| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29317 is a reply to message #29309] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:17   |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Walter Banks ?walter@bytecraft.com? wrote
>>>> > Real debate on productivity needs to happen. If private industry
>>>> > is so good how come a product can be made at a profit in China
>>>> > and shipped to the US for less than it can be manufactured in the US.
>>>> The answer is obvious to anyone with even half a clue, wages.
>>>> > Wages are often cited as the problem
>>>> Compare the minimum wage in both countrys sometime.
>>>> > but is it possible that the current expectations of GMROI a
>>>> > far higher number is a bigger problem for sustained growth.
>>> Rod, do the math,
>> Don't need to. The difference in the minimum wage between the
>> two countrys is all you need to explain your para now at the top.
>>> "What is the wage needed in the US to compete
>>> with a product manufactured in China?"
>> Basically something like the minimum wage
>> in china, which isnt even legal in the US.
> Rod, do the math.
Don't need to. Operations like Apple have already done
them, and have worked out that it's a lot cheaper to get
their stuff made in China than in the US.
> There is a lot more than wage differences in product costs.
But it's the wage cost that completely dominates
the cost of low cost consumer goods.
> The product manufactured in China has 3000 miles of
> ocean, two borders and land shipping to destinations in the US
And when stuff like ipads and iphones moves in fully
automated container loads, that's peanuts in the final
retail price and you have to pay MUCH more to move
them around the US if you made them in the US anyway.
> not to mention differences in personal productivity.
That's much better in china than in the US with
the manufacture of low cost consumer goods
on even the hours worked alone.
> It really isn't all about wages.
Never said it was, but it is whats the reason that low
cost consumer goods are almost all made outside the
US and the west in general now.
There are some obvious exceptions with movies and
TV series and with OSs and even book authors etc,
and most of the full commercialisation of almost all
technology still happens in the US first, but the world
has moved on with low cost consumer goods.
Most of the manufacture of aircraft and even cars
is still done in the west, particularly if you include
Japan in that, and obviously military hardware is
still done in the west, but the manufacture of low
cost consumer goods is long gone now, for a reason.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29318 is a reply to message #29184] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:21 |
Shmuel (Seymour J.) M
Messages: 3286
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In <kao8lp$24g$1@dont-email.me>, on 12/17/2012
at 06:15 PM, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> said:
> Previously there were too many dependencies on CKD to make the
> change easy.
FSVO previously; the RCI in VSAM made it clear that it wasn't exactly
rocket science. For that matter, they had the example of
page-formatted volumes in TSS/360 to learn from.
> Now, however, VSAM has replaced ISAM,
ISAM effectively died in the 1970's, even though it continued to be
supported much longer.
> and there is a new load mudule format, so TTRs aren't imbeded in
> everything.
More importantly, it would have been possible to model the TTR on FBA
storage.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29319 is a reply to message #29311] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:22 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Anne & Lynn Wheeler" <lynn@garlic.com> wrote in message
news:m3obhr1a7g.fsf@garlic.com...
>
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>> [*] Defense, over one trillion a year[**], needs to drop by 50%, but the
>> republican ideologues and lobby would throw a fit. Do we really need
>> 1500 new F-35's, or are new-build/upgraded F-16's/F-15's (at 10-50%
>> the cost) sufficient
>> for any conceivable threat (in conjunction with the small number of
>> F-22s
>> already built). There's no reason that a carrier cannot float for
>> 75 years
>> instead of 50, so the carrier new-build program can slow down
>> substantially
>> (even assuming we need a dozen CBGs floating around).
>
> re:
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#30 Search Google, 1960:s-style
>
> for the fun of it ... web site that goes into more detail. Last year I
> was exchanging messages with somebody in vancouver BC and happened to
> quote several references on this website ... they then said they wanted
> to forward to somebody in Canadian gov. turn out it was the prime
> minister. more recently there are claims canada is backing out of
> F35.
> http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/
>
> their f35 reading list:
> http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/p/f-35-reading-list.html
>
> and recent: Canada still confused about acquisition costs for F-35
> http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com/2012/12/canada-still-conf used-about-acquisition.html
>
> winslow wheeler (and before you ask, we aren't related)
> http://nation.time.com/2012/12/03/if-more-money-buys-a-small er-fleet-what-will-less-money-buy/
> http://nation.time.com/2012/12/04/more-than-the-navys-number s-could-be-sinking/
> http://nation.time.com/2012/12/05/is-the-fleet-steaming-forw ardor-backward/
> one of the recent things to come out is that naval war games dating
> back to the 80s ... our carriers being regularly sunk by diesel/electric
> submarines ... results that were surpressed in summaries/reports.
And wont last any time at all when nukes are used.
> assumption is that the carriers will pretty much
> have to be kept far away from any serious threat ...
There wont ever be any serious threats like that again,
nukes guarantee that.
They are very handy when you want to fuck over
somewhere like Iraq tho.
> and the range of the carrier f35 is limited ...
> so that, in turn, makes them pretty much useless.
Nope, not if you just want to fuck over Iraq etc.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29320 is a reply to message #29315] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:22 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:
> On 12/18/2012 10:42 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>> So you can _increase_ revenue by not raising taxes.
>> How do you think that works?
>> How is it working now?
>> How well has it worked for the last 12 years?
>> How many small businesses were destroyed during the Clinton era?
>
> Revenue is up this year, I think 10%, but taxes are not. We don't
> have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
Does repeating mantras make you feel better?
Cut military spending. Boeing doesn't need welfare.
Oh, that's no good?
