 | | | | | |
Hi,
Has anyone made a Ldraw part for a cannon?
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
De Bengel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has anyone made a Ldraw part for a cannon?
>
> ____
> |oooo| Cheers,
> |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
> ¯¯¯¯
I have a shooting cannon in my to-render-bucket, but unfortunately, it
has low priority.
Also, at the Tracked Parts List at
http://www3.hmc.edu/~zbenz/parttracker/partlist.shtml it says:
3 Cannon Zach Coakley Planning to Work On 1/7/98
I'll never learn if that means January 7th or July 1st, but anyhow if
it's the same cannon, it's been on more to-do-lists for several months
now... (Of course I think the Swedish system is best [yy]yy-mm-dd. It
also makes it easy for computers to sort. Aren't we heading towards
total confusion in the year 2001? But that's a new thread to start... ;)
)
/Tore
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tore Eriksson <tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> wrote:
> 1/7/98
> I'll never learn if that means January 7th or July 1st, but anyhow if
> it's the same cannon, it's been on more to-do-lists for several months
> now... (Of course I think the Swedish system is best [yy]yy-mm-dd. It
> also makes it easy for computers to sort. Aren't we heading towards
> total confusion in the year 2001? But that's a new thread to start... ;)
Actually, I always peferred the date format [D]D-MMM-[CC]YY as in 6-NOV-98
or 06-NOV-1998.
At work we have to use [CC]YYMMDD so that things sort properly.
Gary
GaryLouie@EarthLink.Net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Fri, 6 Nov 1998 22:53:47 GMT, Tore Eriksson
<tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> wrote:
> Also, at the Tracked Parts List at
> http://www3.hmc.edu/~zbenz/parttracker/partlist.shtml it says:
> 3 Cannon Zach Coakley Planning to Work On 1/7/98
Thanks for that link. I'll keep checking it.
I'm amazed at how many parts there are already.
Still, found another one not in the recent parts zip: A large
round-top door, like the one you find in Ford Legoredo.
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Once upon a time, wvw@earthlink.net (De Bengel) wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 1998 22:53:47 GMT, Tore Eriksson
> <tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> wrote:
> > Also, at the Tracked Parts List at
> > http://www3.hmc.edu/~zbenz/parttracker/partlist.shtml it says:
> > 3 Cannon Zach Coakley Planning to Work On 1/7/98
>
> Thanks for that link. I'll keep checking it.
> I'm amazed at how many parts there are already.
> Still, found another one not in the recent parts zip: A large
> round-top door, like the one you find in Ford Legoredo.
I believe that one is on the list:
2400 Door 1x5x10 1/4 Circle Curved Top Adam B. Howard In Progress
9/10/98
Steve
(who just today cleaned up his entries in the L-Draw Parts Tracker)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:50:53 GMT, blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve
Bliss) wrote:
> I believe that one is on the list:
>
> 2400 Door 1x5x10 1/4 Circle Curved Top Adam B. Howard In Progress
> 9/10/98
Great! I used it in my poor-mans ninja house.
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:50:53 GMT, blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve
Bliss) wrote:
> Once upon a time, wvw@earthlink.net (De Bengel) wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 6 Nov 1998 22:53:47 GMT, Tore Eriksson
> > <tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> wrote:
> > > Also, at the Tracked Parts List at
> > > http://www3.hmc.edu/~zbenz/parttracker/partlist.shtml it says:
> > > 3 Cannon Zach Coakley Planning to Work On 1/7/98
> >
> > Thanks for that link. I'll keep checking it.
> > I'm amazed at how many parts there are already.
> > Still, found another one not in the recent parts zip: A large
> > round-top door, like the one you find in Ford Legoredo.
>
> I believe that one is on the list:
>
> 2400 Door 1x5x10 1/4 Circle Curved Top Adam B. Howard In Progress
> 9/10/98
Yes, those doors were done. They had some significant dimension
problems which caused the author to pull them from voting.
I expect them to be resubmitted soon.
-- Terry K --
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Fri, 6 Nov 1998 22:53:47 GMT, Tore Eriksson
<tore.eriksson@mbox325.swipnet.se> wrote:
> (Of course I think the Swedish system is best [yy]yy-mm-dd. It
> also makes it easy for computers to sort. Aren't we heading towards
> total confusion in the year 2001? But that's a new thread to start... ;)
I like that system. Never knew that it was a official system in
certain countries. It's what I use on PC's though. I'm dutch and we
use dd/mm/yy, which works a little bit. At least it is a sequence. Now
that I live in the States, I'm starting to get used to their system.
It's not easy, but I'll get there.
Another 'strangeness' that always gets me is the way they write
addresses down here. I live at 3510 Sahalee Drive. In Holland we would
say: Sahalee Drive 3510. For me, that makes more sense, you first find
the street, and then you look for the number.
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
De Bengel <wvw@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Another 'strangeness' that always gets me is the way they write
> addresses down here. I live at 3510 Sahalee Drive. In Holland we would
> say: Sahalee Drive 3510. For me, that makes more sense, you first find
> the street, and then you look for the number.
Yes well how about:
1558 Mass Ave #41
Meaning:
Street: Mass Ave
Address: 1558
Apartment: 41
Fits in well with the mm/dd/yy thing, don't you think?
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote
> Yes well how about:
>
> 1558 Mass Ave #41
>
> Meaning:
>
> Street: Mass Ave
> Address: 1558
> Apartment: 41
It's the numbers that get me. I'm prepared to believe that somewhere in
Nuke Freeland there's a street where the numbers get to 1000, but I
haven't seen it. And 41 apartments? Are you nuts - that would be a
hospital or something. Even the council flats across the road only have
about 30 apartments in each building.
Moz
(NZ: where we use "dd/mm/yyyy" and "apt/num Street", but have trouble
with the mandatory "state" field in addresses online)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
>
> It's the numbers that get me. I'm prepared to believe that somewhere in
> Nuke Freeland there's a street where the numbers get to 1000, but I
> haven't seen it. And 41 apartments? Are you nuts - that would be a
> hospital or something. Even the council flats across the road only have
> about 30 apartments in each building.
Hey, In my country apartment buildings where people live can have more than
100 apartments, in big cities. Just think about a 20 storey building with 6
or more apartments on each storey.
Selçuk
> Moz
> (NZ: where we use "dd/mm/yyyy" and "apt/num Street", but have trouble
> with the mandatory "state" field in addresses online)
hey, dd/mm/yyyy is also same as our format, and yes, we have no states,
too..:-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Selçuk <sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> Hey, In my country apartment buildings where people live can have more than
> 100 apartments, in big cities. Just think about a 20 storey building with 6
> or more apartments on each storey.
*shudder*
I couldn't imagine living 20 stories off the ground. In fact, when I
went to Comdex last spring I almost slept in the van because our hotel
room was on the 20-something-th floor. :/
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> "Selçuk <sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> > Hey, In my country apartment buildings where people live can have more than
> > 100 apartments, in big cities. Just think about a 20 storey building with 6
> > or more apartments on each storey.
>
> *shudder*
>
> I couldn't imagine living 20 stories off the ground. In fact, when I
> went to Comdex last spring I almost slept in the van because our hotel
> room was on the 20-something-th floor. :/
Uhm, I frequently watch your way of "home"s (those one storey large houses with
garages, sitting in the middle of a large grass garden) from Hollywwod pieces of
junk, and yes, it is just very nice. But living in a city like Istanbul (with a
population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much high but
generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
(generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring price. I
fyou want to live in a independent home like the ones in US, either you must be
very rich, or very poor (for some hand build disgusting type of "independent"
barracks located generally at the far suburbs, having no proper utility)
Hey, we are all third worlders, don't you know..:-)
Selçuk
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Selçuk <sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> Uhm, I frequently watch your way of "home"s (those one storey large houses with
> garages, sitting in the middle of a large grass garden) from Hollywwod pieces of
> junk, and yes, it is just very nice. But living in a city like Istanbul (with a
> population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much high but
> generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
> (generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring price. I
> fyou want to live in a independent home like the ones in US, either you must be
> very rich, or very poor (for some hand build disgusting type of "independent"
> barracks located generally at the far suburbs, having no proper utility)
Wow, that really sucks. We don't own a home yet but plan on buying
within the next few years. We'll never willingly choose to live in a
huge city, although I would like to live close enough to one to make
use of the amenities.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Wow, that really sucks. We don't own a home yet but plan on buying
> within the next few years. We'll never willingly choose to live in a
> huge city, although I would like to live close enough to one to make
> use of the amenities.
I assume you are waiting for Target to branch out into real estate,
so that you can get it for 30% off in a post-Christmas sale?????? :o)
(You are a self-confessed cheap bastard, your words, not mine!)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Richard Dee <richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net> wrote:
> > Wow, that really sucks. We don't own a home yet but plan on buying
> > within the next few years. We'll never willingly choose to live in a
> > huge city, although I would like to live close enough to one to make
> > use of the amenities.
>
> I assume you are waiting for Target to branch out into real estate,
> so that you can get it for 30% off in a post-Christmas sale?????? :o)
>
> (You are a self-confessed cheap bastard, your words, not mine!)
Pshaw. 30%? I'll pass and wait for 70% off.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 23:45:13 GMT, "Selçuk <teyyareci>"
<sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> Uhm, I frequently watch your way of "home"s (those one storey large houses with
> garages, sitting in the middle of a large grass garden) from Hollywwod pieces of
> junk, and yes, it is just very nice. But living in a city like Istanbul (with a
> population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much high but
> generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
> (generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring price. I
ObSomething: You get 100 m2 at a reasonable price? wow. We only get at
most 20 m2 affordable.... and then you have a spacy apartment/room :)
And our entire country only seats 16 mil, over an area, which I
_think_ is slightly larger than Istanbul (400 * 600 km, or something
like that)
Anyway... this is an off-topic ng, so I just thought I'd do my bit :)
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> > population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much • high but
> > generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
> > (generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring • price. I
>
> ObSomething: You get 100 m2 at a reasonable price? wow. We only get at
> most 20 m2 affordable.... and then you have a spacy apartment/room :)
Affordable at least considering the larger ones having three regular rooms
+ a larger living room (90-100 m2 ones having only 2 rooms + a living room).
By the way, me and my wife are both engineers, earning above avarage, to
vmake it clear the word 'affordable' much ..:-(
When I was a student, only affordible thing was only one room of an again
100m2 apartment, which I shared with two other guys..:-)
> And our entire country only seats 16 mil, over an area, which I
> _think_ is slightly larger than Istanbul (400 * 600 km, or something
> like that)
Uhm,.. did you see the film Water World?..:-D Sorry, I can't stand.
Selçuk
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998 08:21:56 GMT, "Selçuk <teyyareci>"
<sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> Uhm,.. did you see the film Water World?..:-D Sorry, I can't stand.
errr Well, I think I started once, anyway. It was a bit boring tho,
especially on a simple TV. And color me stupid, but I don't think I
get the reference :P
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <36666ec3.58183035@lugnet.com>...
> errr Well, I think I started once, anyway. It was a bit boring tho,
> especially on a simple TV. And color me stupid, but I don't think I
> get the reference :P
What colour is that? I imagine it a sort of pasty green colour, like
translucent slime without the highlights. But I could be wrong.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998 18:48:59 GMT, "Moz (Chris Moseley)"
<moz1@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> Jasper Janssen wrote in message <36666ec3.58183035@lugnet.com>...
> > errr Well, I think I started once, anyway. It was a bit boring tho,
> > especially on a simple TV. And color me stupid, but I don't think I
> > get the reference :P
>
>
> What colour is that? I imagine it a sort of pasty green colour, like
> translucent slime without the highlights. But I could be wrong.
Something like that.
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I visited an ex-pat family on the east side of Istanbul a few years ago.
The husband worked for an oil firm.
The flat was <I><very bloody big> palatial </very bloody big></I>.
I don't know the exact square metreage, but it was comparable to
lobby areas of large, city skyscrapers. One of the waiting rooms had
the same floor space as my entire house.
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
Selçuk wrote in message ...
>
> > > population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much • high but
> > > generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
> > > (generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring • price. I
> >
>
> > ObSomething: You get 100 m2 at a reasonable price? wow. We only get at
> > most 20 m2 affordable.... and then you have a spacy apartment/room :)
>
> Affordable at least considering the larger ones having three regular rooms
> + a larger living room (90-100 m2 ones having only 2 rooms + a living • room).
