14:27   |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-01-15, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> And capping the state population would require repealing the Fourteenth
> Amendment, along with other equally impossible things. Places like China
> can try a one-child policy.
Yes, there were some unintended consequences there. Still, it would be
better if we could find some way to slow population growth before Mother
Nature does it for us.
Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.
-- Edward Abbey
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390410 is a reply to message #390407] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 14:46 |
scott
Messages: 4239
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes:
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 7:33:10 AM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> The obvious solutions are desalination, conservation and capping the state
>> population. San Diego already uses the first, the entire state has saved
>> a tremendous amount by the second and the third isn't very likely I'm afraid.
>
> Desalination is energy-intensive.
There is, of course, active research into more efficient methods of
desalination. California does have a lot of insolation that can
be leveraged if necessary.
> Since California has problems paying for the
> electiricity it already uses
Say what? Where did you get that flawed idea?
> , and it sits on so many fault lines that building
> more nuclear power plants there is not a good idea
That's also silly. Large portions of California
aren't near major fault lines, and one can certainly
build nuclear power plants (see San Onofre, Diablo Canyon (now in
decommissioning - for economic reasons)).
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390411 is a reply to message #390410] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 16:48 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes:
>> Since California has problems paying for the
>> electiricity it already uses
> Say what? Where did you get that flawed idea?
You have a governor who, in addition to being a bodybuilder and a former actor,
passed legislation to prevent out-of-state utilities from responding to the fact
that California utilities were in arrears - although there is a claim that this
was a response to a corrupt takeover attempt.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390412 is a reply to message #390403] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:03 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2020-01-15, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-01-14, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > and a better class of people will be coming in to the neighborhood.
>>>>
>>>> s/a better class of/richer/
>>>
>>> Just so.
>>>
>>>> Many of these people are part of the Hong Kong diaspora. Now we're
>>>> trying to figure out how to deal with the resulting flood of
>>>> absentee owners and landlords. After all, housing is first and
>>>> foremost an investment, not a place to live.
>>>
>>> For those absentee owners, yes. For ordinary people -- those lacking
>>> surplus funds for discretionary investment -- it's a myth. The myth
>>> has been remarkably realized for people buying housing from circa 1940
>>> to 1970. Plenty of jobs, high wages/salaries, moderate interest. If
>>> you bought a nice house in, say, 1955, you may have been able to sell
>>> it for what appeared to be a windfall, despite inflation, when you
>>> retired in 2000.
>>
>> It’s mostly a myth. We bought our house in 1984 and sold last year for
>> twice what we originally paid. No mortgage, but a small home equity loan.
>> Spent a few thousand to fix the place up to sell (electrical, mould, paint,
>> etc.) . Spent all but about 15,000 on our new condo, paid a bunch in moving
>> costs, and a lot of the profit went to do work on the new place and buy
>> furniture. Of course, we own the new place free and clear.
>
> We bought our house in 1988. It's currently worth ten times what we
> paid (oops, make that nine with the latest market correction, which
> has the investors freaking out). We still have a mortgage left, but
> we're in no hurry to move, and if and when we do, it's small enough
> that we'll kill it with proceeds from the sale and have enough left
> over to buy a condo free and clear.
>
> We realize full well that it was a stroke of luck that we were born
> at the right time.
>
>>> If a 20-something couple can even *get* a mortgage today, perhaps with
>>> big student debt still over their heads, they're in a very different
>>> kettle of sharks/economic, political and financial environment. But
>>> that conventional middle-class bungalo (or now condo) is touted to
>>> them as an "investment". So they both have to work full time or more
>>> to keep up with the mortgage, insurance etc. when jobs and the
>>> financial world are unstable. The phrase "smoke & mirrors" comes to
>>> mind.
>>
>> I don’t know, but owning seems more secure than renting to me, where the
>> landlord can arbitrarily raise the rent or sell the place out from under
>> you.
>
> True. But if prices have risen to where you don't stand a chance of
> getting a toe into the market, you're screwed. And even for owners,
> the city can arbitrarily raise taxes (7% this year in Vancouver) -
> and sell the place out from under you when you can't pay.
>
>>>> My advice to young people around here [BC, Canada] is to get the
>>>> hell out of the Lower Mainland. This might make it hard for the
>>>> beautiful people to find grunts to clean their hotel rooms.