Looks like we need more taxes to keep subsidizing Boeing.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29321 is a reply to message #29283] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:29 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 12/18/2012 12:05 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
> The democrats are still working out of the mess that the bush tax cuts, financial dereg,
> and two unnecessary wars have left the country in. Their goal is to
> rein in the budget deficit without causing futher irreparable harm. It
> is clear to anyone who looks at the US Budget that cuts in spending alone
> cannot accomplish this[*]. It's clear to anyone who looks that the tax rates
> that are being proposed are significantly less than at any time prior to
> 2002 - and the US hummed along just fine then, including small businesses,
> family farms and all the other bugaboos the radical right like Barb keep
> bitching about.
I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US
business taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
....
>
> Pure speculation on your part. _You_ may be pissed off (but you always
> seem to be, about pretty much everything from computers to politics), but
> the vast majority of the country obviously doesn't think like you. You
> may want to consider that you're the outlier here.
>
You're peddling the Obama line of BS. From what I read the popular vote
was something like 51 percent to 47. This isn't exactly a "vast
majority" or a "mandate" that the O-man is trying to claim, it's a sign
that he'd better tread pretty carefully. I blame Romney, and his
campaign staff for the result. He was a fairly unattractive candidate
and the White House kept his campaign off balance all summer with the
"BS of the week" rather than actually talking about any issues.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29322 is a reply to message #29313] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:23 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kaqeen$75m$1@dont-email.me...
> On 12/18/2012 9:39 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>>> In <PM0004D10DB0CDEE1A@ac812cc2.ipt.aol.com>, on 12/17/2012
>>> at 03:34 PM, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> said:
>>>
>>>> Do you remember when the USSR sent its soldiers out to harvest
>>>> potatoes?
>>>
>>> How does that conflict with their system being state capitalism?
>>>
>>>> The books I read talked about the collectives not working a long
>>>> day;
>>>
>>> Are you talking about a real collective, owned by the workers,
>>
>> Kibbutz (I couldn't remember the word yesterday).
>>
>>> or a
>>> state run farm where the workers are coolies? Where and what year.
>>
>> The books were about Israel and its history.
>>
>>> Are
>>> you comparing them to single family farms in the same location and
>>> year?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> Or are you saying, e.g., that there is a longer work day on a
>>> moshave than on a nearby kibbutz?
>>
>> No, I'm saying that an owner has more incentive to work longer hours
>> than those who work under a collective org. A collective would have
>> to post work details and hours. The first thing you hear is someone
>> complaining about someone else not having to do the messiest work.
>> An owner just does the labor until the job is done. There are no
>> hours scheduled by a manager nor days off nor obligatory coffee
>> breaks.
>>
>>>
>>> If you're talking about soviet "collective" farms, the operative
>>> expression is "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work."
>>>
>>
>> That's an organization which has completely self-destructed. If
>> those people owned their own pieces of that farming area, they
>> would have more self-interest in success. For those people
>> who didn't care about doing the work, they would sell the land
>> to someone who did have an interest.
>>
>> Bottom line is that the land is productive and not lying fallow
>> or worse.
> In his soul every Russian is a farmer, or something like that.
Putin isnt, neither was Yeltsin or Gorby either.
> National Geographic recently had an article about a dacha community -
> vacation homes of city people - north of Moscow. In the photos you could
> see that the "back yards" were almost all vegetable plots. A few grew
> flowers and no one had a lawn.
They do now.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29329 is a reply to message #29315] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:53 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kaqf4h$bps$2@dont-email.me...
> On 12/18/2012 10:42 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>> So you can _increase_ revenue by not raising taxes.
>> How do you think that works?
>> How is it working now?
>> How well has it worked for the last 12 years?
>> How many small businesses were destroyed during the Clinton era?
> Revenue is up this year, I think 10%,
Pity about the immense deficit that remains, anyway.
And that's off the lowest revenues in a long time anyway.
> but taxes are not. We don't have a revenue problem,
Corse you do.
> we have a spending problem.
You have both and you are too stupid to even notice.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29330 is a reply to message #29321] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 14:58 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kaqfqk$h7k$1@dont-email.me...
> On 12/18/2012 12:05 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>> The democrats are still working out of the mess that the bush tax
>> cuts, financial dereg,
>> and two unnecessary wars have left the country in. Their goal is to
>> rein in the budget deficit without causing futher irreparable harm.
>> It
>> is clear to anyone who looks at the US Budget that cuts in spending
>> alone
>> cannot accomplish this[*]. It's clear to anyone who looks that the
>> tax rates
>> that are being proposed are significantly less than at any time prior
>> to
>> 2002 - and the US hummed along just fine then, including small
>> businesses,
>> family farms and all the other bugaboos the radical right like Barb
>> keep
>> bitching about.
>
> I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US business
> taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
It's a lie.
>> Pure speculation on your part. _You_ may be pissed off (but you always
>> seem to be, about pretty much everything from computers to politics), but
>> the vast majority of the country obviously doesn't think like you. You
>> may want to consider that you're the outlier here.
> You're peddling the Obama line of BS.
Corse you never ever peddle any Repug line of bullshit, eh ?
> From what I read the popular vote was something like 51 percent to 47.
Still a majority.
> This isn't exactly a "vast majority"
He never said that that was a vast majority, fool.
> or a "mandate" that the O-man is trying to claim, it's a sign that he'd
> better tread pretty carefully.
Nope, he aint got any more terms, he
can do what he likes with impunity.
> I blame Romney, and his campaign staff for the result.
I blame those actually stupid enough to put up
a mormon bishop as a presidential candidate.
> He was a fairly unattractive candidate
So why was your lot stupid enough to have him ?
> and the White House kept his campaign off balance all summer with the "BS
> of the week" rather than actually talking about any issues.