> By the way, me and my wife are both engineers, earning above avarage, to
> vmake it clear the word 'affordable' much ..:-(
>
> When I was a student, only affordible thing was only one room of an again
> 100m2 apartment, which I shared with two other guys..:-)
>
> > And our entire country only seats 16 mil, over an area, which I
> > _think_ is slightly larger than Istanbul (400 * 600 km, or something
> > like that)
>
>
> Uhm,.. did you see the film Water World?..:-D Sorry, I can't stand.
>
> Selçuk
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
The best earners in Turkey, who are working for sombady else (I mean payed to
work for, not having own private job), are foreign workers of foreign companies.
They are generally payed with foreign currency.
We have very high (80-100% annual) inflation rates, and foreign currency always
getting value simply more rapidly, wrt. Turkish Lira (300 000 TL=1 $ right now).
This situation results in continiously decreased purchasing power for natives,
together with not enough (always less than the inflation rate) yearly/six
monthly increases in salaries, although prchasing power of foreign currency
steadily increases. This means, if you payed with US Dollars (or something like)
in Turkey, Every morning you wake up, you are richer than the yesterday.
I don't need to mention low living standards in Turkey, which is another cause.
If you are a foreigner, you would be payed with at least in the scale of your
native country by your company, and generally even more of it, since yuo are
working in a third worlder, undeveloped, and virtually dangereous (to own
standards(1) country. This makes a very big difference. As far as I know, the
lowest legal bid that could be payed to a worker for a month is around 2200$ in
US, but it is (read my lips) around '120$' in Turkey. As another example, me and
my wife are both engineers, well earning to Turkish standards, and our total
monthly sallary is 510 million TL which is exactly 1700$. So, as you already
guessed, living in Turkey is far much cheaper than you get used to. Imagine
living here with a sallary of higher tahn the standard sallaries in your
homeland...Heaven?..:-)
That is why there are football stadium like flats (2), and why I can't live in
one..:-D (3)
regards,
Selçuk
-------------------------------------------------------
(1) Actually, in universal standards:
Number of Traffic Accidents in one year:
near 350 000
Number of people killed in these acccidents:
more than 6000
(2) Not exactly a true sentence, I just liked but saying so..:-)
(3) My flat is a 110m2 type, 10m2 is a balcony, and total
60m2 of rooms (a bedroom, a living room, and a computer
/hobby room(4) and 40m2 of other utilities, like bath,
entrance, kitchen, wc.
(4) As you guessed, this one is also my(5) lego room,
and is only 4.20x4.20 meters. (three book cases, one
computer table, one study table, two computers with
a scanner and printer, painting and sculpturing thingies
of my wife...and more than 20 000 pieces of Legos :-D
(5) I wish I could say 'our' but my wife still watching legos
from far..:-(
Richard Dee wrote:
>
> I visited an ex-pat family on the east side of Istanbul a few years ago.
> The husband worked for an oil firm.
> The flat was <I><very bloody big> palatial </very bloody big></I>.
> I don't know the exact square metreage, but it was comparable to
> lobby areas of large, city skyscrapers. One of the waiting rooms had
> the same floor space as my entire house.
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
> Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
> AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
> _____________________________________________________________
> For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
> Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
> _____________________________________________________________
> Selçuk wrote in message ...
> >
> > > > population of more than 12 million) requires this. Not always this much • high but
> > > > generally at least 6 storeys. And always smaller than what you require
> > > > (generally 90-100 m2) if you don't want yo pay tremendous amount hiring • price. I
> > >
> >
> > > ObSomething: You get 100 m2 at a reasonable price? wow. We only get at
> > > most 20 m2 affordable.... and then you have a spacy apartment/room :)
> >
> > Affordable at least considering the larger ones having three regular rooms
> > + a larger living room (90-100 m2 ones having only 2 rooms + a living • room).
> > By the way, me and my wife are both engineers, earning above avarage, to
> > vmake it clear the word 'affordable' much ..:-(
> >
> > When I was a student, only affordible thing was only one room of an again
> > 100m2 apartment, which I shared with two other guys..:-)
> >
> > > And our entire country only seats 16 mil, over an area, which I
> > > _think_ is slightly larger than Istanbul (400 * 600 km, or something
> > > like that)
> >
> >
> > Uhm,.. did you see the film Water World?..:-D Sorry, I can't stand.
> >
> > Selçuk
> >
> >
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 00:55:13 GMT, "Selçuk <teyyareci>"
<sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> standards(1) country. This makes a very big difference. As far as I know, the
> lowest legal bid that could be payed to a worker for a month is around 2200$ in
> US, but it is (read my lips) around '120$' in Turkey. As another example, me and
Do the US even have a minimum wage? I thought they de-regulated... As
far as our minimum wage is concerned, it's somewhere on the order of
$1000-1500 or so. And not too shabby at that, compared to some of our
neighbours.
> (1) Actually, in universal standards:
> Number of Traffic Accidents in one year:
> near 350 000
> Number of people killed in these acccidents:
> more than 6000
Well - for the amount of people in Turkey, not too bad. It's higher
than here, I think, relatively - but I've seen the way turkish people
drive here sometimes ;)
>
> (2) Not exactly a true sentence, I just liked but saying so..:-)
>
> (3) My flat is a 110m2 type, 10m2 is a balcony, and total
> 60m2 of rooms (a bedroom, a living room, and a computer
> /hobby room(4) and 40m2 of other utilities, like bath,
> entrance, kitchen, wc.
>
> (4) As you guessed, this one is also my(5) lego room,
> and is only 4.20x4.20 meters. (three book cases, one
> computer table, one study table, two computers with
> a scanner and printer, painting and sculpturing thingies
> of my wife...and more than 20 000 pieces of Legos :-D
Some people could live in a room like that - but I'll agree that it
wouldn't be enough for a self-sufficient, multiple person housing :)
I don't think I'll bore you with accounts of my parents house, where
I'm currently living again.
> (5) I wish I could say 'our' but my wife still watching legos
> from far..:-(
She'll get there! :)
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jasper Janssen <janssenjasper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Do the US even have a minimum wage? I thought they de-regulated... As
Nah, Larry and his friends haven't gotten all of their insidious wishes yet.
:)
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote:
> Jasper Janssen <janssenjasper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Do the US even have a minimum wage? I thought they de-regulated... As
>
> Nah, Larry and his friends haven't gotten all of their insidious wishes yet.
Yeah, just think. If we abolish the minimum wage then we'll get to
look forward to all these service-oriented jobs paying slave wages.
Then we can enjoy pimply-faced McDonald's style service anywhere! :)
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote:
> > Jasper Janssen <janssenjasper@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Do the US even have a minimum wage? I thought they de-regulated... As
> >
> > Nah, Larry and his friends haven't gotten all of their insidious wishes yet.
>
> Yeah, just think. If we abolish the minimum wage then we'll get to
> look forward to all these service-oriented jobs paying slave wages.
> Then we can enjoy pimply-faced McDonald's style service anywhere! :)
Well that's certainly one possible outcome if nothing else was changed,
but I rather doubt it. Most Mickey Dee's I see seem to be offering well
above minimum to start. One near my apt in CO was offering 9 an hour to
start, 10 if you could work hours that High Schoolers can't.
So even with the government doing all sorts of silly things our economy
is doing pretty good.
Minimum wage CAUSES unemployment. Followups to .debate not .fun...
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> I don't need to mention low living standards in Turkey, which is another • cause.
> If you are a foreigner, you would be payed with at least in the scale of
your
Things may have changed, but when I was there, oh 5 years ago or so, I was
quite
impressed. There were many things which put Istanbul in a higher league than
many
cities I have visited. (Visited being the operative word, as living there a
different impression may be derived).
> and our total
monthly sallary is 510 million TL which is exactly 1700$. So, as you
I know it is dreadful for the people living there, but it is a sure-fire way
for me to become a millionaire! Inflation was rife in Yugoslavia as well,
when
I visited, and I remember that well. It was my 1st visit to a high-inflation
country, and changing a 100 pounds on my arrival, I was a millionaire for
the
first time in my life!
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Selçuk <sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> US, but it is (read my lips) around '120$' in Turkey. As another example, me and
> my wife are both engineers, well earning to Turkish standards, and our total
> monthly sallary is 510 million TL which is exactly 1700$. So, as you already
Well, I guess it makes me feel better to know I'm a millionaire in at
least one country. :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> "Selçuk <sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> > US, but it is (read my lips) around '120$' in Turkey. As another example, me and
> > my wife are both engineers, well earning to Turkish standards, and our total
> > monthly sallary is 510 million TL which is exactly 1700$. So, as you already
>
> Well, I guess it makes me feel better to know I'm a millionaire in at
> least one country. :)
This was the exactly the same feeling for Robin and Diane Sathner (two fellow
RTL'ers from Canada), when I met them in Istanbul. They were instant
millionaires just after exchanging a 100 USD at airport's change office...:-D
Selçuk
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> > (NZ: where we use "dd/mm/yyyy" and "apt/num Street", but have trouble
> > with the mandatory "state" field in addresses online)
>
> hey, dd/mm/yyyy is also same as our format, and yes, we have no states,
> too..:-)
The whole world uses this format, with the exception of Japan and the USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
It figures. Not only are we backwards by using feet and inches, we're
backwards with the date too.
Duane
Richard Dee writes:
> > > (NZ: where we use "dd/mm/yyyy" and "apt/num Street", but have trouble
> > > with the mandatory "state" field in addresses online)
> >
> > hey, dd/mm/yyyy is also same as our format, and yes, we have no states,
> > too..:-)
>
> The whole world uses this format, with the exception of Japan and the USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Duane Hess" <DNJHESS@ZDNETMAIL.COM> writes:
> It figures. Not only are we backwards by using feet and inches, we're
> backwards with the date too.
And paper sizes -- we use 8 1/2" x 11" (which has the ratio 1.294117647059),
whereas every other sane country uses A4 (approximately 210mm x 297mm) with
an exact ratio of sqrt(2). The DIN paper sizes fully rock because DIN An is
exactly half a sheet of DIN A[n+1], and you never have to distort or crop
when reducing something.
--Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 05:45:21 GMT, moz1@ihug.co.nz (Moz (Chris
Moseley)) wrote:
> It's the numbers that get me. I'm prepared to believe that somewhere in
> Nuke Freeland there's a street where the numbers get to 1000, but I
> haven't seen it. And 41 apartments? Are you nuts - that would be a
> hospital or something. Even the council flats across the road only have
> about 30 apartments in each building.
Well.. the specific building I am in (Building F) only has 4
apartments, but my number is F12
Downstairs on one side is F11 and upstairs is F21
Downstairs on the other side is F12 and upstairs is F22
And I know other buildings do similar things.
So it is not NECESSARILY true that there are even 41 apartments....
And the same way with roads. They don't necessarily start at 0.
My road is 3009. And our complex is only two buildings down from the
turn-off road.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Perhaps a Princess... <sarah@eskimo.com> wrote:
> Well.. the specific building I am in (Building F) only has 4
> apartments, but my number is F12
>
> Downstairs on one side is F11 and upstairs is F21
> Downstairs on the other side is F12 and upstairs is F22
>
> And I know other buildings do similar things.
>
> So it is not NECESSARILY true that there are even 41 apartments....
Yup. We're in H380 but there certainly aren't 300+ apartments in our
building.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Moz (Chris Moseley) <moz1@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> Nuke Freeland there's a street where the numbers get to 1000, but I
> haven't seen it. And 41 apartments? Are you nuts - that would be a
> hospital or something. Even the council flats across the road only have
> about 30 apartments in each building.
Well, we cheat a bit -- the building numbers often (almost always, in fact)
skip. For example, from 1558 to 1562. Just in case someone wants to come
squeeze a two-dimensional 1560 in between the buildings.
As for the apartments, it's a code -- the 'tens' digit represents floor, and
the ones represent the apartment. In the case of my building, it's actually
base 5. (With all digits mapped +1, 'cause there's no floor 0 or apt. 10,
20, 30...)
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998 05:45:21 GMT, moz1@ihug.co.nz (Moz (Chris
Moseley)) wrote:
> It's the numbers that get me. I'm prepared to believe that somewhere in
> Nuke Freeland there's a street where the numbers get to 1000, but I
> haven't seen it. And 41 apartments? Are you nuts - that would be a
> hospital or something. Even the council flats across the road only have
> about 30 apartments in each building.