>>>> Boo-hoo.
>>
>> There are lots of less-expensive places to live, even in California, as
>> Scott points out. It seems like everyone always wants to live in the same
>> places.
>
> I find it ironic, after all the talk in the '80s about the "global village",
> that people are cramming themselves into the big cities more tightly than
> ever. Remember when technology was going to make that unnecessary?
>
Yup, live where you want and telecommute to your job.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390413 is a reply to message #390405] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:03 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 23:47:33 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>> nobody@example.org (Scott) writes:
>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:01:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And while California produces the vast majority of Almonds and walnuts
>>>> to the rest of the country, to characterize the state as "nuts" is
>>>> pretty fucking stupid.
>>>
>>> Apropos of nothing, I was pondering California's status as an
>>> agricultural powerhouse and one of the few states that pays more in
>>> federal taxes than it receives in federal benefits. Points of pride,
>>> surely.
>>>
>>> I then went on to ponder what California would look like without the
>>> substantial inputs of electricity and clean water that it recieves
>>> from neighboring areas.
>>
>> LA gets half of its water from the Colorado River, which does
>> flow into California naturally, so that doesn't count as
>> an import (see recent water rights supreme court case between
>> Fl and Ga for how complicated interstate water rights can be).
>>
>> The rest of california gets water by saving the winter rains and spring runoff
>> in reservoirs and aquafers.
>>
>> California gets about 20% of its electricity from other states, mainly
>> from Washington (hydro and wind). The rest is generated within the
>> state.
>
> About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
> talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
> 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
> years.
>
> The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
> of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
> exist anymore.
>
The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
case of a water shortage.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390414 is a reply to message #390406] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:03 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Alfred Falk <aefalk@telus.net> wrote:
> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote in
> news:875zhdmtmb.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere:
>
>>
>> nobody@example.org (Scott) writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:01:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And while California produces the vast majority of Almonds and
>>>> walnuts to the rest of the country, to characterize the state as
>>>> "nuts" is pretty fucking stupid.
>>>
>>> Apropos of nothing, I was pondering California's status as an
>>> agricultural powerhouse and one of the few states that pays more in
>>> federal taxes than it receives in federal benefits. Points of pride,
>>> surely.
>>>
>>> I then went on to ponder what California would look like without the
>>> substantial inputs of electricity and clean water that it recieves
>>> from neighboring areas.
>>
>> I've not been following it closely but from intermittent and
>> fragmentary bits I've seen go by, California is doomed unless,
>> invoking the controversial US doctrine of "continental water" and as
>> yet non-existent technology, someone can arrange to pipe the contents
>> of Lake Winnipeg directly into the Central Valley. IIRC, Lake
>> Winnipeg is no longer as pristine pure as it once was but far better
>> than no water at all.
>
> Aside from general absurdity... "Winnipeg" is usually translated as "murky
> water". Turbidity has always been high. Modern pollutants from urban areas
> on main tributaries to the south haven't helped. And, while the surface
> area is large, there isn't all that much water there. It's not very deep.
> (< 40 feet mean depth.)
>
>
>> Nor is California unique in that respect although it may be the most
>> prominent example. Norther Texas, f'rgzample, depends on pumping water
>> out of a rapidly retreating paleoaquifer and may soon need Lake
>> Winnipeg too.
>>
>
I think the plan was to get water from several Alaskan rivers, thus
avoiding the charge that we’d be stealing Canada’s water.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390415 is a reply to message #390409] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:03 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2020-01-15, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> And capping the state population would require repealing the Fourteenth
>> Amendment, along with other equally impossible things. Places like China
>> can try a one-child policy.
>
> Yes, there were some unintended consequences there. Still, it would be
> better if we could find some way to slow population growth before Mother
> Nature does it for us.
>
> Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.
> -- Edward Abbey
>
Now China has a problem with declining birthrates. Apparently people got so
used to the one-child policy they don’t want more than one kid.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390416 is a reply to message #390409] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:03 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 12:27:57 PM UTC-7, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2020-01-15, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> And capping the state population would require repealing the Fourteenth
>> Amendment, along with other equally impossible things. Places like China
>> can try a one-child policy.
> Yes, there were some unintended consequences there. Still, it would be
> better if we could find some way to slow population growth before Mother
> Nature does it for us.
I quite agree.