Corse Romney talked about heaps of issues, eh ?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29331 is a reply to message #29321] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 15:05 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:
> On 12/18/2012 12:05 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>> The democrats are still working out of the mess that the bush tax cuts, financial dereg,
>> and two unnecessary wars have left the country in. Their goal is to
>> rein in the budget deficit without causing futher irreparable harm. It
>> is clear to anyone who looks at the US Budget that cuts in spending alone
>> cannot accomplish this[*]. It's clear to anyone who looks that the tax rates
>> that are being proposed are significantly less than at any time prior to
>> 2002 - and the US hummed along just fine then, including small businesses,
>> family farms and all the other bugaboos the radical right like Barb keep
>> bitching about.
>
> I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US
> business taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
> ...
>>
>> Pure speculation on your part. _You_ may be pissed off (but you always
>> seem to be, about pretty much everything from computers to politics), but
>> the vast majority of the country obviously doesn't think like you. You
>> may want to consider that you're the outlier here.
>>
>
> You're peddling the Obama line of BS. From what I read the popular
> vote was something like 51 percent to 47. This isn't exactly a "vast
> majority" or a "mandate" that the O-man is trying to claim, it's a
> sign that he'd better tread pretty carefully. I blame Romney, and his
> campaign staff for the result. He was a fairly unattractive candidate
> and the White House kept his campaign off balance all summer with the
> "BS of the week" rather than actually talking about any issues.
To realistically blame Romney, you need to point to the other candidate
that would have done better.
The entire Republican field was abysmal.
Who can forget how Cain made such a big splash.
Only to be shown to be nuts.
The only statesman in the bunch was Huntsman who was automatically
disqualified because he wasn't 100% crazy.
So, blame Romney if you want, but I blame the entire party.
Gingrich just made a comment about Hillary running in 2016:
"The Republican party is incapable of competing at that level,"
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29333 is a reply to message #29321] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 15:12 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:
> I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US
> business taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#30 Search Google, 1960:s-style
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#34 Search Google, 1960:s-style
there are multiple ways of doing the comparison, like top tax bracket
versus effective corporate tax collected versus corporate taxes as
percent of total tax collected versus corporate taxes as percent of GDP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_Sta tes
above has comparison of corporate tax collected by country sliced &
diced in several ways.
part of the reason that congress is called most corrupt institution on
earth is the amount of money they've received for 70,000+ page tax code
with enormous loopholes. the current speaker of the house at the start
of the last new congress ... made some statements about the most prized
committee appointments were on committee dealing with the tax code ...
because they became the recipients of the largest amounts of money from
special interests. part of "Kabuki theater" is nobody in congress really
wants the tax code fixed ... because that would stop the enormous
amounts of money flowing into their pockets. there are claims that the
largest business ROI is money spent on congress for tax loopholes
.... the ROI can be thousands of times more than they have to pay for the
loopholes. The appearance of conflict with strong opposing sides to the
tax issues can enorously increase the funds flowing into congressional
pockets.
Facebook compares comporate, individual tax burden in 1950, today
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/ 03/facebook-posts/facebook-post-compares-corporate-individua l-tax-bu/
from above:
In 1950, corporations paid $3 in taxes for every $1 by a worker. Today,
they pay 22 cents for every $1 by a worker."
.... snip ...
Corporate Tax Rates, Then and Now
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04/corporate-tax-rates-the n-and-now/
from above:
Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 27.3%
2010 . . . 8.9%
Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of GDP
1955 . . . 4.3%
2010 . . . 1.3%
Individual Income/Payrolls as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 58.0%
2010 . . . 81.5%
.... snip ...
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29334 is a reply to message #29310] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 15:46 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Dec 18, 1:33Â pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Here we have the TEA Party (Taxed Enough Already), when taxes are
> lower than ever (a lot more than 20 years).
> Ask any right winger and they'll deny, deny, deny.
The TEA folks conveniently forget how much in government services they
demand:
--bigger airports, modernized air traffic control. While partly paid
from user fees, much of it is paid for by general tax dollars.
--bone dry streets, roads, and highways the moment a snowflake falls.
--many prisons, sophisticated law enforcement and homeland security,
tracking of offenders after release (eg Megan's law).
--expanded military (note the calls for war after the Libya incident
and desire to increase military spending).
> With all the talk about mental illness on TV, seeing what should be
> normal people talking so paranoid is concerning. Â Maybe there's
> something in the environment. Â Beck and Rush can't be the only reason.
Talk radio is part of it. The 'right' hated Bill Clinton--he was a
"Mike Stivic" baby boomer who represented--theorecctially--all the
things they were against, even though he was actually a centrist. But
the big thing was that he was in power and they were out. The cycle
is repeating for Obama. He's also a centrist, but they've got
themselves so worked up and believe he's a far left extremist.
But this is nothing new. After the narrow loss in 1948, the 'right'
hated Harry Truman--mostly because he was in and they were out. They
felt a sense of entitlement to be in despite being in the minority.
They invented the communist witchhunts as a way of subverting the
Democrats, and managed to get a lot of good people out of office.
Ironically, their smear campaign backfired and hit them too.
I wonder what would've happened to say an EAM employee in a large
corporation if they were 'named' as a communist. My guess is that it
probably wouldn't matter for a low level employee, but a manager might
lose his job without any appeal or recourse.
Also, in the early 1960s when the corporate world was still rather
conservative, I wonder how an entry-level programmer would be screened
for a job--would a prospective employer only check out his technical
credentials, or also check out his overall college experience for
unapproved activities, church affilation, etc?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29335 is a reply to message #29320] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 15:53 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Dec 18, 2:22Â pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Cut military spending. Â Boeing doesn't need welfare.
> Oh, that's no good?
> Looks like we need more taxes to keep subsidizing Boeing.
There are a number of major military contractors, )not just Boeing),
including their employees and subcontractors, who naturally have
strong feelings against cutting defense spending. Likewise with
communities hosting a military base.