In my own city, we have one street that goes to over a thousand - but
it's not actually all in the city :) It runs from the centre of the
city to a long way off somewhere :)
Viz Apartments: Student flat. small rooms with very small
bathroom/kitchen arrangement, on a budget. 8 floors or so, each floor
with 20 apartments. making about 150 "apartments" (well, they're only
15 m2 or so, but they're still separate living quarters) in those
flats. Then picture three identical ones standing next to eachother,
and you have a situation in Delft, where my university is. Oh, two
more of these buildings are one block off :)
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:26:16 GMT, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller)
wrote:
> Yes well how about:
>
> 1558 Mass Ave #41
Could have been worse: 1558 51st St. #41
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
De Bengel wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:26:16 GMT, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller)
> wrote:
> > Yes well how about:
> >
> > 1558 Mass Ave #41
>
> Could have been worse: 1558 51st St. #41
One thing that drives me crazy at USA is the street with a 0 in the
midle, things like
1558 N 51st St. #41
And of course there is:
1558 S 51st St. #41
>
>
> ____
> |oooo| Cheers,
> |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
> ¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Once upon a time, Paulo Caparica Junior <paulocjunior@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> De Bengel wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:26:16 GMT, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller)
> > wrote:
> > > Yes well how about:
> > >
> > > 1558 Mass Ave #41
> >
> > Could have been worse: 1558 51st St. #41
>
> One thing that drives me crazy at USA is the street with a 0 in the
> midle, things like
>
> 1558 N 51st St. #41
>
> And of course there is:
>
> 1558 S 51st St. #41
Some towns really have fun with this. In one place I lived, all roads
are numbered (not named). Roads which run East-West are called
streets. Roads which run North-South are called avenues. The
numbering system starts with 1 at a central point, and the numbers
increase in every direction. So there are possibly four different
roads with the same number:
44th Street North
44th Street South
44th Avenue West
44th Avenue East
To make it even worse, since the house numbers also increase in both
directions, the *other* cardinal direction must be included in a
complete address:
4444 East 44th Street North
4444 West 44th Street North
etc., etc.
Of course, this is just a verbose way of coding ordered pairs of
cartesian coordinates. But it seems ugly and confusing.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 13:46:42 GMT, blisses@worldnet.att.net (Steve
Bliss) wrote:
> Some towns really have fun with this. In one place I lived, all roads
> are numbered (not named). • <snip>
> Of course, this is just a verbose way of coding ordered pairs of
> cartesian coordinates. But it seems ugly and confusing.
In a town in Holland (Zoetermeer), they made a new part where all the
roads are color-coded. You have a blue quadrant, a red quadrant, etc.
So the road between the blue and red is called the 'blue-red street'.
And within the green quadrant you have the (I made these up, for I
don't know the english equivalents) moss-green street, the basil-green
street, etc. I never knew there were so many names for different
shades of red/blue/yellow/green. Not all that practical, but I'm sure
it looked cute on the proposal.
The street I really like is in Utrecht, the one that the university is
on, called (loose translation) 'The road to wisdom'
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
wvw@earthlink.net (De Bengel) writes:
> In a town in Holland (Zoetermeer), they made a new part where all the
> roads are color-coded. You have a blue quadrant, a red quadrant, etc.
> So the road between the blue and red is called the 'blue-red street'.
> And within the green quadrant you have the (I made these up, for I
> don't know the english equivalents) moss-green street, the basil-green
> street, etc. I never knew there were so many names for different
> shades of red/blue/yellow/green. Not all that practical, but I'm sure
> it looked cute on the proposal.
Seriously?! That's so great to hear!!! One thing we're looking at for the
LUGNET community map(s) is color-coding the boundary markers for a sense of
overall location. Numbers alone just don't cut it.
At first it was going to be four main directional gradients -- West=Yellow,
East=Blue, North=Red, South=Green...with the intensity fading to white the
farther away you got from the center.
But the color mixing code for that was gunky, so now what it does is takes
the cartesian coordinates and converts them to polar coordinates, then
converts the angle (theta) to a hue on the rainbow (red, yellow, orange,
green, blue, purple) and uses the distance from the origin (rho) to modify
the hue into a tone -- black at the center, increasing slowly up to full-on
color at about 15 squares out, then increasing slowly up to full-on white
about 30 squares out.
In the end, I think it works well, and it's fun to navigate around in it.
(Demo coming maybe later this week if people are interested...)
I'm wicked surprised (but in a happy way) to hear that some area of the real
world actually did this with color mixing! So you say that moss-green
street is actually given by a slightly different color of paint on the sign
compared to basil-green street? Or do they just vary the names and not the
pigments in the paints?
> The street I really like is in Utrecht, the one that the university is
> on, called (loose translation) 'The road to wisdom'
That's pretty cool! Does it have an associated color?
--Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Will people get to pick the color of their 'Home'? 'Cause, if so, I
want Dibs on where ever Pine Green is (if that's okay). :)
Jeff
Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> wvw@earthlink.net (De Bengel) writes:
>
> > In a town in Holland (Zoetermeer), they made a new part where all the
> > roads are color-coded. You have a blue quadrant, a red quadrant, etc.
> > So the road between the blue and red is called the 'blue-red street'.
> > And within the green quadrant you have the (I made these up, for I
> > don't know the english equivalents) moss-green street, the basil-green
> > street, etc. I never knew there were so many names for different
> > shades of red/blue/yellow/green. Not all that practical, but I'm sure
> > it looked cute on the proposal.
>
> Seriously?! That's so great to hear!!! One thing we're looking at for the
> LUGNET community map(s) is color-coding the boundary markers for a sense of
> overall location. Numbers alone just don't cut it.
>
> At first it was going to be four main directional gradients -- West=Yellow,
> East=Blue, North=Red, South=Green...with the intensity fading to white the
> farther away you got from the center.
>
> But the color mixing code for that was gunky, so now what it does is takes
> the cartesian coordinates and converts them to polar coordinates, then
> converts the angle (theta) to a hue on the rainbow (red, yellow, orange,
> green, blue, purple) and uses the distance from the origin (rho) to modify
> the hue into a tone -- black at the center, increasing slowly up to full-on
> color at about 15 squares out, then increasing slowly up to full-on white
> about 30 squares out.
>
> In the end, I think it works well, and it's fun to navigate around in it.
> (Demo coming maybe later this week if people are interested...)
>
> I'm wicked surprised (but in a happy way) to hear that some area of the real
> world actually did this with color mixing! So you say that moss-green
> street is actually given by a slightly different color of paint on the sign
> compared to basil-green street? Or do they just vary the names and not the
> pigments in the paints?
>
> > The street I really like is in Utrecht, the one that the university is
> > on, called (loose translation) 'The road to wisdom'
>
> That's pretty cool! Does it have an associated color?
>
> --Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jeff Stembel <Dragonelf1@aol.com> writes:
> Will people get to pick the color of their 'Home'? 'Cause, if so, I
> want Dibs on where ever Pine Green is (if that's okay). :)
Yes, the houses have red, yellow, or blue roofing.
Hmm, Pine Green, eh? I think that's at about W4,S3 (West 4, South 3). That
might wind up being inside the reserved area at the center. Then again it
might not... Maybe the coloring should transition from black to full-on
color a little more slowly than it does currently.
BTW, since it will all be first-come-first-serve, there is no way to get
dibs on locations or things like that. But you can basically pick up and
move to another location on the map at any time, so you could strike a deal
with someone if you wanted to swap spots or something.
--Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Thu, 12 Nov 1998 03:02:13 GMT, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman)
wrote:
> I'm wicked surprised (but in a happy way) to hear that some area of the real
> world actually did this with color mixing! So you say that moss-green
> street is actually given by a slightly different color of paint on the sign
> compared to basil-green street? Or do they just vary the names and not the
> pigments in the paints?
They just vary the names. All signs are blue with white lettering. I
don't know if there is a sysyem in the color names. My knowledge of
those names is almost non-existant so I don't know if a green-street
near the blue quadrant has a blue-hue and one near the red quadrant is
semi-purple.
> That's pretty cool! Does it have an associated color?
No, why? What color would be associated with a university? Actualy, if
I remember correctly, it's black. That must be a conspiracy, cause
most streets in Holland are black.
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(Yes, I know this is an old message, but I just saw it.)
> Seriously?! That's so great to hear!!! One thing we're looking at for the
> LUGNET community map(s) is color-coding the boundary markers for a sense of
> overall location. Numbers alone just don't cut it.
Um, *what* community map(s)? This sounds... well, interesting.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
lazuli@fidalgo.net (Fred M. Sloniker) writes:
> (Yes, I know this is an old message, but I just saw it.)
That's OK -- that's one of the reasons the messages stay here so long.
(Instead of expiring after 2 weeks.)
> > Seriously?! That's so great to hear!!! One thing we're looking at for the
> > LUGNET community map(s) is color-coding the boundary markers for a sense of
> > overall location. Numbers alone just don't cut it.
>
> Um, *what* community map(s)? This sounds... well, interesting.
http://www.lugnet.com/plan/
check out the links near the bottom of the page and the text in the first
few areas at the top...
--Todd
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 03:09:45 GMT, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman)
wrote:
> http://www.lugnet.com/plan/
> check out the links near the bottom of the page and the text in the first
> few areas at the top...
Wow. I may not have been here in time to watch the foundation being
poured, but it looks like I have plenty of time to help stack a few
bricks. (:3
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 22:14:15 GMT, wvw@earthlink.net (De Bengel) wrote:
> In a town in Holland (Zoetermeer), they made a new part where all the
> roads are color-coded. You have a blue quadrant, a red quadrant, etc.
> So the road between the blue and red is called the 'blue-red street'.
> And within the green quadrant you have the (I made these up, for I
> don't know the english equivalents) moss-green street, the basil-green
> street, etc. I never knew there were so many names for different
> shades of red/blue/yellow/green. Not all that practical, but I'm sure
> it looked cute on the proposal.
>
> The street I really like is in Utrecht, the one that the university is
> on, called (loose translation) 'The road to wisdom'
Yeah. Weg naar de Wetenschap. Main arterial road between the
university complex and the freeways and the city.
Always liked that one, myself.
Jasper
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Steve Bliss wrote:
> Once upon a time, Paulo Caparica Junior <paulocjunior@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > De Bengel wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 9 Nov 1998 17:26:16 GMT, mattdm@mattdm.org (Matthew Miller)
>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Yes well how about:
> > > >
> > > > 1558 Mass Ave #41
> > >
> > > Could have been worse: 1558 51st St. #41
> >
> > One thing that drives me crazy at USA is the street with a 0 in the
> > midle, things like
> >
> > 1558 N 51st St. #41
> >
> > And of course there is:
> >
> > 1558 S 51st St. #41
>
> Some towns really have fun with this. In one place I lived, all roads
>
> are numbered (not named). Roads which run East-West are called
> streets. Roads which run North-South are called avenues. The
> numbering system starts with 1 at a central point, and the numbers
> increase in every direction. So there are possibly four different
> roads with the same number:
>
> 44th Street North
> 44th Street South
> 44th Avenue West
> 44th Avenue East
>
> To make it even worse, since the house numbers also increase in both
> directions, the *other* cardinal direction must be included in a
> complete address:
>
> 4444 East 44th Street North
> 4444 West 44th Street North
> etc., etc.
>
> Of course, this is just a verbose way of coding ordered pairs of
> cartesian coordinates. But it seems ugly and confusing.
>
> Steve
Living there would drive me crazy for sure! I remember that in Atlanta
,where all the streets are called peachtree. There are one of the
peachtrees lane, street, road, whatever that E and W where parallel
streets
a block away from each other. Of course I had a map, be it take some
time
for me to search for the other street.
Paulo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Paulo Caparica Junior <paulocjunior@hotmail.com> wrote
> Living there would drive me crazy for sure! I remember that in
> Atlanta, where all the streets are called peachtree. There are one
> of the peachtrees lane, street, road, whatever that E and W
In NZ we have a rule that the main street in every town is called Queen
St. From memory something like 1 in 10 towns do this. And nearly as many
use High St instead.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998 04:19:13 GMT, Paulo Caparica Junior
<paulocjunior@hotmail.com> wrote:
> One thing that drives me crazy at USA is the street with a 0 in the
> midle, things like
>
> 1558 N 51st St. #41
>
> And of course there is:
>
> 1558 S 51st St. #41
What about:
1558 NE 51st St.
1558 NE 51st Pl.
1558 NE 51st Av.
1558 NE 51st Ct.
Or a street that starts as NE 31st St. but after a slight curve
becomes 239 NE Ct.
or Main Street starting in Seattle, then on the other side of Lake
Washington continues and goes on on the other side of Lake Samammish
as a private road. It's still called Main Street.