In one sense, we already have one. The Pill has been invented, so there exists
an effective means of contraception that isn't messy or inconvenient. Diaphragms
and IUDs can also take honorable mention.
The condom, of course, requires careful attention to lubrication, and involves
certain issues of timing, which is not to say it isn't useful as well.
But the question isn't whether or not people _could_ limit the size of their
families, it's whether or not they would want to.
The "demographic transition" appears to suggest that this is not a problem.
All we would need to do is fix things so that:
- everybody in the world lives at a standard comparable to that of the average
white American in 1960 at the least,
- everybody in the world lives under political rule such that they don't feel
threatened as a cultural, religious, ethnic, or linguistic group from neighbors
within the same jurisdiction
and family size would shrink just fine.
The trouble is that the second point would require an immense amount of military
force to achieve that no one has an interest in applying, and the first point
would lead to a severe effective level of over-population in terms of resource
consumption.
And I'm not even sure that the "demographic transition" will save us. There are
basic human desires that lead people to want children, which can sometimes be
offset by economic pressures - but how people with different experiences and
from different cultures will react to a certain economic situation may vary.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390417 is a reply to message #390413] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:05 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:03:42 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>> About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
>> talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
>> 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
>> years.
>> The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
>> of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
>> exist anymore.
> The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
> case of a water shortage.
And so this means they are vastly more sensible than he gives them credit for?
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390418 is a reply to message #390415] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 17:07 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:03:46 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
> Now China has a problem with declining birthrates. Apparently people got so
> used to the one-child policy they don’t want more than one kid.
If they're also willing to put up with that kid being a daughter, great.
If not... "I told you so". (I may not be available to say it after a global
thermonuclear war with China.)
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390420 is a reply to message #390412] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 18:25 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:03:36 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> I find it ironic, after all the talk in the '80s about the "global
>> village", that people are cramming themselves into the big cities more
>> tightly than ever. Remember when technology was going to make that
>> unnecessary?
It is - but few seem to realise it.
> Yup, live where you want and telecommute to your job.
I do! I live in North Kerry, my dev box is a virtual machine in
Seattle, the HR team is based in Cork, the rest of my team is spread
between two or three US States, Russia, India and China (there's nobody else
on the team in Ireland). Work's laptop, RSA keyfob and an internet
connection puts me in the office - desk phone and all. This is the third
employer I've worked from home with. For all practical purposes timezone
difference is more of a barrier than distance, and that can be worked to
advantage.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390422 is a reply to message #390412] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 19:52 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:03:36 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2020-01-15, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2020-01-14, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> and a better class of people will be coming in to the neighborhood.
>>>> >
>>>> > s/a better class of/richer/
>>>>
>>>> Just so.
>>>>
>>>> > Many of these people are part of the Hong Kong diaspora. Now we're
>>>> > trying to figure out how to deal with the resulting flood of
>>>> > absentee owners and landlords. After all, housing is first and
>>>> > foremost an investment, not a place to live.
>>>>
>>>> For those absentee owners, yes. For ordinary people -- those lacking
>>>> surplus funds for discretionary investment -- it's a myth. The myth
>>>> has been remarkably realized for people buying housing from circa 1940
>>>> to 1970. Plenty of jobs, high wages/salaries, moderate interest. If
>>>> you bought a nice house in, say, 1955, you may have been able to sell
>>>> it for what appeared to be a windfall, despite inflation, when you
>>>> retired in 2000.
>>>
>>> It’s mostly a myth. We bought our house in 1984 and sold last year for
>>> twice what we originally paid. No mortgage, but a small home equity loan.
>>> Spent a few thousand to fix the place up to sell (electrical, mould, paint,
>>> etc.) . Spent all but about 15,000 on our new condo, paid a bunch in moving
>>> costs, and a lot of the profit went to do work on the new place and buy
>>> furniture. Of course, we own the new place free and clear.
>>
>> We bought our house in 1988. It's currently worth ten times what we
>> paid (oops, make that nine with the latest market correction, which
>> has the investors freaking out). We still have a mortgage left, but
>> we're in no hurry to move, and if and when we do, it's small enough
>> that we'll kill it with proceeds from the sale and have enough left
>> over to buy a condo free and clear.
>>
>> We realize full well that it was a stroke of luck that we were born
>> at the right time.