But as you said, do we really want to keep subsidizing these
organizations?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29336 is a reply to message #29173] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 15:55 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:48:27 +0000 (UTC), Alfred Falk
<falk@arc.REMOVE.ab.ca> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in
> news:20121215062624.a4f3a1b41c9d38a782332cb3@eircom.net:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 18:02:59 -0600
>> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But I think consumer taste may be different in Europe/North America,
>>> NA has favored big top loaders with a spin cycle and separate
>>> hot/cold water inputs (no built-in heater) that drain to a standpipe.
>>> From our last discussion on this topic, it seemed like that did
>>> _not_ describe the typical Euro or Oz washer.
>>
>> Correct, European washers went front loader a long time ago
>> (1960s), hot and cold feed was normal up until a decade or so ago when
>> cold only became normal. They do have spin cycles and drain to a
>> standpipe.
>
> 25 years ago I had some British visitors that commented on the
> primitiveness of my top-loading washer. I subsequently saw theirs and
> understood.
>
> Top-loaders are approching extinction in Canada. (Replaced old Kenmore
> [Whirlpool] model with Korean-made front-loader 5 years ago.) I just had
> a quick look at homedepot.com. There seems to be a lot higher proportion
> of top-loaders than on on homedepot.ca.
I prefer top loaders and that is what bought when I needed a clothes
washer. Dish washer, came with my place, is a front loader.
..
JimP.
--
Brushing aside the thorns so I can see the stars.
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://www.drivein-jim.net/ Drive-In movie theaters
http://story.drivein-jim.net/ A story Feb, 2011
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29337 is a reply to message #29166] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:02 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 17 Dec 2012 18:55:38 GMT, greymausg@mail.com wrote:
> On 2012-12-17, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 12/17/2012 9:34 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Dec 16, 10:43 am, jmfbahciv <See.ab...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> Human nature being what it is, a workforce needs _both_ enforcers and
>>>> >> incentives. One or the other alone won't do it, despite ideological
>>>> >> claims.
>>>> >
>>>> > 4 for each worker?? That's paying 5 people to do one job and doesn't
>>>> > include any of the management.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where do you get "4 for each worker???
>>>
>>> Form the white paper I read about North Korea. It's packed away so
>>> I can't give you the book's specs.
>>
>> One has to suspect that counts all the soldiers in the army vs. all
>> the farmers, not soldiers actually standing there watching the
>> farmers. Which, even though North Korea has an enormous army for its
>> size, probably isn't that different a ratio from the US, if you count
>> all our mercenaries, military contractors, and "contractors" as
>> soldiers (North Korea hasn't discovered "outsourcing" yet).
>>
>
> hey, maybe they would hire out surplus soldiers to the US..
> Catch 22?,.. I believe crazier things are happening in Afganistan.
I was watching CNN this past weekend. They were talking to an escapee
from North Korea. He said he was born in a prison camp; with factory,
famrland, mines, stores. His parents had to win the right to marry and
have a child. Ayone trying to escape was shot, if you didn't report
someone who was plotting to escape, you were shot, etc. He didn't know
life was different until someone was put in the camp who had lived in
a North Korean city before the camp. So evidently, the military there
just guarded the fence and shot people trying to escape.
..
JimP.
--
Brushing aside the thorns so I can see the stars.
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://www.drivein-jim.net/ Drive-In movie theaters
http://story.drivein-jim.net/ A story Feb, 2011
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29339 is a reply to message #29334] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:31 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
news:c0b82855-0058-43f7-a8f3-86c39e4afc5b@b16g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 18, 1:33 pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Here we have the TEA Party (Taxed Enough Already), when taxes are
>> lower than ever (a lot more than 20 years).
>> Ask any right winger and they'll deny, deny, deny.
>
> The TEA folks conveniently forget how much in government services they
> demand:
> --bigger airports, modernized air traffic control. While partly paid
> from user fees, much of it is paid for by general tax dollars.
> --bone dry streets, roads, and highways the moment a snowflake falls.
> --many prisons, sophisticated law enforcement and homeland security,
> tracking of offenders after release (eg Megan's law).
> --expanded military (note the calls for war after the Libya incident
> and desire to increase military spending).
>
>
>> With all the talk about mental illness on TV, seeing what should be
>> normal people talking so paranoid is concerning. Maybe there's
>> something in the environment. Beck and Rush can't be the only reason.
>
> Talk radio is part of it. The 'right' hated Bill Clinton--he was a
> "Mike Stivic" baby boomer who represented--theorecctially--all the
> things they were against, even though he was actually a centrist. But
> the big thing was that he was in power and they were out. The cycle
> is repeating for Obama. He's also a centrist, but they've got
> themselves so worked up and believe he's a far left extremist.
>
> But this is nothing new. After the narrow loss in 1948, the 'right'
> hated Harry Truman--mostly because he was in and they were out. They
> felt a sense of entitlement to be in despite being in the minority.
> They invented the communist witchhunts as a way of subverting the
> Democrats, and managed to get a lot of good people out of office.
> Ironically, their smear campaign backfired and hit them too.
>
> I wonder what would've happened to say an EAM employee in a large
> corporation if they were 'named' as a communist. My guess is that it
> probably wouldn't matter for a low level employee, but a manager might
> lose his job without any appeal or recourse.
>
> Also, in the early 1960s when the corporate world was still rather
> conservative, I wonder how an entry-level programmer would be screened
> for a job--would a prospective employer only check out his technical
> credentials, or also check out his overall college experience for
> unapproved activities, church affilation, etc?
The short story is that they were so desperately
short of programmers that they weren't that stupid.