And while I found NE and SE streets in the Seattle area, what happened
to NW and SW?
____
|oooo| Cheers,
|oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Wouter van Wageningen writes:
>
> And while I found NE and SE streets in the Seattle area, what happened
> to NW and SW?
We have them here in Grand Prairie, Texas.
Main and Center bisect the town and then
SW 1st
NW 1st
SE 1st
NE 1st
SW 2nd
NW 2nd
SE 2nd
NE 2nd
out to
SW 19th
NW 19th
SE 19th
NE 19th
etc.
etc.
chris barnes
>
> ____
> |oooo| Cheers,
> |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
> ¯¯¯¯
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> What about:
>
> 1558 NE 51st St.
> 1558 NE 51st Pl.
> 1558 NE 51st Av.
> 1558 NE 51st Ct.
>
> Or a street that starts as NE 31st St. but after a slight curve
> becomes 239 NE Ct.
>
> or Main Street starting in Seattle, then on the other side of Lake
> Washington continues and goes on on the other side of Lake Samammish
> as a private road. It's still called Main Street.
>
> And while I found NE and SE streets in the Seattle area, what happened
> to NW and SW?
Of course, you could have the English street/road naming convention.....
As these roads have been in use since Roman times, many streets have as many
as 5 names....
For instance, many roads going into London are often referred to as London
Road, and are as often referred to as the name of the city from which it has
come as well! The half-way point is often the point at which is referred to
as the other, though that is not always the case. The same road will
also have the more modern letter numbering system,
as well as local variations for the road as well! (I.E. M for Motorways, A
for major
arteries, and B-roads, which are minor roads). There are also local
variations for
the road name, either High St or whatever.
Example- the A40, near me, is also known as the London Road, Oxford Road,
and also
has a number of minor names as well, depending on which section you are on!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Richard Dee wrote in message ...
> Of course, you could have the English street/road naming convention.....
> As these roads have been in use since Roman times, many streets have as • many
> as 5 names....
I was in England once. I thought that once you get out of London none of
the roads has a name, under the assumption that if you don't know where you
are then you don't belong there anyway.
Jesse
__________________________________________________________________
Jesse The Jolly Jingoist
Looking for answers?
Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! http://www.multicon.de/fun/legofaq.html
Power-search in Deja News! http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Once upon a time, "Jesse Long" <LongJR97@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I was in England once. I thought that once you get out of London none of
> the roads has a name, under the assumption that if you don't know where you
> are then you don't belong there anyway.
Arkansas is like that. Once you are off the main highways & out of
the city, you better have some solid directions.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366A0E48.901D7C85@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
>
> Minimum wage CAUSES unemployment. Followups to .debate not .fun...
You could at least explain that if you're going to toss it out. Lots of
people don't believe it. Apparently people think employers will just fork
out more moeny and not cut any jobs.
Jesse
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Minimum wage CAUSES unemployment. Followups to .debate not .fun...
One of the arguments against the introduction of a minimum wage in
the UK. The practise of some firms to pay near slave-labour wages
in this country provide numerous examples of how *not* working can
pay more, through unemployment and other state-provided benefits!
(And that is without abuses of the system...)
Adds further argument for the overhaul of the benefits system, which
is very difficult to do, if only because of the pinko-liberal/quasi-
communist elements that exist in British politics, who seem to think
that welfare-state economics are far more preferable to a society
that works and is productive!
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366A0E48.901D7C85@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <F3J7pC.EGt@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jesse Long wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366A0E48.901D7C85@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
> >
> > Minimum wage CAUSES unemployment. Followups to .debate not .fun...
>
>
> You could at least explain that if you're going to toss it out. Lots of
> people don't believe it. Apparently people think employers will just fork
> out more moeny and not cut any jobs.
OK, briefly. This is purely an economic analysis. Anyone who wishes to
prattle about how people have rights to jobs or employers have
obligations to provide them hasn't any standing in the debate and can
just keep such fantasyland thinking to themselves.
Performing a task has an economic value. That value is what getting the
task done is WORTH. Determining that value by analysis is tricky, but
factors that contribute include what the impact of not doing the task at
all would be with no process change, and what it would cost to change
process to avoid the need for the task, and what it would cost to
automate the task (just another sort of process change).
In deciding how to get a task performed, given its worth, an employer
can either get an existing employee to do it or hire a new one. Hiring
has a cost as well, and there are ongoing incremental costs associated
with one more employee, both reasonable (benefits, and uniforms and
suchlike) and unreasonable (the Social Security ponzi scheme, for
example), that must be borne.
Now suppose that a newly identified task is worth 7 dollars an hour to
get done (vast simplification) but non wage costs if a new employee is
hired are 4 dollars an hour (rather cheap, actually). Now if there is a
minimum wage law in effect saying that a new employee must get 5
dollars, then the employer will have to pay 2 dollars an hour more than
the task is worth to get it accomplished. Ergo either the task will not
be done or will be done in another way. No job created.
Since creating jobs is the primary way that unemployment is attacked,
the MW directly causes unemployment. A person who may have been willing
to work for that 3 dollars an hour (after nonwage costs, and because
they want to get started in the work force and learn skills (1) ) now is
DENIED a job thanks to the friendly government.
Now let's look at the long term effects. We all agree that long term,
that 3 dollar job is not where we want a worker to remain (although it
is a good starting point). If we mandate that employers subsidise low
value jobs we get lots of bad effects. First, people in them are not
incented to improve themselves since they're getting more than their
work is worth. Second, the high wage jobs aren't getting what they are
worth either, also a disincentive. Third, our McDonalds is dirtier than
it needs to be since we can't get the workers in to clean it
economically. (noticed how McDonalds are dirtier lately... now you know
why)
Now, a 3 dollar job WOULD be a living wage job if it weren't for the
drag that government placed on the economy, but that's another topic (
personally, i think 80 cents on the dollar of my food dollar goes to
silly government in one way or another when you factor in evertying)
1 - my first job not supplied by a relative paid maybe 50 cents an hour,
as a paper boy. I had it when I was 12. Learned a lot. My next one paid
well below minimum wage, and I was in collusion with my employer to keep
it that way. (2) He could not have afforded another bus boy if he had to
pay a "living wage" to a middle school student. I would not have learned
the food service industry well enough to become a crew leader at
McDonalds by the time I was in 12th grade. We both won.
2 - who shall remain anonymous despite my belief about the statue of
limitations
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> OK, briefly. This is purely an economic analysis. Anyone who wishes to
> prattle about how people have rights to jobs or employers have
> obligations to provide them hasn't any standing in the debate and can
> just keep such fantasyland thinking to themselves.
I happen to know someone who seems to hold these beliefs. I once had
to hear him whine and complain about how our employer had to pay him
more because he was behind in his bills and would never catch up and
be able to buy a house if they didn't pay him what he (thought) he
deserved.
I've never discussed it with him in detail because I just don't think
we'd be speaking the same language. That whole thought process is so
alien to my way of thinking.
> Now let's look at the long term effects. We all agree that long term,
> that 3 dollar job is not where we want a worker to remain (although it
> is a good starting point). If we mandate that employers subsidise low
> value jobs we get lots of bad effects. First, people in them are not
> incented to improve themselves since they're getting more than their
> work is worth. Second, the high wage jobs aren't getting what they are
> worth either, also a disincentive.
I think I know what you are trying to say in "second..." but just to
make sure - you're asserting that because Employer Bob HAS to pay the
low wage jobs more than they are worth he has to pay the high wage
jobs less, probably because the money has to come from somewhere?
> Third, our McDonalds is dirtier than
> it needs to be since we can't get the workers in to clean it
> economically. (noticed how McDonalds are dirtier lately... now you know
> why)
Oh, I don't know about that. I worked for years in fast food as a
teenage with crews the same size or smaller than the ones I see
working in the places now, and for less money. We kept the place
clean - it was a priority. I'm sure the work force pool varies from
community to community (otherwise the workers wouldn't be all or
mostly black next to UTK and all or mostly white way out west in
Farragut, with odd pockets where a large percentage of the workers are
actually old people elsewhere) but I'd say the places that are dirtier
are that way because of poor management and poor workers. Call me
crazy, but I didn't have to be told to keep the bathroom clean at KFC
when I worked there. It was one of my duties, and I took pride in it.
> 1 - my first job not supplied by a relative paid maybe 50 cents an hour,
> as a paper boy. I had it when I was 12. Learned a lot. My next one paid
> well below minimum wage, and I was in collusion with my employer to keep
> it that way. (2) He could not have afforded another bus boy if he had to
> pay a "living wage" to a middle school student. I would not have learned
> the food service industry well enough to become a crew leader at
> McDonalds by the time I was in 12th grade. We both won.
Wow, you were a libertarian when you were in middle school? Neat. :)
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Meet more LEGO fans in your area through LUGNET
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote
> Performing a task has an economic value. That value is what getting the
> task done is WORTH. Determining that value by analysis is tricky, but
> factors that contribute include what the impact of not doing the task at
> all would be with no process change, and what it would cost to change
> process to avoid the need for the task, and what it would cost to
> automate the task (just another sort of process change).
> In deciding how to get a task performed, given its worth, an employer
> can either get an existing employee to do it or hire a new one. Hiring
> has a cost as well, and there are ongoing incremental costs associated
> with one more employee, both reasonable (benefits, and uniforms and
> suchlike) and unreasonable (the Social Security ponzi scheme, for
> example), that must be borne.
One minor point Larry: this presumes that the employer will pay what
the job is worth, rather that the minimum required to attract staff.
I would object to that practice were I a shareholder.
The minimum wage is similar - there is no practical incentive for an
employer to pay workers enough to survive, let alone live well. All
the employer has to do is provide enough to attract suitably subsidised
workers. Like you as a child, or homeless people, or petty criminals.
The British have been through this, and I'm sure you've read enough
Dickens to know that it's not a lot of fun being there.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Moz (Chris Moseley) wrote in message ...
>
> One minor point Larry: this presumes that the employer will pay what
> the job is worth, rather that the minimum required to attract staff.
> I would object to that practice were I a shareholder.
That's basically the best argument for MW, because it's fairly accurate.
There are times in the economic cycle (such as in the Depression) when there
are way too few jobs, and market forces would push wages below subsistence.
Kind of like 1880s America too. So the government went out and started MW
in order to ensure those who were working enough money. Did that limit the
number of jobs? In a depressed economy, probably not too many.
The problem is that there are too many politics involved in setting
subsistence level and minimum wage. Ideally, there would be a fair way of
determining the poverty line, MW would be just above it, and
unemployment/welfare would be at or below it. Having a minimum wages
prevents social unrest because people have a tendency to get upset if they
can work all day and still be in poverty. Of course, having welfare above
MW is dumb too.
Obviously, the MW for teenagers needs to be abolished. But, while I don't
like the MW, I have no doubt that Man's greed would have companies paying
pittance levels in a bad economy, which would only make things worse
(capitalists still haven't figured out that you have to pay your workers
good money so they can buy all your products. This was part of Marx's and
later Lenin's arguments. Did MW save capitalism?).
I could never be a libertarian because 1) I have no faith in Man's ability
to care about each other and 2) I have no faith in Man's ability to consider
the common good without being forced by government.
Jesse
__________________________________________________________________
Jesse The Jolly Jingoist
Looking for answers?
Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! http://www.multicon.de/fun/legofaq.html
Power-search in Deja News! http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Jesse Long wrote in message ...
> Obviously, the MW for teenagers needs to be abolished. But, while I don't
> like the MW, I have no doubt that Man's greed would have companies paying
> pittance levels in a bad economy, which would only make things worse
I dunno - it produced the French Revolution, which was not all bad.
> (capitalists still haven't figured out that you have to pay your workers
> good money so they can buy all your products. This was part of Marx's and
> later Lenin's arguments.
Also a strong point of that extreme radical, Henry Ford. This was mentioned
in
the Time magazine issue on business leaders, if you're interested. He
beleived
in paying enough that his workers could afford the product.
In NZ it has resulted in kids being fired when they get old enough for
the minimum wage to bite. "happy birthday kid, now get lost".
> I could never be a libertarian because 1) I have no faith in Man's ability
> to care about each other and 2) I have no faith in Man's ability to • consider
> the common good without being forced by government.