>>
>>>> If a 20-something couple can even *get* a mortgage today, perhaps with
>>>> big student debt still over their heads, they're in a very different
>>>> kettle of sharks/economic, political and financial environment. But
>>>> that conventional middle-class bungalo (or now condo) is touted to
>>>> them as an "investment". So they both have to work full time or more
>>>> to keep up with the mortgage, insurance etc. when jobs and the
>>>> financial world are unstable. The phrase "smoke & mirrors" comes to
>>>> mind.
>>>
>>> I don’t know, but owning seems more secure than renting to me, where the
>>> landlord can arbitrarily raise the rent or sell the place out from under
>>> you.
>>
>> True. But if prices have risen to where you don't stand a chance of
>> getting a toe into the market, you're screwed. And even for owners,
>> the city can arbitrarily raise taxes (7% this year in Vancouver) -
>> and sell the place out from under you when you can't pay.
>>
>>>> > My advice to young people around here [BC, Canada] is to get the
>>>> > hell out of the Lower Mainland. This might make it hard for the
>>>> > beautiful people to find grunts to clean their hotel rooms.
>>>> > Boo-hoo.
>>>
>>> There are lots of less-expensive places to live, even in California, as
>>> Scott points out. It seems like everyone always wants to live in the same
>>> places.
>>
>> I find it ironic, after all the talk in the '80s about the "global village",
>> that people are cramming themselves into the big cities more tightly than
>> ever. Remember when technology was going to make that unnecessary?
>>
>
> Yup, live where you want and telecommute to your job.
I'm kind of a dinosaur--sometimes I'm the only person in my department
that is actually physically present in the office.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390423 is a reply to message #390394] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 19:53 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:42:42 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 6:48:14 PM UTC-7, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> writes:
>>
>>> nobody@example.org (Scott) writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:01:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > And while California produces the vast majority of Almonds and
>>>> > walnuts to the rest of the country, to characterize the state as
>>>> > "nuts" is pretty fucking stupid.
>>>>
>>>> Apropos of nothing, I was pondering California's status as an
>>>> agricultural powerhouse and one of the few states that pays more in
>>>> federal taxes than it receives in federal benefits. Points of pride,
>>>> surely.
>>>>
>>>> I then went on to ponder what California would look like without the
>>>> substantial inputs of electricity and clean water that it recieves
>>>> from neighboring areas.
>>>
>>> I've not been following it closely but from intermittent and
>>> fragmentary bits I've seen go by, California is doomed unless,
>>> invoking the controversial US doctrine of "continental water" and as
>>> yet non-existent technology, someone can arrange to pipe the contents
>>> of Lake Winnipeg directly into the Central Valley. IIRC, Lake
>>> Winnipeg is no longer as pristine pure as it once was but far better
>>> than no water at all.
>>>
>>> Nor is California unique in that respect although it may be the most
>>> prominent example. Norther Texas, f'rgzample, depends on pumping water
>>> out of a rapidly retreating paleoaquifer and may soon need Lake
>>> Winnipeg too.
>>
>> Lake Winnipeg is way too far off.
>> The Columbia River has been discussed more than once:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_interstate_water_pipe lines_to_California
>>
>> Although really expensive, I'd rate it as feasible.
>>
>> If only we could move the perfect climate of LA north to where the water is...
>
> Opening a portal between the fires of Australia and the winter of Canada would
> be nice, but we don't have the technology.
>
> The rivers I'd like to send to California are the Mississippi and the
> Atchafalaya, as that would also solve a flooding problem, but that's clearly
> impossible, what with the Rocky Mountains being in the way.
Sounds like a job for the Boring Company.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390424 is a reply to message #390407] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 19:55 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 09:02:45 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 7:33:10 AM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> The obvious solutions are desalination, conservation and capping the state
>> population. San Diego already uses the first, the entire state has saved
>> a tremendous amount by the second and the third isn't very likely I'm afraid.
>
> Desalination is energy-intensive. Since California has problems paying for the
> electiricity it already uses, and it sits on so many fault lines that building
> more nuclear power plants there is not a good idea, I can't expect it to expand
> much.
Most of California's problems are its own doing.
> And capping the state population would require repealing the Fourteenth
> Amendment, along with other equally impossible things. Places like China can try
> a one-child policy.