Even hippys had no problem getting a job and I know
one who always rocked up at DECUS wearing what
we call thongs and you barbarians call flip flops, right
thru the winter.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29340 is a reply to message #29333] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:22 |
Patrick Scheible
Messages: 768
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
> re:
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#30 Search Google, 1960:s-style
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#34 Search Google, 1960:s-style
>
> there are multiple ways of doing the comparison, like top tax bracket
> versus effective corporate tax collected versus corporate taxes as
> percent of total tax collected versus corporate taxes as percent of GDP
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_Sta tes
>
> above has comparison of corporate tax collected by country sliced &
> diced in several ways.
>
> part of the reason that congress is called most corrupt institution on
> earth is the amount of money they've received for 70,000+ page tax code
> with enormous loopholes. the current speaker of the house at the start
> of the last new congress ... made some statements about the most prized
> committee appointments were on committee dealing with the tax code ...
> because they became the recipients of the largest amounts of money from
> special interests. part of "Kabuki theater" is nobody in congress really
> wants the tax code fixed ... because that would stop the enormous
> amounts of money flowing into their pockets. there are claims that the
> largest business ROI is money spent on congress for tax loopholes
> ... the ROI can be thousands of times more than they have to pay for the
> loopholes. The appearance of conflict with strong opposing sides to the
> tax issues can enorously increase the funds flowing into congressional
> pockets.
Generally agreed, but there are plenty of members of Congress who resent
the amount of money they must raise for their reelection campaigns. The
money doesn't go to them personally, that would be illegal, it's just
what they have to raise if they want to get reelected or elected to
another office. Their opponents certainly will.
Maybe if conflict of interest rules were strengthened to prohibit voting
on any issue that was championed by one of their donors.
Or if congressional districts were smaller, so campaigning could be done
person to person instead of by expensive media ads.
-- Patrick
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29341 is a reply to message #29336] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:22 |
Patrick Scheible
Messages: 768
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JimP. <pongbill127@cableone.net> writes:
> On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:48:27 +0000 (UTC), Alfred Falk
> <falk@arc.REMOVE.ab.ca> wrote:
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in
>> news:20121215062624.a4f3a1b41c9d38a782332cb3@eircom.net:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 18:02:59 -0600
>>> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> But I think consumer taste may be different in Europe/North America,
>>>> NA has favored big top loaders with a spin cycle and separate
>>>> hot/cold water inputs (no built-in heater) that drain to a standpipe.
>>>> From our last discussion on this topic, it seemed like that did
>>>> _not_ describe the typical Euro or Oz washer.
>>>
>>> Correct, European washers went front loader a long time ago
>>> (1960s), hot and cold feed was normal up until a decade or so ago when
>>> cold only became normal. They do have spin cycles and drain to a
>>> standpipe.
>>
>> 25 years ago I had some British visitors that commented on the
>> primitiveness of my top-loading washer. I subsequently saw theirs and
>> understood.
>>
>> Top-loaders are approching extinction in Canada. (Replaced old Kenmore
>> [Whirlpool] model with Korean-made front-loader 5 years ago.) I just had
>> a quick look at homedepot.com. There seems to be a lot higher proportion
>> of top-loaders than on on homedepot.ca.
>
> I prefer top loaders and that is what bought when I needed a clothes
> washer. Dish washer, came with my place, is a front loader.
I've never seen a top loader dishwasher :)
-- Patrick
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29342 is a reply to message #29337] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:34 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"JimP." <pongbill127@cableone.net> wrote in message
news:f7m1d85cg6chvpi4ifngmeueqs14ojp9u2@4ax.com...
> On 17 Dec 2012 18:55:38 GMT, greymausg@mail.com wrote:
>> On 2012-12-17, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/17/2012 9:34 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> > On Dec 16, 10:43 am, jmfbahciv <See.ab...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>> Human nature being what it is, a workforce needs _both_ enforcers
>>>> >>> and
>>>> >>> incentives. One or the other alone won't do it, despite ideological
>>>> >>> claims.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 4 for each worker?? That's paying 5 people to do one job and doesn't
>>>> >> include any of the management.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Where do you get "4 for each worker???
>>>>
>>>> Form the white paper I read about North Korea. It's packed away so
>>>> I can't give you the book's specs.
>>>
>>> One has to suspect that counts all the soldiers in the army vs. all
>>> the farmers, not soldiers actually standing there watching the
>>> farmers. Which, even though North Korea has an enormous army for its
>>> size, probably isn't that different a ratio from the US, if you count
>>> all our mercenaries, military contractors, and "contractors" as
>>> soldiers (North Korea hasn't discovered "outsourcing" yet).
>>>
>>
>> hey, maybe they would hire out surplus soldiers to the US..
>> Catch 22?,.. I believe crazier things are happening in Afganistan.
>
> I was watching CNN this past weekend. They were talking to an escapee
> from North Korea. He said he was born in a prison camp; with factory,
> famrland, mines, stores. His parents had to win the right to marry and
> have a child. Ayone trying to escape was shot, if you didn't report
> someone who was plotting to escape, you were shot, etc. He didn't know
> life was different until someone was put in the camp who had lived in
> a North Korean city before the camp. So evidently, the military there
> just guarded the fence and shot people trying to escape.
The absolute vast bulk of north koreans arent in the prison camps.
Likely there are a higher percentage of non whites in prisons in the US
than in north korea.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29343 is a reply to message #29340] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 16:37 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Patrick Scheible" <kkt@zipcon.net> wrote in message
news:86licvkqd4.fsf@zipcon.net...
> Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
>
>> re:
>> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#30 Search Google, 1960:s-style
>> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#34 Search Google, 1960:s-style
>>
>> there are multiple ways of doing the comparison, like top tax bracket
>> versus effective corporate tax collected versus corporate taxes as
>> percent of total tax collected versus corporate taxes as percent of GDP
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_Sta tes
>>
>> above has comparison of corporate tax collected by country sliced &
>> diced in several ways.