For example, the many US laws that only work if the population is sensible -
your excessive right to have lawsuits decided by juries is one example. And
the theory that companies will care for the environment because they're
there
for the long term. Which fails because stripping pays more, and the owners
can always move on. So the caring ones usually get driven out or forced to
change. Look at nuclear power plants, for instance.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Message-Id: <slrn76mqie.11f.cjc@VADER.NS.UTK.EDU>
X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.3 UNIX)
D <F3KMny.FDD@lugnet.com>
Reply-To: cjc@newsguy.com
Followup-To:
Jesse Long <LongJR97@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I could never be a libertarian because 1) I have no faith in Man's ability
> to care about each other and 2) I have no faith in Man's ability to consider
> the common good without being forced by government.
As for 2) I don't think "government" has anything to do with
protecting the common good. The "common good" that the government
protects at any given time is just whatever pet project and
self-interest that the special interests with the most money and
lobbyists promote.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Meet more LEGO fans in your area through LUGNET
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366A0E48.901D7C85@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <F3J7pC.EGt@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I've read through most of the responses to this, and I have to add that
the Unemployment level directly affects the 'going' wage in a locale.
Take for instance, Fargo ND, we currently have about 1.8% statewide
unemployment, but in Fargo, we have about 0.8% or so ...
What that means, is that the minimum wage is disregarded, and a 'going'
wage is established. Currently, I could go almost anywhere in town and
'demand' about $6.50/hr starting ... at least, FYI MW is $5.25/hr ... and
that's
fast food. If you get into more skilled labor, or office type work, starting
would be much closer to $8.00/hr.
True, there are exceptions to the 'going' wages, for instance a truly entry
level
job, or a job designed and staffed by school age kids.
Another thing in this type of economy, is that employees will leave for $0.25
difference. That makes a big difference. When an employer knows that
he has an employee that would leave for a little difference, he will pay more
because training a new person is expensive.
-Lee.
Jesse Long wrote:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366A0E48.901D7C85@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
> >
> > Minimum wage CAUSES unemployment. Followups to .debate not .fun...
>
>
> You could at least explain that if you're going to toss it out. Lots of
> people don't believe it. Apparently people think employers will just fork
> out more moeny and not cut any jobs.
>
> Jesse
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366A9CDD.FC0E00B2@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <slrn76lja1.k7.cjc@VADER.NS.UTK.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> > OK, briefly. This is purely an economic analysis. Anyone who wishes to
> > prattle about how people have rights to jobs or employers have
> > obligations to provide them hasn't any standing in the debate and can
> > just keep such fantasyland thinking to themselves.
>
> I happen to know someone who seems to hold these beliefs. I once had
> to hear him whine and complain about how our employer had to pay him
> more because he was behind in his bills and would never catch up and
> be able to buy a house if they didn't pay him what he (thought) he
> deserved.
>
> I've never discussed it with him in detail because I just don't think
> we'd be speaking the same language. That whole thought process is so
> alien to my way of thinking.
Yes. Makes me ill.
> > Now let's look at the long term effects. We all agree that long term,
> > that 3 dollar job is not where we want a worker to remain (although it
> > is a good starting point). If we mandate that employers subsidise low
> > value jobs we get lots of bad effects. First, people in them are not
> > incented to improve themselves since they're getting more than their
> > work is worth. Second, the high wage jobs aren't getting what they are
> > worth either, also a disincentive.
>
> I think I know what you are trying to say in "second..." but just to
> make sure - you're asserting that because Employer Bob HAS to pay the
> low wage jobs more than they are worth he has to pay the high wage
> jobs less, probably because the money has to come from somewhere?
Yes.
> > Third, our McDonalds is dirtier than
> > it needs to be since we can't get the workers in to clean it
> > economically. (noticed how McDonalds are dirtier lately... now you know
> > why)
>
> Oh, I don't know about that. I worked for years in fast food as a
> teenage with crews the same size or smaller than the ones I see
> working in the places now, and for less money. We kept the place
> clean - it was a priority. I'm sure the work force pool varies from
> community to community (otherwise the workers wouldn't be all or
> mostly black next to UTK and all or mostly white way out west in
> Farragut, with odd pockets where a large percentage of the workers are
> actually old people elsewhere) but I'd say the places that are dirtier
> are that way because of poor management and poor workers. Call me
> crazy, but I didn't have to be told to keep the bathroom clean at KFC
> when I worked there. It was one of my duties, and I took pride in it.
You're saying the same thing I am if you think about it. At least I
think you are.
>
> > 1 - my first job not supplied by a relative paid maybe 50 cents an hour,
> > as a paper boy. I had it when I was 12. Learned a lot. My next one paid
> > well below minimum wage, and I was in collusion with my employer to keep
> > it that way. (2) He could not have afforded another bus boy if he had to
> > pay a "living wage" to a middle school student. I would not have learned
> > the food service industry well enough to become a crew leader at
> > McDonalds by the time I was in 12th grade. We both won.
>
> Wow, you were a libertarian when you were in middle school? Neat. :)
Yes. Thanks to a librarian who turned me onto Atlas Shrugged after I had
inhaled just about everything else in the library, and a dentist on my
paper route who turned me on to the party.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<F3KMny.FDD@lugnet.com> <F3Lxqn.GrG@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"Moz (Chris Moseley)" wrote:
Deliberately inflammatory reply by me follows..
> In NZ it has resulted in kids being fired when they get old enough for
> the minimum wage to bite. "happy birthday kid, now get lost".
>
> > I could never be a libertarian because 1) I have no faith in Man's ability
> > to care about each other and 2) I have no faith in Man's ability to • consider
> > the common good without being forced by government.
That's claptrap. Normal people are inherently good, and further,
properly structured societies incent people to act in their own self
interest, and cull those that are inherently bad.
As for pittance wages, remove the 80% (or more, 99% in Sweden, for
instance) drag of the current govts on the economy and you will see an
unending boom so large that all that want to work will be able to live
handsomely. As for those that don't, bleeding hearts can voluntarily
contribute, and if not, think of it as evolution in action.
. Which fails because stripping pays more, and the owners
> can always move on. So the caring ones usually get driven out or forced to
> change. Look at nuclear power plants, for instance.
Stripping only pays more if the long term costs (leaching, adjacent
property value reduction, etc) are ignored.
Abolish the EPA and use tort and (especially) criminal law to go after
polluters and you'd see a quick reduction in new strip mine projects (as
well as other polluting projects) .
We need strict enforcement of exising law, not regulations that shield
companies. Minimum standards always turn out to be a shield that
companies hide behind, they compete to hit the minimum, just barely.
The first time a company prez went to jail for murder, or at least
negligent homicide, because her subordinates built a plant that emitted
too many pollutants, and knew it, might be a bit surprising, but you'd
see some changes fast.
Your friendly radical.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366C20C0.1D3A29CA@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
>
> That's claptrap. Normal people are inherently good, and further,
> properly structured societies incent people to act in their own self
> interest, and cull those that are inherently bad.
Please tell me you don't believe this. You'd lose the shread of respect I
have for your intellect if you do. Read the news. Every day is full of
murder, theft, abuse, and hate. Yet people are good? You don't have to
teach a two-year-old how to say "mine," yet people are good? All of human
history is filled with conquerors and war, but people are good? I'd love to
see you try to explain this one.
> As for pittance wages, remove the 80% (or more, 99% in Sweden, for
> instance) drag of the current govts on the economy and you will see an
> unending boom so large that all that want to work will be able to live
> handsomely. As for those that don't, bleeding hearts can voluntarily
> contribute, and if not, think of it as evolution in action.
Explain.
> Stripping only pays more if the long term costs (leaching, adjacent
> property value reduction, etc) are ignored.
Who cares. They move, leaving the problems for others.
> Abolish the EPA and use tort and (especially) criminal law to go after
> polluters and you'd see a quick reduction in new strip mine projects (as
> well as other polluting projects) .
Explain, using a polluter that isn't falling into disuse like strip mining.
What crimes? As a libertarian, shouldn't you think that the government
should stay out?
> We need strict enforcement of exising law, not regulations that shield
> companies. Minimum standards always turn out to be a shield that
> companies hide behind, they compete to hit the minimum, just barely.
So, in other words, if you drop or eliminate the MW, companies won't even
have to worry about hitting that, and can drop wages as they please. That,
and market forces in a good economy won't force prices above the minimum?
This doesn't sound libertarian to me.
Jesse
__________________________________________________________________
Jesse The Jolly Jingoist
Looking for answers?
Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! http://www.multicon.de/fun/legofaq.html
Power-search in Deja News! http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> We need strict enforcement of exising law, not regulations that shield
> companies. Minimum standards always turn out to be a shield that
> companies hide behind, they compete to hit the minimum, just barely.
Regulations that shield companies.......
Sounds familiar, and one of the biggest impediments to customers getting
a fair deal in the shops here in the UK and Europe.
Consumer goods cost more in the UK than in our competitor's shops. For
instance, and this is the most galling, I could go to the States, buy
any item of clothing from, say, Aquascutum or Burberry's, bring them back
and pay the VAT at customs, and still save money, a lot of money. 30% or
more...
The silhouette agreement?.... most insidious thing to happen in recent
years.
Levi's jeans, available from select shops and Levi's own at phenomenally
high
prices. Tesco and other supermarkets, using parallel import, bring them in,
sell
them at half the price, still make a healthy profit, but have been stopped.
Levi's
took them to the European court, forced them to stop selling them! "Tesco
does not
fit in with the image Levi's wishes to portray!" 90% of Tesco customers wear
the
f*&"£ng things!!! Motorcycles another example. Parallel importers have
become so
successful that they forced the manufacturers to lower prices substantially
in
order to compete. The importers will now be taken to court and with the
Silhouette
as the dangerous precedent, will most likely shut them down and enable them
to
raise prices.
Cars are another horrendous example. Could pop over the channel to France,
order a
UK-built car, to UK specifications (including right-hand drive) and pay a
deposit.
Pop back a few weeks later (delivery times, etc.) and pay off the balance,
drive it
back over the channel, have a few verification checks, etc. The cost? A
couple of
days spent researching, a couple more going back and forth to France, and
one could
save 1000's and 1000's.
CD's too. We pay for them, like everything else, in pounds what our
Americans would
pay in dollars....(a cd costs 14 pounds here, and 14 dollars there.....).
Big
Parliamentary hearings about it, but no real result. More sales of CD's, but
base
price still to high. The Record Labels said we were paying for the
investment in
new talent. Bollocks. As usual, the UK consumer is subsidising the rest of
the
world's cheaper prices.
The solution? Who knows. Too much public apathy. "Oh its always been this
way....."
The apathy gets in the way of organising any kind of useful boycott of any
particular
product. Too many who can afford it will buy it at the inflated price.
Stupid manufacturers know this too. Because enough people will buy something
more
expensive, they might as well rake in the profits. Why reduce across the
board
prices by 20%?? "uhhhh, 20% less profit??" NO!!!!! 30, 40, 50% more
sales!!!! More
profit! Higher turnovers!!!
Lego is also very expensive comparitively speaking by the way......
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Richard Dee <richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net> wrote:
> Sounds familiar, and one of the biggest impediments to customers getting
> a fair deal in the shops here in the UK and Europe.
> Consumer goods cost more in the UK than in our competitor's shops. For
> instance, and this is the most galling, I could go to the States, buy
> any item of clothing from, say, Aquascutum or Burberry's, bring them back
> and pay the VAT at customs, and still save money, a lot of money. 30% or
> more...
<major snippage of horrific rip-off stories)
> > Lego is also very expensive comparitively speaking by the way......
Wow, with all those and the one I left in just above, I don't see why
you don't move to the US.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry produced a deliberately inflammatory reply to my original inflammatory
post:
> As for pittance wages, remove the 80% (or more, 99% in Sweden, for
> instance) drag of the current govts on the economy and you will see an
> unending boom so large that all that want to work will be able to live
> handsomely. As for those that don't, bleeding hearts can voluntarily
> contribute, and if not, think of it as evolution in action.
> In a booming economy (remember that premise, we won't HAVE any non
> booming economies in Libertopia) any employer foolish enough to pay less
> than what a job is worth will soon find herself without workers, and out
> of business.
Hate to say this Larry, but over here we have a lot less government than
you have, and it hasn't helped. What it does mean is that we're much more
vulnerable to games played by other countries. Mostly the USA with its
threats of trade barriers- and subsidies. So while our tax take is around
half yours and our economy is much less regulated, the "benefits" are
mostly obscured by the fact that not everyone plays by our rules.