>
> John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390425 is a reply to message #390411] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 19:58 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 13:48:02 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes:
>
>>> Since California has problems paying for the
>>> electiricity it already uses
>
>> Say what? Where did you get that flawed idea?
>
> You have a governor who, in addition to being a bodybuilder and a former actor,
> passed legislation to prevent out-of-state utilities from responding to the fact
> that California utilities were in arrears - although there is a claim that this
> was a response to a corrupt takeover attempt.
?? When was Gavin Newsom a bodybuilder or actor?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390426 is a reply to message #390425] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 22:06 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 5:58:42 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote:
> ?? When was Gavin Newsom a bodybuilder or actor?
You had such a governor, then. But perhaps he'll be back.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390427 is a reply to message #390423] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 22:13 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 21:42:42 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> The rivers I'd like to send to California are the Mississippi and the
>> Atchafalaya, as that would also solve a flooding problem, but that's clearly
>> impossible, what with the Rocky Mountains being in the way.
> Sounds like a job for the Boring Company.
If Wayne Boring had the cartoon character Leonardo's pencil, he could draw a
picture that would come to life of the *real* solution to the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnheB_ETwfo
....this character _looks_ like the Leonardo I'm thinking of.
And if you don't recall who Wayne Boring drew,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5-BkmvHfvA
There is a more specific video about Wayne Boring's art:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GY7_QAFD9pA
John Savard
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390429 is a reply to message #390392] |
Wed, 15 January 2020 23:39 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 6:48:14 PM UTC-7, Dan Espen wrote:
> If only we could move the perfect climate of LA north to where the water is...
I think Lex Luthor had a plan to move the climate of California eastward, rather
than northward, to where water might be more easily available - in the first
Superman movie.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390433 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 07:39 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 16 Jan 2020 09:07:13 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> There are far too many middle managers who have no idea how to manage
The rest of this sentence isn't required for accuracy, just
precision.
> remote staff; they want to see rows of heads bent over keyboards.
Nothing new. There's a bit in Venus Equilateral about it, something
about managers who don't understand that when an engineer is leaning back
with feet up, hands behind head and eyes closed they're working their
hardest.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390434 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 09:38 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 16 Jan 2020 14:15:15 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> I like to thing that when I ran a team, I didn't do any of that crap. I
> was just interested in whether or not the work got done. I didn't care
> about *how* it got done; these people are responsible adults, just let
> them get on with the work.
That's the way to do it.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390435 is a reply to message #390431] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 10:01 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 11:18:49 PM UTC-7, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> Aha! Two more women with the initials LL.
What, you didn't know about Lyla Lerrol and Lori Lemaris?
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390436 is a reply to message #390413] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 11:37 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:03:40 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 23:47:33 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>> nobody@example.org (Scott) writes:
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 16:01:05 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > And while California produces the vast majority of Almonds and walnuts
>>>> > to the rest of the country, to characterize the state as "nuts" is
>>>> > pretty fucking stupid.
>>>>
>>>> Apropos of nothing, I was pondering California's status as an
>>>> agricultural powerhouse and one of the few states that pays more in
>>>> federal taxes than it receives in federal benefits. Points of pride,
>>>> surely.
>>>>
>>>> I then went on to ponder what California would look like without the
>>>> substantial inputs of electricity and clean water that it recieves
>>>> from neighboring areas.
>>>
>>> LA gets half of its water from the Colorado River, which does
>>> flow into California naturally, so that doesn't count as
>>> an import (see recent water rights supreme court case between
>>> Fl and Ga for how complicated interstate water rights can be).
>>>
>>> The rest of california gets water by saving the winter rains and spring runoff
>>> in reservoirs and aquafers.
>>>
>>> California gets about 20% of its electricity from other states, mainly
>>> from Washington (hydro and wind). The rest is generated within the
>>> state.
>>
>> About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
>> talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
>> 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
>> years.
>>
>> The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
>> of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
>> exist anymore.
>>
>
> The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
> case of a water shortage.
It already doesn't exist, but this would be politicians doing this.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390437 is a reply to message #390417] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 11:39 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:05:29 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:03:42 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
>>> talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
>>> 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
>>> years.
>
>>> The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
>>> of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
>>> exist anymore.
>
>> The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
>> case of a water shortage.
>
> And so this means they are vastly more sensible than he gives them credit for?