>>
>> part of the reason that congress is called most corrupt institution on
>> earth is the amount of money they've received for 70,000+ page tax code
>> with enormous loopholes. the current speaker of the house at the start
>> of the last new congress ... made some statements about the most prized
>> committee appointments were on committee dealing with the tax code ...
>> because they became the recipients of the largest amounts of money from
>> special interests. part of "Kabuki theater" is nobody in congress really
>> wants the tax code fixed ... because that would stop the enormous
>> amounts of money flowing into their pockets. there are claims that the
>> largest business ROI is money spent on congress for tax loopholes
>> ... the ROI can be thousands of times more than they have to pay for the
>> loopholes. The appearance of conflict with strong opposing sides to the
>> tax issues can enorously increase the funds flowing into congressional
>> pockets.
>
> Generally agreed, but there are plenty of members of Congress who resent
> the amount of money they must raise for their reelection campaigns. The
> money doesn't go to them personally, that would be illegal, it's just
> what they have to raise if they want to get reelected or elected to
> another office. Their opponents certainly will.
> Maybe if conflict of interest rules were strengthened to prohibit
> voting on any issue that was championed by one of their donors.
That wouldn’t work, it would be too easy to donate
to someone who opposed your interests so they
couldn’t vote.
> Or if congressional districts were smaller,
That’s the way the british do it. Doesn’t make any significant difference.
> so campaigning could be done person to person
We're never going to see that again.
> instead of by expensive media ads.
That will always be the way its done now that its possible,
essentially because most of the voters do watch the media.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29348 is a reply to message #29340] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 17:21 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> writes:
> Generally agreed, but there are plenty of members of Congress who resent
> the amount of money they must raise for their reelection campaigns. The
> money doesn't go to them personally, that would be illegal, it's just
> what they have to raise if they want to get reelected or elected to
> another office. Their opponents certainly will.
>
> Maybe if conflict of interest rules were strengthened to prohibit voting
> on any issue that was championed by one of their donors.
>
> Or if congressional districts were smaller, so campaigning could be done
> person to person instead of by expensive media ads.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#30 Search Google, 1960:s-style
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#34 Search Google, 1960:s-style
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#35 Search Google, 1960:s-style
or if they cared about re-ellection ... recent post over in facebook
about "spending being the problem" ... that showed graph out to 2040
(but w/o very fine break-out; aka current majority party in the house
was responsible for part-d, and now complaining about the "entitlement"
programs ... but by far the most egregious and enormous of the
entitlement programs is the long term $40T part-d unfunded mandate that
they passed in 2003, which comes to swamp all other budget items):
CBO reported that tax revenues were decreased by $6T last decade
(compared to baseline, which had all federal debt retired by 2010) and
spending increased by $6T last decade (compared to baseline) for $12T
budget gap, momentum of which continues today. This happened after
congress allowed fiscal responsibility act to expire in 2002 (required
spending to match revenue). The first major legislation was medicare
part-D in 2003 ... which comptroller general characterized as unfunded
mandate that long term comes to be $40T, totally swamping all other
budget items (afterwards the comptroller general would include in
speeches that nobody in congress was capable of middle school arithmetic
for medicare part-d and other things they were doing to the budget). CBS
60mins did segment on the behind the scenes that were done to get
medicare part-d passed ... including inserting a sentence at the last
minute that prevented competitive bidding and they also prevented CBO
from distributing report on the effect of that sentence until after the
vote. 60mins showed side-by-side drugs, part-d was three times the price
of identical drugs from VA (that allows competitive bidding). 60mins
also followed the 18people from the party in power responsible for
getting part-d passed ... afterwards all had resigned and were on drug
industry payrolls
.... snip ...
also there was recent item about colbert and super-pac money
http://www.colbertsuperpac.com/
.... there is apparently a way to launder the money in such a way that it
doesn't have to be reported.
http://ivn.us/editors-blog/2012/12/18/colbert-super-pac-dona tes-over-700000-to-charity/
from above:
The donation, originating from P.O. Box "Bite Me," highlights the ease
with which extremely large sums of untraceable cash can change hands
with little to no oversight or regulation.
.... snip ...
past posts mentioning part-d:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010c.html#0 Oldest Instruction Set still in daily use?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010c.html#3 Oldest Instruction Set still in daily use?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010c.html#9 Oldest Instruction Set still in daily use?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010f.html#34 The 2010 Census
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010f.html#35 The 2010 Census
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010f.html#46 not even sort of about The 2010 Census
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010o.html#66 They always think we don't understand
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010o.html#75 origin of 'fields'?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010o.html#78 origin of 'fields'?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011g.html#72 77,000 federal workers paid more than governors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#14 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#20 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#28 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#29 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#33 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#37 Happy 100th Birthday, IBM!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011j.html#40 Advice from Richard P. Feynman
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011l.html#59 computer bootlaces
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#57 The Mortgage Crisis---Some Inside Views
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#42 Speed: Re: Soups
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011o.html#73 How Pursuit of Profits Kills Innovation and the U.S. Economy
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011p.html#136 Gingrich urged yes vote on controversial Medicare bill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011p.html#137 The High Cost of Failing Artificial Hips
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#6 We are on the brink of a historic decision [referring to defence cuts]
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012d.html#36 McCain calls for U.S.-led airstrikes in Syria
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#40 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#61 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012h.html#68 Interesting News Article
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#0 Interesting News Article
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#41 Lawmakers reworked financial portfolios after talks with Fed, Treasury officials
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#51 Is this Boyd's fundamental postulate, 'to improve our capacity for independent action'? thoughts please
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#63 Monopoly/ Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#81 Should the IBM approach be given a chance to fix the health care system?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#37 If all of the American earned dollars hidden in off shore accounts were uncovered and taxed do you think we would be able to close the deficit gap?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#74 Unthinkable, Predictable Disasters
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#79 Romney and Ryan's Phony Deficit-Reduction Plan
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012l.html#85 Singer Cartons of Punch Cards
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#33 General Mills computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#38 General Mills computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#71 General Mills computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#0 General Mills computer
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29349 is a reply to message #29281] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 17:34 |
Andrew Swallow
Messages: 1705
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 18/12/2012 16:55, greymausg@mail.com wrote:
{snip}
>
> More recently than that, the natives on Diego Suarez in the Indian Ocean
> claim that they were rounded up by the British and dumped, in Mauritious,
> with no compensation, the Island being developed as a bomber base for the
> Iraqi and Afganistan Wars. Wikipedia seems to have no refence to that,
> but a court case is being persued.