Just how far do we have to go along this route? Zero tax? Government
destruction of anything that looks like a natural monopoly? (or should
they own the monopolies? Or are monopolies good? I can't work that out.
What is your position on stuff like power lines?)
> Stripping only pays more if the long term costs (leaching, adjacent
> property value reduction, etc) are ignored.
Too right. The problem there is that of who you sue. Who should
generation three from Minimata sue? Generation three of the companies
who did the polluting? There will surely be other examples in
the future of things that are unpredictably expensive down the track.
I thought one of the big advances in capitalism was the limited
liability company? It allows higher risk businesses by limiting
the loss to what shareholders have invested in the company, thus
facilitating both mass sharemarkets and small shareholding.
I mean, if my share in Microsoft meant that I was also liable when
it turns out that MS liabilty in a occupational overuse suit is 10x
assets, then I'd be a little reluctant to buy any shares at all.
And if that debt was non-avoidable, then I'd be risking not just
myself, but my children and family.
> Abolish the EPA and use tort and (especially) criminal law to go after
> polluters and you'd see a quick reduction in new strip mine projects (as
> well as other polluting projects) .
How do you prove specific legal liability in a contributory problem?
Who do I sue if my farm is wiped out by a drought which was probably
prolonged and deepened by global warming, but should have been
survivable otherwise? I could sue the USA for emitting greenhouse
gases, on the grounds that it has not legislated appropriately.
> The first time a company prez went to jail for murder, or at least
> negligent homicide, because her subordinates built a plant that emitted
> too many pollutants, and knew it, might be a bit surprising, but you'd
> see some changes fast.
And when the shareholders were held liable, yea even unto the seventh
generation, I think we'd see your predicate boom change course a little.
I've got one other point:
Big problem for libertarians IMO is that NZ used to spend about 8% GDP
on a state health system that served 99% of the population to about
the same level as the second quintile in the USA. Which was spending
12-15% GDP on health, and reaching about 70% pop with that. So NZ
is moving to the US model, because those making the decisions are
in the upper quintile. But from a libertarian perspective I suspect
that state-owned health care is anathema regardless.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in reply to "Moz (Chris Moseley)"
> Deliberately inflammatory reply by me follows..
Larry, old stick, it would be nice if you didn't simply ignore inconvenient
questions. I know you don't have pat answers, but they make your provocation
seem somewhat empty.
Moz, who asked:
---cut here---
Jesse Long wrote in message ...
> Obviously, the MW for teenagers needs to be abolished. But, while I don't
> like the MW, I have no doubt that Man's greed would have companies paying
> pittance levels in a bad economy, which would only make things worse
I dunno - it produced the French Revolution, which was not all bad.[1]
> (capitalists still haven't figured out that you have to pay your workers
> good money so they can buy all your products. This was part of Marx's and
> later Lenin's arguments.
Also a strong point of that extreme radical, Henry Ford. This was mentioned
in the Time magazine issue on business leaders, if you're interested. He
believed in paying enough that his workers could afford the product.[2]
In NZ it has resulted in kids being fired when they get old enough for
the minimum wage to bite. "happy birthday kid, now get lost".[3]
> I could never be a libertarian because 1) I have no faith in Man's ability
> to care about each other and 2) I have no faith in Man's ability to • consider
> the common good without being forced by government.
For example, the many US laws that only work if the population is sensible -
your excessive right to have lawsuits decided by juries is one example. [4]
And the theory that companies will care for the environment because they're
there for the long term. Which fails because stripping pays more, and the
owners can always move on. So the caring ones usually get driven out or
forced to change. Look at nuclear power plants, for instance.[5]
---cut here---
[1] which was indeed a direct response to the conditions of the time, and
led Marx to his theory of the proletariat. Personally I like the idea of
libertarianism for that very reason - I think it would produce a real
revolution in the USA.
[2] and isn't Ford one of the big capitalist heroes?
[3] yes, every law has a downside. And I'd be interested to see those
firings
challenged under HR law on discrimination by age.
[4] which results in silly settlements, and in corporate reactions that
annoy
everyone, like McD selling lukewarm coffee. That jury sure thought ahead,
and
of the common good.
[5] It does now, and I see no real way to stop that within a mass capitalist
system. Anything that allows multinationals will allow them to cut their
losses
if they need/want to. So they can come in, buy companies, sell their assets,
and
abandon their liabilities. The same mechanism applies to strip mining -
promise
the earth beforehand, fight in court while mining to delay the fixup work,
then cut your losses when finished mining. Or repeat ad infinitum if the
mine is still worthwhile. But you knew that from observation, didn't you?
Eg: Fission power means accepting unlimited forward liability for an
infinite
time, according to how I understand Larry. Infinite, meaning "at least an
order
of magnitude longer that the duration so far of any of these involved". So
Larry would have the shareholders of GE accept liability on behalf of their
descendants for any accident that might happen in the future involving
either
a power plant, or waste from one. Such liability being at least the
cost of moving New York 200 miles, should one of those plants become
inoperable.
But the question there is, what are the alternatives? Burn petrochemical
feedstocks and face future ecovandalism charges when the cost of oil has
risen in the future? And greenhouse gas charges now?
Plus the very real possibility of lifting the leukemia rates under power
lines,
making generating electricity a pretty dubious game in itself.
All in all, I think bankruptcy laws are a good idea. And the idea of suing
for
damages would make only lawyers happy.
Did I mention that one other drain on the US economy in the lawyers? You
have
a lot of them, and they cost both directly and indirectly (by retainers and
by the caution they advise).
Have fun
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> I happen to know someone who seems to hold these beliefs. I once had
> to hear him whine and complain about how our employer had to pay him
> more because he was behind in his bills and would never catch up and
> be able to buy a house if they didn't pay him what he (thought) he
> deserved.
Doesn't it make you just laugh, when you see examples of such people
used on news programs concerning poverty, advocacy for minimum wage, etc.
Fine, they maybe on low/lower-income, have families to support, whatever.
Then you see what they spend their money on, and the whole argument is
lost, as quite appreciable amounts of money are spent on non-essential,
luxury goods, barely or just outside the means that their income provides.
There was an example a few years back which springs to mind......
Both parents smoked, (smoking here is a very expensive business, GBP3.40
per 20, ~USD5!!), they had satellite television, (dish costs ~100-200,
decoder similarly, plus subscription fees of varying costs...), children
had more expensive trainers, Nintendo (or whatever the equivalent was back
then), etc. Numerous other examples of wastes of money, yet they complained
of not having enough to survive on, borrowing a little bit more each month
on their next month's pay, etc. If they stopped buying a lot of the rubbish
that
they bought each month, and changed their mind-set from "Must have it now!"
to
a more rational, "save up to when you can afford it," most of their
"problems"
would be eliminated.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366C20C0.1D3A29CA@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <F3M105.K52@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jesse Long wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366C20C0.1D3A29CA@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
> >
> > That's claptrap. Normal people are inherently good, and further,
> > properly structured societies incent people to act in their own self
> > interest, and cull those that are inherently bad.
>
> Please tell me you don't believe this. You'd lose the shread of respect I
> have for your intellect if you do. Read the news. Every day is full of
> murder, theft, abuse, and hate. Yet people are good? You don't have to
> teach a two-year-old how to say "mine," yet people are good? All of human
> history is filled with conquerors and war, but people are good? I'd love to
> see you try to explain this one.
Certainly conquerors and war happen, and certainly there is murder,
theft, abuse, and hate, but don't tell ME that you believe that people
are inherently evil... I thought better of you. Once again slowly: Most
people are good. They have a sense of right and wrong. The rest (and how
many murderers do you know in your circle of friends, really...) are
deviant. People without a sense of right and wrong are not fully human.
To a certain extent that sense of right and wrong is nurture, not
nature, but if you have a society that is TOO far off respecting
property, people will sense that something is wrong, because they
understand cause and effect. Set up society so that rights are protected
and that self interest and the good of society intersect (that is,
capitalism and the rule of law, with a properly functioning marketplace
to communicate information about efficiency) and most people will do the
right thing. The ones that do not are acting in a counter survival
manner and need to be culled. That is the proper function of the rule of
law.
> > As for pittance wages, remove the 80% (or more, 99% in Sweden, for
> > instance) drag of the current govts on the economy and you will see an
> > unending boom so large that all that want to work will be able to live
> > handsomely. As for those that don't, bleeding hearts can voluntarily
> > contribute, and if not, think of it as evolution in action.
>
> Explain.
Explain what? That government is a big drag on the economy and that
business cycles are created by government interference? We are far
afield already. Not today. Take it as a given for now and ask later.
That people have no "right" to have all their desires catered to by
others if they will not work? That people have the right to choose how
to spend their charity dollars? Seems self evident to me.
> > Stripping only pays more if the long term costs (leaching, adjacent
> > property value reduction, etc) are ignored.
>
> Who cares. They move, leaving the problems for others.
Today.
Reassert full property rights and the rule of law, take away the lenient
bankruptcy laws that let corporations avoid the consequences of bad
decisions, take away the protection that corporate officers have for
being prosecuted as criminals for what their corporations do and moving
away to leave problems for others will not be possible, much less
profitable.
> > Abolish the EPA and use tort and (especially) criminal law to go after
> > polluters and you'd see a quick reduction in new strip mine projects (as
> > well as other polluting projects) .
>
> Explain, using a polluter that isn't falling into disuse like strip mining.
> What crimes? As a libertarian, shouldn't you think that the government
> should stay out?
As a libertarian I want government to assist in preserving the basic
rights of its citizens. And that means property. All rights are property
rights in the final analysis.
If I sell you a product that I make explicit claims about, to wit, that
it is safe, but I know for a fact that it is not safe, but instead is
dangerous and WILL harm you, and you come to harm, I am guilty of
assault. Not pollution, not product liability, not violating an OSHA
regulation, just plain old common law assault.
If I operate a facility in such a way that it emits toxic material from
the facility and I have not secured permission from all adjacent
landowners to do so (and they in turn make provisions that it does not
leave their property or get permission from THEIR neighbors, all the way
around the world, if need be, (therefore impractical and ruled out, in
reality) ) then I am guilty of trespass because I am putting material
that is not desired on the property of another. Not pollution, just
plain old common law trespass. Should a landowner or his authorised
agent suffer harm, then I am guilty of assault, or negligent homicide or
murder, depending.
> > We need strict enforcement of exising law, not regulations that shield
> > companies. Minimum standards always turn out to be a shield that
> > companies hide behind, they compete to hit the minimum, just barely.
>
> So, in other words, if you drop or eliminate the MW, companies won't even
> have to worry about hitting that, and can drop wages as they please. That,
> and market forces in a good economy won't force prices above the minimum?
> This doesn't sound libertarian to me.
I was referring to product standards not wages.
If there is a process for packing meat that has a tendency to include
bone slivers, (0r costs more not to) but a regulation says that no more
than .1% bone is allowed in meat, then all packers will set up their
equipment to hit .1%, and the media will not report it because after
all, it's within spec. The packers are competing on price.
Absent the regulation, Consumer Reports will run a study, and soon
enough, the packers will be competing with each other on quality
instead, because I and many other consumers will pay more for meat that
has 0% bone slivers in it.
SO instead of competing to hit the minimum they are competing to hit 0%
based on consumer preference. Far better.
In a booming economy (remember that premise, we won't HAVE any non
booming economies in Libertopia) any employer foolish enough to pay less
than what a job is worth will soon find herself without workers, and out
of business.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366C4892.B09B99C3@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com>...
>
> Certainly conquerors and war happen, and certainly there is murder,
> theft, abuse, and hate, but don't tell ME that you believe that people
> are inherently evil... I thought better of you. Once again slowly: Most
> people are good. They have a sense of right and wrong. The rest (and how
> many murderers do you know in your circle of friends, really...) are
> deviant. People without a sense of right and wrong are not fully human.
I do think that people have a sense of right and wrong, and that when they
do wrong they usually know it. But if people are good, then they should
choose to do good. We have plenty of laws and religion to tell us what is
good and what is bad. But people choose to do wrong things. Even the worst
criminals have a sense of right and wrong (usually), and know they're doing
wrong. I'm not suggesting we don't know what we do. I'm suggesting we know
exactly what we're doing, and that makes us selfish and evil by nature.