>
> John Savard
I don't give credit to politicians.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390438 is a reply to message #390433] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 11:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 12:39:10 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2020 09:07:13 GMT
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> There are far too many middle managers who have no idea how to manage
>
> The rest of this sentence isn't required for accuracy, just
> precision.
>
>> remote staff; they want to see rows of heads bent over keyboards.
>
> Nothing new. There's a bit in Venus Equilateral about it, something
> about managers who don't understand that when an engineer is leaning back
> with feet up, hands behind head and eyes closed they're working their
> hardest.
Nor do they understand things like 'the air plant'. Venus Equilateral
is an interesting set of stories.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390439 is a reply to message #390438] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 12:03 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 10:47:10 -0600
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nor do they understand things like 'the air plant'. Venus Equilateral
> is an interesting set of stories.
I have never regretted reading them at an impressionable age,
although they were a little too fond of transparency experiments for my
taste.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390440 is a reply to message #390435] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 13:44 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-01-16, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 11:18:49 PM UTC-7, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> Aha! Two more women with the initials LL.
>
> What, you didn't know about Lyla Lerrol and Lori Lemaris?
I never was a really dedicated fan. My contact with the Superman
universe came from reading the stack of comics that were at the
music store while I was waiting for lessons. At least it gave me
the idea for my forged From: line.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390441 is a reply to message #390433] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 13:44 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-01-16, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2020 09:07:13 GMT
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> There are far too many middle managers who have no idea how to manage
>
> The rest of this sentence isn't required for accuracy, just
> precision.
Thanks to Dilbert we can now abbreviate it to "PHB".
>> remote staff; they want to see rows of heads bent over keyboards.
>
> Nothing new. There's a bit in Venus Equilateral about it, something
> about managers who don't understand that when an engineer is leaning back
> with feet up, hands behind head and eyes closed they're working their
> hardest.
My brother-in-law, who ran screw machines in a factory, applied the same
philosophy. Occasionally a foreman would come by and see him sitting
back with his hands behind his head while the machine, already perfectly
adjusted, churned out parts by the thousand. Once, he says, the foreman
got so upset about him not (apparently) doing anything that he hit the
emergency stop and tore the machine down. "There," he said, "I'm working.
Are you happy now?"
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390442 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 15:14 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 1/15/2020 4:05 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:03:42 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
>>>> talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
>>>> 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
>>>> years.
>>
>>>> The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
>>>> of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
>>>> exist anymore.
>>
>>> The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
>>> case of a water shortage.
>>
>> And so this means they are vastly more sensible than he gives them credit for?
>>
>
> Let's not get carried away, now.
>
The feds made ‘em do it. It was either negotiate or have it dictated to
them.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390443 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 15:14 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 1/15/2020 1:27 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2020-01-15, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> And capping the state population would require repealing the Fourteenth
>>> Amendment, along with other equally impossible things. Places like China
>>> can try a one-child policy.
>>
>> Yes, there were some unintended consequences there. Still, it would be
>> better if we could find some way to slow population growth before Mother
>> Nature does it for us.
>>
>> Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.
>> -- Edward Abbey
>>
>
> With economic development, improved status for women, and easy/cheap
> access to birth control, I suspect most women will be happy to oblige.
>
In primitive societies, lots of children are an asset - insurance against
early death, more hands to work the fields or tend the herds, etc. When
most children live to grow up, you no longer have a farm that needs lots of
hand labor, and you have to start thinking about sending the kids to
school, you don’t want more than one or two.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390444 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 15:14 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 1/15/2020 6:58 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 13:48:02 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
>> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-7, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>> > Since California has problems paying for the
>>>> > electiricity it already uses
>>>
>>>> Say what? Where did you get that flawed idea?
>>>
>>> You have a governor who, in addition to being a bodybuilder and a former actor,
>>> passed legislation to prevent out-of-state utilities from responding to the fact
>>> that California utilities were in arrears - although there is a claim that this
>>> was a response to a corrupt takeover attempt.
>>
>> ?? When was Gavin Newsom a bodybuilder or actor?
>>
> Qaddi is Canadian, he doesn't know. Not his fault, I don't know who
> the Premier of Saskatchewan is, myself.
>
Aren’t Harry and Meagan the king and queen of Canada now?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390445 is a reply to message #390234] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 15:14 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2020-01-15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:03:36 -0700
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> I find it ironic, after all the talk in the '80s about the "global
>>>> village", that people are cramming themselves into the big cities more
>>>> tightly than ever. Remember when technology was going to make that
>>>> unnecessary?