>
>
The British and US Governments will spend more money not compensating
the people than the value of the compensation. They will also have to
suffer lots of bad publicity. There are good reasons for Compulsory
Purchase system.
Andrew Swallow
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29357 is a reply to message #29349] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 17:55 |
GreyMaus
Messages: 422
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2012-12-18, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 18/12/2012 16:55, greymausg@mail.com wrote:
> {snip}
>
>>
>> More recently than that, the natives on Diego Suarez in the Indian Ocean
>> claim that they were rounded up by the British and dumped, in Mauritious,
>> with no compensation, the Island being developed as a bomber base for the
>> Iraqi and Afganistan Wars. Wikipedia seems to have no refence to that,
>> but a court case is being persued.
>>
>>
> The British and US Governments will spend more money not compensating
> the people than the value of the compensation. They will also have to
> suffer lots of bad publicity. There are good reasons for Compulsory
> Purchase system.
>
> Andrew Swallow
Actually, on rechecking, Wikipedia has a good bit on Diego Suarez (not
the gardener)
--
maus
.
.
....
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29359 is a reply to message #29347] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 18:27 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 12/18/2012 2:23 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <kao8oe$24g$2@dont-email.me>, on 12/17/2012
> at 06:16 PM, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> said:
>
>> The Antonine rule was pretty benign, maybe not as idyllic as
>> Gibbon portrays it, but it was remembered as a golden age.
>
> By whom? It may have been a golden age for residents of Rome, but it
> certainly wasn't for the conquered provinces.
>
It was better than what came before or after. There was peace, mostly.
Trajan conquered Arabia but Hadrian gave it up. Until the Dacian wars
there were no major conflicts, only border skirmishes. In most
provinces it appeared the economy was flourishing. There was a major
spurt of activity building amenities in the provinces - aqueducts,
baths, amphitheaters, temples. Before you had Domitian, though he was
just a blip between Nero and Nerva. After you got Caracalla and disaster.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29362 is a reply to message #29289] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 20:06 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <828.770T465T5743518@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> In article <icpq2819qp.fsf@home.home>, despen@verizon.net (Dan Espen)
> writes:
>
>> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> Microsloth is going crazy trying to move the cr@p. They're not
>>> only advertising the heck out of windoze 8, they've done product
>>> placement to get the "surface" on just about every show on TV.
>>
>> I've seen those ads.
>
> And they're not just on TV - they're also part of the pre-movie ads
> that you sit through at the local cinema.
>
>> Is it me or does the product look like crap?
>
> It's a continuation of the Fisher-Price look that started with XP.
If a product has to be advertised that much, it's most likely crap
from the getgo.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29364 is a reply to message #29313] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 20:11 |
Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <kaqeen$75m$1@dont-email.me>,
Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 9:39 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>>> In <PM0004D10DB0CDEE1A@ac812cc2.ipt.aol.com>, on 12/17/2012
>>> at 03:34 PM, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> said:
>>>
>>>> Do you remember when the USSR sent its soldiers out to harvest
>>>> potatoes?
>>>
>>> How does that conflict with their system being state capitalism?
>>>
>>>> The books I read talked about the collectives not working a long
>>>> day;
>>>
>>> Are you talking about a real collective, owned by the workers,
>>
>> Kibbutz (I couldn't remember the word yesterday).
>>
>>> or a
>>> state run farm where the workers are coolies? Where and what year.
>>
>> The books were about Israel and its history.
>>
>>> Are
>>> you comparing them to single family farms in the same location and
>>> year?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> Or are you saying, e.g., that there is a longer work day on a
>>> moshave than on a nearby kibbutz?
>>
>> No, I'm saying that an owner has more incentive to work longer hours
>> than those who work under a collective org. A collective would have
>> to post work details and hours. The first thing you hear is someone
>> complaining about someone else not having to do the messiest work.
>> An owner just does the labor until the job is done. There are no
>> hours scheduled by a manager nor days off nor obligatory coffee
>> breaks.
>>
>>>
>>> If you're talking about soviet "collective" farms, the operative
>>> expression is "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work."
>>>
>>
>> That's an organization which has completely self-destructed. If
>> those people owned their own pieces of that farming area, they
>> would have more self-interest in success. For those people
>> who didn't care about doing the work, they would sell the land
>> to someone who did have an interest.
>>
>> Bottom line is that the land is productive and not lying fallow
>> or worse.
>>
>
> In his soul every Russian is a farmer, or something like that.
The Communist killed off most of the people who weren't.
> National
> Geographic recently had an article about a dacha community - vacation
> homes of city people - north of Moscow. In the photos you could see
> that the "back yards" were almost all vegetable plots. A few grew
> flowers and no one had a lawn.
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29365 is a reply to message #29362] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 20:13 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message
news:proto-7F2434.20065318122012@news.panix.com...