Having a sense of right and wrong doesn't make you good. Having a sense of
right and wrong, having the freedom to choose right or wrong, and naturally
tending toward right without societal training makes you "good." This does
not happen. We tend towards evil and selfishness.
> To a certain extent that sense of right and wrong is nurture, not
> nature, but if you have a society that is TOO far off respecting
> property, people will sense that something is wrong, because they
> understand cause and effect. Set up society so that rights are protected
> and that self interest and the good of society intersect (that is,
> capitalism and the rule of law, with a properly functioning marketplace
> to communicate information about efficiency) and most people will do the
> right thing. The ones that do not are acting in a counter survival
> manner and need to be culled. That is the proper function of the rule of
> law.
Actually, considering the socializing aspects of school, church, and family,
and that it takes 18 years of socialization before we declare someone fully
responsible for himself, I'd say a lot of nurture is going on. In fact, I'd
say that a child is born an animal, with no higher thought and a world view
that centers around him. As a child ages, it only gets worse, because he
begins to realize that others have feelings, and still chooses to be selfish
and mean and hurt others. This is not "good." Most of the guilt that comes
from mistreating others is a result of the socialization process that tells
us that we should be sorry for what we've done. Even then it isn't enough
to stop us from choosing to be mean sometimes.
Survival means taking what you need and leaving others behind. Dog eat dog.
Pretend to support the Golden Rule, but break it if you're not going to get
caught. Just ask how many kids cheat on tests in high school, or how many
people fudge taxes, or how many people lie to their spouses about their
"extracurricular" activity. Survival means cut everyone down who gets in
your way. This does not sound like good to me.
I realize that we have yet to agree on some basic definitions here, which
limits the discussion, but most arguments come from disagreements over
definitions more than anything else, so no surprise there.
Jesse
__________________________________________________________________
Jesse The Jolly Jingoist
Looking for answers?
Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! http://www.multicon.de/fun/legofaq.html
Power-search in Deja News! http://www.dejanews.com/home_ps.shtml
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Jesse Long <LongJR97@hotmail.com> wrote:
> responsible for himself, I'd say a lot of nurture is going on. In fact, I'd
> say that a child is born an animal, with no higher thought and a world view
> that centers around him. As a child ages, it only gets worse, because he
> begins to realize that others have feelings, and still chooses to be selfish
> and mean and hurt others. This is not "good." Most of the guilt that comes
Finally, someone else that agrees with me that kids suck.
Just say no to procreation. Raise cats, they're less expensive. If
you want to cuddle miniature people, befriend a midget or visit your
nieces and nephews, I say.
This said, of course, a week after I had to see my little 4 year old
second cousin terrorize her few week old kitten. I think she came
close to killing it 4 times in 20 minutes.
And no, I'm not animal rights activist, but I know a lot of people I'd
rather lose than my cats.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Meet more LEGO fans in your area through LUGNET
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I have to agree with Jesse on this one point.
Jesse Long wrote in message ...
> Survival means taking what you need and leaving others behind. Dog eat • dog.
> Pretend to support the Golden Rule, but break it if you're not going to get
> caught.
Biologically, (and I don't think humans have transcended their roots yet)
cooperation is *only* undertaken when the end results benefit the
individuals involved. An individual cooperates not because it helps others,
but because the help will be returned. If the cooperation is not
reciprocal, then someone is gaining and someone is loosing. Do this in an
evolutionary landscape and you are destined for obscurity.
I follow and support laws not because I am a good person, but because if
there are no laws, I am at a higher probability of being taken advantage of.
An individual who supports and follows laws can be *labeled* "a good
person", but being good is *not* the impetus for the behaviour.
Following the law costs me, (I can't bonk my neighbor on the head and take
is house), but the benefit is that I am less likely to be bonked on the head
myself. If an entire neighborhood agrees not to bonk and steal houses then
they all benefit. If they band together as a group to stop others they
benefit again.
LINC
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366C4892.B09B99C3@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <F3M8Bn.6nD@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jesse Long wrote:
>
> I do think that people have a sense of right and wrong, and that when they
> do wrong they usually know it. But if people are good, then they should
> choose to do good. We have plenty of laws and religion to tell us what is
> good and what is bad. But people choose to do wrong things. Even the worst
> criminals have a sense of right and wrong (usually), and know they're doing
> wrong. I'm not suggesting we don't know what we do. I'm suggesting we know
> exactly what we're doing, and that makes us selfish and evil by nature.
>
> Having a sense of right and wrong doesn't make you good. Having a sense of
> right and wrong, having the freedom to choose right or wrong, and naturally
> tending toward right without societal training makes you "good." This does
> not happen. We tend towards evil and selfishness.
No no no!! To be selfish is not evil. To be selfish (that is, to do
things that are pro-survival, to act in your own self interest) is GOOD.
You have fallen into the classic looters trap. Renounce teaching that
tells you to be selfless, for that way lies death.
Now, there IS a hierarchy of self. Just as with Maslow's needs
hierarchy, a mother who sacrifices herself to save her children is not
being selfless. She is acting under biological imperative.
But until you renounce the notion that self sacrifice, whatever the
reason, or for no reason at all, is a good thing, we have no moral basis
for discussion, since your morals are fundamentally flawed. Therefore I
suggest we stop this thread now as we will never fundamentally agree.
We are not our brother's keepers, nor should we be.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Once upon a time, Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> We are not our brother's keepers, nor should we be.
I volunteer to be my brother's LEGO keeper. That's using 'brother' in
the spiritual sense, of course. Sisters, too.
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> But until you renounce the notion that self sacrifice, whatever the
> reason, or for no reason at all, is a good thing, we have no moral basis
> for discussion, since your morals are fundamentally flawed. Therefore I
> suggest we stop this thread now as we will never fundamentally agree.
Hrmmm, you've used the phrase "your morals are fundamentally flawed"
before to describe your opinion of the morals of people who think it
is ok to pull the price tags off merchandise to try to get a lower
price. I think you also mentioned something about not wanting to do
business with that type of person.
Not trying to suggest that these two examples are even remotely
similar, but do you see this "self-sacrifice" flaw as being an
essentially wrong thing or just a misguided thing? I guess that would
depend on how much power the person who was flawed had to inflict that
flawed view on others...
> We are not our brother's keepers, nor should we be.
Hrmmm.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Meet more LEGO fans in your area through LUGNET
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote
> No no no!! To be selfish is not evil. To be selfish (that is, to do
> things that are pro-survival, to act in your own self interest) is GOOD.
You're using a specific and unconventional definition of "selfish",
most often used IME by evolutionary biologists and geneticists
(both meat and virtual). To most of us "selfish" is similar to
arrogant or unempathetic - it describes someone who cares only
about herself. your usage is more like "longterm self-interest"
than "uncaring".
> You have fallen into the classic looters trap. Renounce teaching that
> tells you to be selfless, for that way lies death.
Larry, there's a fine line between selflessness and long term thought.
On the trivial end, you could keep the money and Lego people send you,
thereby making an immediate gain. And only losing the goodwill of people
you'll never meet. But you honor agreements and promote your good
reputation by "selflessly" doing good things. Why? Long term gain.
I read an interesting study of monastries in Italy that went the
same way - nominally the monks were committing suicidal altruism
from a genetic perspective. But in practice the monks tended to
be from large families, and so having a monk in the family was
genetically cheap, but the payoff was in standing in the community.
So over generations the strategy paid off (families with traditions
of devotion do better, in historical terms).
The same can be said of any form of government - you accept the
current system in the US despite its obvious problems, because
historically the US has done better than most other countries
and therefore your kids have a better chance at a good life there
than in most countries. So you "selflessly" pay high taxes to
support welfare mothers and corporate "sponsorship" because they're
part of a greater good.
Personally I count some of what you advocate as increased altruism
- caring for future generations. Some of the rest of it seems more
like unethical social experimentation.
At what level(s) do you advocate greater selfishness?
> But until you renounce the notion that self sacrifice, whatever the
> reason, or for no reason at all, is a good thing, we have no moral basis
> for discussion, since your morals are fundamentally flawed. Therefore I
> suggest we stop this thread now as we will never fundamentally agree.
I don't believe that altruism is a benefit-free activity. So you're right
in that respect. And yes, morally you and me are worlds apart, but
unfortunately mine don't let me write you off as an idiot quite that
easily.
Moz
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> As for 2) I don't think "government" has anything to do with
> protecting the common good. The "common good" that the government
> protects at any given time is just whatever pet project and
> self-interest that the special interests with the most money and
> lobbyists promote.
A politician has 2 responsibilities in the Western World.....
1) Get into office
2) Stay in office
This is of course, the observed attitude of most politicians.
They will promise the earth to be elected, and when elected,
do just enough to ensure re-election. The few campaign promises
that are ever fulfilled, usually occur within a short period
before re-election time, in order to capitalise on successes.....
Sometimes the notion of democratic autocracy appeals, with the
threat of a bullet to ensure a ballet at appropriate
times....._____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366C8C88.9640F50F@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <slrn76qr20.1j0.cjc@VADER.NS.UTK.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> Not trying to suggest that these two examples are even remotely
> similar,
Oh, but they are. There is a direct link between thinking that it's OK
to ask/force someone else to support you, or someone else who's not
deserving, and thinking it's OK to cheat a store out of what is rightly
theirs.
Either you respect property rights, or you don't. You can't only sort of
respect them.
> but do you see this "self-sacrifice" flaw as being an
> essentially wrong thing or just a misguided thing? I guess that would
> depend on how much power the person who was flawed had to inflict that
> flawed view on others...
Essentially wrong. But the power of the drumbeat preaching self
sacrifice is strong, so I can't get too upset with people not knowing
better. It's when they try to argue for it that I try to stop arguing
because we have no basis of agreement.
But we are far afield of the original thread. And I can get along with
people that believe in self sacrifice, as long as I'm not the self
they're sacrificing.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> > Not trying to suggest that these two examples are even remotely
> > similar,
>
> Oh, but they are. There is a direct link between thinking that it's OK
> to ask/force someone else to support you, or someone else who's not
> deserving, and thinking it's OK to cheat a store out of what is rightly
> theirs.
Well, maybe I didn't make myself clear. I don't care for people
telling me that I need to sacrifice for others, but what I was talking
about, I think anyway, was someone choosing to do it of his own
accord.
Like me and Rachael giving money to the Knox Area Rescue Ministry, or
the rare occasions when I have given money to street people. Probably
stupid of me (the latter anyway), and I'm not normally taken in by pan
handlers, having gone to school in downtown Nashville with quite a few
of them, but somehow, those few times, it seemed right.
But no, I don't think I'm my brother's keeper. A good thing for him,
too, because if I were he'd still be black and blue for some of the
stupid stunts I let him go through with because I knew he had to learn
on his own.
I don't think we're disagreeing about anything, come to think of it.
> But we are far afield of the original thread. And I can get along with
> people that believe in self sacrifice, as long as I'm not the self
> they're sacrificing.
Oh, who cares about threads?
Now, how about the NBA? I hear the players are doing some kind of
pay-per-view for charity but also to benefit some of the poor,
financially strapped lesser-paid players. You know, the ones who only
make 200-300k per year. Gotta feel sorry for them. :)
Or how about Tennessee this year? National Champs, or will they choke
at the last instant in the Fiesta Bowl?
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Larry Pieniazek wrote
> Oh, but they are. There is a direct link between thinking that it's OK
> to ask/force someone else to support you, or someone else who's not
> deserving, and thinking it's OK to cheat a store out of what is rightly
> theirs.
But Larry, the good (selfish) view is that changing tags is fine because
you benefit at the expense of people you don't know. Property rights work
best when you can persuade others to adhere to them while you don't.
> Either you respect property rights, or you don't. You can't only sort of
> respect them.
I respect them a lot. I think it's great that other people feel bound by
them.[1]
Moz
[1] yes, devils advocate.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366DDFEB.DF57435D@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <slrn76s42j.1so.cjc@VADER.NS.UTK.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> Like me and Rachael giving money to the Knox Area Rescue Ministry, or
> the rare occasions when I have given money to street people. Probably
> stupid of me (the latter anyway), and I'm not normally taken in by pan
> handlers, having gone to school in downtown Nashville with quite a few
> of them, but somehow, those few times, it seemed right.
If you donate money of your own free will, to a cause that you believe
is worthy, because it helps people that deserve to be helped, is it a
sacrifice? What if you gave so much money that you couldn't buy a Lego
set you dearly wanted to get?