>>
>> It is - but few seem to realise it.
>
> There are far too many middle managers who have no idea how to manage
> remote staff; they want to see rows of heads bent over keyboards.
>
>>> Yup, live where you want and telecommute to your job.
>>
>> I do! I live in North Kerry, my dev box is a virtual machine in
>> Seattle, the HR team is based in Cork, the rest of my team is spread
>> between two or three US States, Russia, India and China (there's nobody else
>> on the team in Ireland). Work's laptop, RSA keyfob and an internet
>> connection puts me in the office - desk phone and all. This is the third
>> employer I've worked from home with. For all practical purposes timezone
>> difference is more of a barrier than distance, and that can be worked to
>> advantage.
>
> Good, innit!?!?!? I worked from home for the 5 years before retiring. At
> one point, my boss was in New York, my team in Mumbai and I was in my
> back bedroom in Bedford, UK. Occasionally, I went into the office in
> Canary Wharf; the biggest problem there was finding somewhere to plug the
> laptop into the mains.
>
> Unfortunately, this only works if your "product" is something virtual; if
> your job is to stand at a lathe and make widgets, you have to go into the
> factory.
>
I used to like going to the office. Sure it was drudgery to have to get up
every morning and leave the house at 7:00 every day, and in upstate NY
winters the drive could be “interesting”, but my jobs provided the
flexibility to come in late or leave early. Now that I’m retired I miss the
face-to-face and the ability to bounce ideas or problems off someone else.
I wouldn’t mind being in an office a couple of days a week, and wouldn’t
want to work remotely lo the time. Of course YMMV.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390446 is a reply to message #390434] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 15:14 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2020 14:15:15 GMT
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I like to thing that when I ran a team, I didn't do any of that crap. I
>> was just interested in whether or not the work got done. I didn't care
>> about *how* it got done; these people are responsible adults, just let
>> them get on with the work.
>
> That's the way to do it.
>
Agree
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390447 is a reply to message #390442] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 16:16 |
scott
Messages: 4239
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 1/15/2020 4:05 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 3:03:42 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > About 30 years ago I watched a documentary on the Colorado River. They
>>>> > talked about water rights. The river's flow was checked in the early
>>>> > 1930s. Turns out those were the wettest years on that river in 500
>>>> > years.
>>>
>>>> > The states that draw water from that river refuse to allow a redoing
>>>> > of the river flow. Apparently they want to draw water that doesn't
>>>> > exist anymore.
>>>
>>>> The states involved just negotiated a compact covering who gets cut off in
>>>> case of a water shortage.
>>>
>>> And so this means they are vastly more sensible than he gives them credit for?
>>>
>>
>> Let's not get carried away, now.
>>
>
> The feds made ‘em do it.
For some value of 'feds' that includes the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court)
operating as specified by the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390449 is a reply to message #390448] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 17:33 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:14:49 -0700
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Aren’t Harry and Meagan the king and queen of Canada now?
>
> I gather they just got told that they can't live there.
>
The _Globe and Mail_ published some sort of scathing editorial, that’s the
last I heard.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390450 is a reply to message #390449] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 17:42 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:14:49 -0700
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Aren’t Harry and Meagan the king and queen of Canada now?
>>
>> I gather they just got told that they can't live there.
>>
>
> The _Globe and Mail_ published some sort of scathing editorial, that’s the
> last I heard.
>
“A royal living in this country does not accord with the long-standing
nature of the relationship between Canada and Britain, and Canada and the
Crown.”
I don’t get the problem, but then, the inner workings of anyone’s
government are usually inscrutable. Something about a “virtual crown”, etc.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390451 is a reply to message #390444] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 17:56 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 1:14:50 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
> Aren’t Harry and Meagan the king and queen of Canada now?
No, we still have to make do with a Governor-General who takes instructions from
the Queen of England.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anthracite coal, 1929 [message #390452 is a reply to message #390448] |
Thu, 16 January 2020 17:58 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, January 16, 2020 at 2:30:08 PM UTC-7, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> I gather they just got told that they can't live there.
What? Trudeau even confirmed that Canada would pay their security expenses rather
than sending the bill to the UK.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