> In article <828.770T465T5743518@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In article <icpq2819qp.fsf@home.home>, despen@verizon.net (Dan Espen)
>> writes:
>>
>>> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Microsloth is going crazy trying to move the cr@p. They're not
>>>> only advertising the heck out of windoze 8, they've done product
>>>> placement to get the "surface" on just about every show on TV.
>>>
>>> I've seen those ads.
>>
>> And they're not just on TV - they're also part of the pre-movie ads
>> that you sit through at the local cinema.
>>
>>> Is it me or does the product look like crap?
>>
>> It's a continuation of the Fisher-Price look that started with XP.
>
> If a product has to be advertised that much, it's most likely crap
> from the getgo.
Mindlessly silly. When the main alternatives have been
out there for quite a while now, it does make sense to
advertise that you have got your alternative available
now for those who don’t keep up with whats available.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29379 is a reply to message #29342] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 20:46 |
Howard S Shubs
Messages: 81
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
In article <ajc5saF9aqiU1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> The absolute vast bulk of north koreans arent in the prison camps.
>
> Likely there are a higher percentage of non whites in prisons in the US
> than in north korea.
Nothing quite like being an apologist for the NK communist regime, huh?
--
May joy be yours all the days of your life! - Phina
We are but a moment's sunlight, fading in the grass. - The Youngbloods
Those who eat natural foods die of natural causes. - Kperspective
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29381 is a reply to message #29379] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 21:16 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> The absolute vast bulk of north koreans arent in the prison camps.
>> Likely there are a higher percentage of non whites
>> in prisons in the US than in north korea.
> Nothing quite like being an apologist for the NK communist regime, huh?
Just rubbing his nose in the basics.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29386 is a reply to message #29313] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 23:24 |
Dave Garland
Messages: 270
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 12/18/2012 1:06 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> In his soul every Russian is a farmer, or something like that.
> National Geographic recently had an article about a dacha community -
> vacation homes of city people - north of Moscow. In the photos you
> could see that the "back yards" were almost all vegetable plots. A
> few grew flowers and no one had a lawn.
>
IIRC, lawns are imitations of the groundkeeping of English (or at
least European) estates. Wikipedia says they date from the 16th c.
Do other cultures independently have the concept of a lawn being
desirable?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29387 is a reply to message #29321] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 23:45 |
Dave Garland
Messages: 270
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 12/18/2012 1:29 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US
> business taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
But US personal taxes are lower than most other developed countries.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29390 is a reply to message #29387] |
Tue, 18 December 2012 23:59 |
Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote
> Peter Flass wrote
>> I have head it said several times by non-partisan sources that US
>> business taxes are higher than most other developed countries.
> But US personal taxes are lower than most other developed countries.
And he lied about business taxes actually paid too.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29395 is a reply to message #29380] |
Wed, 19 December 2012 03:55 |
GreyMaus
Messages: 422
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2012-12-19, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>
>> In article <icobhrxlaw.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> How can something be Communist
>>> and Nazi at the same time?
>>
>> The same way one can be a Communist and an Islamacist.
>
> Except that in the first case, there is a contradiction.
>
Not really. Just political rant. I was reading recently, an account of the
war by a confirmed Nazi, he blamed the bomb attempt on Hitler on the old
upper class in the Army. The `hard' Nazis were very antiestablishment.
Take the salient points, state control, media control, evening out of
educational rights, there was very little difference. In the War in Russia,
there was less difference in pay or oppertunity in the German Army than the
Russian, which was largely based on the old Czarist model, with the addition
of political officers.
--
maus
.
.
....
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29396 is a reply to message #29386] |
Wed, 19 December 2012 04:55 |
GreyMaus
Messages: 422
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2012-12-19, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 1:06 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> In his soul every Russian is a farmer, or something like that.
>> National Geographic recently had an article about a dacha community -
>> vacation homes of city people - north of Moscow. In the photos you
>> could see that the "back yards" were almost all vegetable plots. A
>> few grew flowers and no one had a lawn.
>>
>
> IIRC, lawns are imitations of the groundkeeping of English (or at
> least European) estates. Wikipedia says they date from the 16th c.
> Do other cultures independently have the concept of a lawn being
> desirable?
>
Where grass lawns are possible, which for a lot of regions they are
not, or very hard to maintain. Japanese equivelent would be those
pebbly areas.
--
maus
.
.
....
|
|
|
|
| Re: Search Google, 1960:s-style [message #29397 is a reply to message #29359] |
Wed, 19 December 2012 04:55 |
GreyMaus
Messages: 422
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2012-12-18, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 2:23 PM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>> In <kao8oe$24g$2@dont-email.me>, on 12/17/2012
>> at 06:16 PM, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> said:
>>
>>> The Antonine rule was pretty benign, maybe not as idyllic as
>>> Gibbon portrays it, but it was remembered as a golden age.
>>
>> By whom? It may have been a golden age for residents of Rome, but it
>> certainly wasn't for the conquered provinces.
>>
>
> It was better than what came before or after. There was peace, mostly.
> Trajan conquered Arabia but Hadrian gave it up. Until the Dacian wars
> there were no major conflicts, only border skirmishes. In most
> provinces it appeared the economy was flourishing. There was a major
> spurt of activity building amenities in the provinces - aqueducts,
> baths, amphitheaters, temples. Before you had Domitian, though he was
> just a blip between Nero and Nerva. After you got Caracalla and disaster.
>
After the Republican Wars, their society was largely based on slavery,
on an established elite. This concept has blighted the countries based
on Roman ideas, Spain, Italy, and France, ever since. The idea of less rich
men being the basis of society, which is a legace of Viking or Saxon society,
is a better idea, even now, as shown by remarks here about small business.
--
maus
.
.
....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