I have given 5 gallons of blood so far in my lifetime. Sometimes I
fainted while I was doing it. Sometimes I had to miss work without pay
to do it. Was that a sacrifice? Why or why not?
If the US ever gets attacked by an evil empire bent on enslaving us the
way the USSR was threatening to, I will volunteer to put my life on the
line to help defend it (even if it is a flawed country, it's the best
hope of mankind now that the ChiComs took Hong Kong back from the
Brits). If I get killed, was that a sacrifice? Why or why not?
The answer in all cases is no. No sacrifice.
To those following along:
When you can reason from property rights and the rights of people to
make choices and suffer the consequences, that is, when you reason from
my first principles, and you get that answer, you're starting to take
the blinders off. Keep thinking.
In particular, think about your motives for giving. Do you give because
the recepient is a good person who had some bad luck and probably would
bounce back anyway, or do you give because you feel guilty that you have
more than they do? Do you give because the person is virtuous, or
because the person is wicked? It's only a sacrifice to give when you
know that helping is morally wrong. It's only a sacrifice when the gift
won't be valued by the recepient.
I won't sacrifice. I am not my brother's keeper. I reject "to each
according to his need". End of story.
<Mike said: how about them Vols?>
Dunno, I don't follow football (well, I did notice that the Broncos seem
to be undefeated, but being in Denver makes that hard to miss).
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
(HEAVILY snipped, but hopefully without changing meaning or intent)
>
> If you donate money of your own free will, to a cause that you believe
> is worthy, because it helps people that deserve to be helped, is it a
> sacrifice?
What if you gave so much money that you couldn't buy a Lego
> set you dearly wanted to get?
>
> I have given 5 gallons of blood so far in my lifetime. Sometimes I
> fainted while I was doing it. Sometimes I had to miss work without pay
> to do it. Was that a sacrifice? Why or why not?
>
> The answer in all cases is no. No sacrifice.
Okay, now you've lost me. I would have said that this giving of blood,
even knowing that it might cause you to miss work and lose income, would
count as a sacrifice. In fact, I used the example of giving blood in a
homily once, to make just this point.
In the homily, I admitted that for me to give blood was not really a
sacrifice. I might feel a little tired afterward, and maybe miss a TV
program if I went to bed early, but giving blood was not really a
sacrifice, in my case.
BUT...then I used an example of a five-year-old who was asked to give
blood for a transfusion to help save the life of his sister. After the
bood was taken, the boy asked, "So, when do I die?" He had the idea
that blood was like batteries, and that since his toy car quit working
when the batteries were removed, he would soon cease to work as well.
In this case, he had been willing to give all that he was for his
sister. (OK, not a great example, because is a child REALLY capable of
understanding what this complete self-giving would entail?) This, I
said, was at the heart of sacrificial giving, as it required that it
COST us something personally.
>
> In particular, think about your motives for giving.
Do you give because
> the recepient is a good person who had some bad luck and probably would
> bounce back anyway,
or do you give because you feel guilty that you have
> more than they do?
Do you give because the person is virtuous,
or
> because the person is wicked?
Do the motives matter here as to whether it is sacrificial, or is the
heart of the matter the knowledge that it will cost us something? I see
that if I give to charity only because I believe that God will give me
more in return (the local fundie notion of giving), then this is not
sacrificial; it's an investment. It may or may not pan out. You could
even call it gambling if you want. You give because of the hoped for
payoff. So it's not really seen as costing me anything "in the long
run."
But if I recognize it as a legitimate, practically (or potentially)
guaranteed loss, why does it matter what my motives are?
> > It's only a sacrifice to give when you
> know that helping is morally wrong.
Huh!?! Here you really lost me! I can't say if I agree with you, as I
cannopt figure out what you mean.
> It's only a sacrifice when the gift
> won't be valued by the recepient.
Double-huh!?!
Woudl you care to clarify?
Rob
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Robert M. Dye <robdye@writeme.com> wrote:
> Okay, now you've lost me. I would have said that this giving of blood,
> even knowing that it might cause you to miss work and lose income, would
> count as a sacrifice. In fact, I used the example of giving blood in a
> homily once, to make just this point.
The life you save may be your own. Think of it as extremely personal
slightly painful insurance.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - A great new resource for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> I have given 5 gallons of blood so far in my lifetime. Sometimes I
> fainted while I was doing it. Sometimes I had to miss work without pay
> to do it. Was that a sacrifice? Why or why not?
I started giving blood as soon as they would let me in my senior year.
Did it almost without fail every 8 weeks until i got out of the Army
and through some freakish paperwork screwup was told that I was one of
thousands of people who tested false-positive 3 years earlier for
hepatitis something or other and that I could no longer give blood
until the Red Cross came up with a way to work it out. The fact that
I had given blood every 8 weeks for the previous 2.5 years didn't seem
to matter. They've never contacted me sense, and I've never felt the
need to drop in on random blood drives for fear of that kind of
embarrasment again.
> The answer in all cases is no. No sacrifice.
Yup.
<Mike said: how about them Vols?> >
> Dunno, I don't follow football (well, I did notice that the
> Broncos seem >to be undefeated, but being in Denver makes that hard
> to miss).
Heh, I don't follow football, but living in Knoxville makes it hard to
miss that Tennessee is undefeated as well. :) Sometimes I think I'm
the only non-rabid Vol fan in my building.
Me, I wish the universities and colleges would come clean and just
declare college football the minor league sport that it is. Then
maybe the schools could get back in the business of education instead
of being parking lots that make money during the week by renting space
to teachers and students.
Might have to take advantage of my staff discount and buy a pair of
season tickets for half off and sacrifice them for a nice price next
season.
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans
worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Wow, with all those and the one I left in just above, I don't see why
> you don't move to the US.
I lived there for 17 years(1), and despite the previously mentioned rip-
offs, have no desire to return......
(1)2 years in Greencastle, Indiana; 3 years in Alaska (Just outside
of Anchorage); and 12 years in New Jersey (2).
(2) And if you ever lived in New Jersey, then you might begin
to understand why I have no wish to return (3)
(3) I work for an airline, so I travel to the US about 3-4
times a year. Lego is usually quite high on the shopping lists,
though rarely at the same time as the sales.... :o( (4)
(4) Are you still here? (5)
(5) I will be in Illinois 9Jan-15Jan, so hopefully might catch
a sale!!!!!!
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Richard Dee <richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net> wrote:
> I lived there for 17 years(1), and despite the previously mentioned rip-
> offs, have no desire to return......
>
> (1)2 years in Greencastle, Indiana; 3 years in Alaska (Just outside
> of Anchorage); and 12 years in New Jersey (2).
>
> (2) And if you ever lived in New Jersey, then you might begin
> to understand why I have no wish to return (3)
Well, you have to admit, though, that 12 years in Jersey would
probably turn anyone against the states. There are lots of better
places to live, though, with lots nicer people.
> (5) I will be in Illinois 9Jan-15Jan, so hopefully might catch
> a sale!!!!!!
Good luck! :)
--
Unofficial listing of weekly US Lego Shop at Home phone specials
http://www.lugnet.com/lsahs/ (discontinued thru Holiday season)
800-835-4386 (S@H USA) / 800-267-5346 ext 222 (S@H Canada)
www.lugnet.com/news/ - Focused discussion groups for LEGO fans worldwide
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<366E0FD1.67876FA4@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> <3664BF87.5043@writeme.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"Robert M. Dye" wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > The answer in all cases is no. No sacrifice.
>
> Okay, now you've lost me. I would have said that this giving of blood,
> even knowing that it might cause you to miss work and lose income, would
> count as a sacrifice. In fact, I used the example of giving blood in a
> homily once, to make just this point.
This is a subtle point but an important one. Life is a series of choices
and trade offs. Every waking moment we are faced with a choice about
something or another. Some are bigger than others, naturally.
To act in an altruistic manner is to make a choice that is against your
own self interest. That is, it is counter survival. If you carry out an
analysis that shows that an action is beneficial, even if it appears
sacrificial, it is not a sacrifice. Further, if you make a choice, even
one that ends your own life, because you value something else more, it's
not a sacrifice, it is a free choice.
The little boy in your example may or may not have been sacrificing when
he decided to give his sister his blood. He clearly loved and valued his
sister. If I choose to do things that benefit my family, or others that
I deeply value and respect, because of that value and respect, it is not
a sacrifice. It is only a sacrifice when I choose to do things out of a
sense of guilt or duty, even though I don't respect or value the person
who benefits.
It is no sacrifice for me to give my life for my country, but rather a
payment in the coin the country can most use at the time for the value
that the country gave to me. But it must be voluntary. I would go down
swinging rather than answer a call to conscription, for conscription is
slavery.
I reject altruism and I reject sacrifice, as I have defined it. You may
think my definition is a bit screwy... Yet many religions and other
moral codes preach that very definition. They state that it is not
altruistic to give something up for another because you value the other
person, only to give something up for someone you do not value. "you are
your brother's keeper". While I can't quote the verses to you right now
I recall reading this very thing in the new testament.
It certainly permeates the notion of "from each according to his
ability..."
Now, I know that I am leaving stuff unanswered. That is always a risk
when several people are responding to one person's posts.
But I just can't answer every post. If you really really want to dig
into this, read some Ayn Rand. You may or may not agree, and it is not
my goal to convince anyone, really, it isn't. But she argues the case
against altruism far more eloquently than I do, so you'll have the
arguments in front of you.
Ayn isn't right about everything, and I am not an Objectivist, per se.
But I am a bit more anti sacrifice than the run of the mill Libertarian.
Most libertarians are more pragmatic, when asked to defend lassez faire
capitalism and the rights of the individual, theirs is a utilitarian
defense. And I could mount one as well, capitalism DOES work better than
other systems. But I prefer to derive from first principles which
usually gets me into these posting-slugfests. We have a name for that,
we call it the Libertarian Macho Flash, and I fall into that trap all
the time.
So this is my last post on this for a while. I could dig into all of
Moz's posts and analyse why NZ is struggling even under a lower
**apparent** tax rate, I guess. But not today, and probably not this
year.
Suffice it to say I would put my honesty, integrity, and general morals
up against anyone, anywhere, anytime. Any mistakes I have made I have
always tried to unwind. But I am convinced that most of us ARE honest
and good, and a properly structured society can incent that behaviour. I
submit that a society that best respects individual rights best incents
it.
Note that it is not enough to assert the right of the self, a fully
formed human recognises that others have rights, and that it is a
prerequisite of a well ordered society that the rights of all be
respected. Someone who doesn't steal because he thinks others are
watching isn't as moral as someone who doesn't steal because he has
internalised that everyone has rights.
Enough.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> > (2) And if you ever lived in New Jersey, then you might begin
> > to understand why I have no wish to return (3)
>
> Well, you have to admit, though, that 12 years in Jersey would
> probably turn anyone against the states. There are lots of better
> places to live, though, with lots nicer people.
I know, and the opportunities exist for me to return without hassle.
It has been considered on a few occassions, too.
>
> > (5) I will be in Illinois 9Jan-15Jan, so hopefully might catch
> > a sale!!!!!!
>
> Good luck! :)
Thanks!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Well, being from the USA, I always look at where the date is coming from ...
if it's coming from the US you can be sure it's month/day/year... if it's
from outside the US that's when you have to worry.. do most people outside
the US use day/month/year? I know our military sometimes uses this format..
and it does get confusing when the day is 1-12.. hehe... but people should
just recognize that they are posting worldwide and give some type of
indication of the format they are using when they give out dates (or times for
that matter)..
as for the cannon.. I need one!!.. If anyone has a dat file for a cannon
with it's holder then please let me know..
In lugnet.cad, Tore Eriksson writes:
>
>
> De Bengel wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Has anyone made a Ldraw part for a cannon?
> >
> > ____
> > |oooo| Cheers,
> > |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen
> > ¯¯¯¯
>
> I have a shooting cannon in my to-render-bucket, but unfortunately, it
> has low priority.
> Also, at the Tracked Parts List at
> http://www3.hmc.edu/~zbenz/parttracker/partlist.shtml it says:
> 3 Cannon Zach Coakley Planning to Work On 1/7/98
> I'll never learn if that means January 7th or July 1st, but anyhow if
> it's the same cannon, it's been on more to-do-lists for several months
> now... (Of course I think the Swedish system is best [yy]yy-mm-dd. It
> also makes it easy for computers to sort. Aren't we heading towards
> total confusion in the year 2001? But that's a new thread to start... ;)
> )
>
> /Tore
| | | | | | |
