I agree to 99% of what "an onerous coward" has written. It is truly shameful what some of the powerful have done in congress. I agree that some of the power players have warped the political process for personal gain. I know that it happens, and I deplore the practice. There is rampant corruption in the system. I agree to that.
That having said, there is NOTHING in the system that keeps anyone at the bottom. There are corridors of power at the top that those of us climbing the ladder may never break into, but there's enough water in the ocean for all of boats, big and small.
Strangely enough, there are also more rich people in the country, and the number of millionares (not the fortunes of the existing ones, but the shear number of people with over a million dollars) is much higher than in anytime in history.
Home ownership is at an alltime high percentage. I'm not saying that there is not a problem that needs to be addressed. Being poor sucks, trust me, I know. What I'm saying is that we can't just blame "the rich" and take no responsibility for our own actions.
Also, look at the number of single parent "families" that are counted amoung the poor, and coorelate that info to your number of families living in poverty. Compare that to the number of single parent families in the seventies. I don't have the numbers in front of me now, but I do seem to remember that it's much harder to become rich if you are a single parent trying to support four kids from four different fathers.
No, I think it probably does work the way you suggest. After all, one does not make effective soldiers by protecting their feelings, or train a top athlete by protecting him from having to excercise.
If one wants to excel in anything in this life, one needs to learn the value of hard work.
The Columbine comment was ill concieved, but the way I read it, I still did not see a direct threat. If there was a question about a threat, then they could ASK the student directly.
Administrator: "Was that some sort of threat?" Student: "No, I was just making the point that bullying students is a bad idea. Even though I would never consider violence against the school, there is evidence that some people do." Administrator: "So you are not now considering acts of violence against the school or any of the faculty or students?" Student: "Of course not. I would, however, like you to stop bullying me, and I will use my constituionally garanteed rights of free speach to complain about the current level of intimidation."
Like I said, I don't think his reference was threatening, anymore than people's continuing comparison of people they don't like to Hitler is threatening. After all, we all know what happened to him, don't we? If someone suggested that "Bush is behaving like Hitler," can we view that as a vieled threat that the White House will be bombed and invaded by armed forces? That the President's body will never be found, and that the only indication of what happened to him is vague and unsubstaniated rumors of suicide?
One can carry supposition of "veiled threats" too far.
You know, that may not entirely be true. I come from a very poor family. My grandparents were sharecroppers (they worked other people's land for a share of the yeild) and my parents struggled to make ends meet. We were evicted from a half a dozen homes, and moved from a dozen or so before we could be evicted, because we could not pay the rent. I clearly remember wondering if we were going to eat on Christmas (much less get any presents,) one year.
Still, even with alcoholism, prescription drug addiction, infidelity and the inability to keep jobs, my family worked it's way out of poverty to a decent middle-class life.
My sister left home at 15, got pregnant by 17 by a resident-alien (here legally, but not a citizen,) and was married and divorced before the baby was a year old. That baby is now 16, is an honor student at a decent high school, dances classical ballet, tap, jazz, etc, and was awarded the "best student of her year" by her principal last week.
With a little hard work and some principles, anyone can work his way out of poverty and into a decent life. Children who are cared for and taught the right principles can excel, even in public schools.
I ended up joining the armed forces, then getting out and using the Montgomery GI bill to go to school. I'm now a professional with a Masters degree, earning a six figure income and have a bright future ahead of me. Don't say the poor are being univerisally exploited by the rich. They are being held back by their own habits.
America is the land of opportunity, where anyone can be rich. No one is going to hand it to you, it takes hard work and perseverance, and a clear understanding that one's choices define one's circumstances, not the other way around.
It's true that it's harder for someone with no resources to climb out of poverty. I'm not claiming that isn't. Also, I acknowlege that there are plenty of soft rich kids out there who will do just fine because they had every advantage given to them. Also, I will be a working stiff all of my life, where some people will get to dabble in whatever suits their fancy because Daddy gave them an huge inheritance.
All of that having been said, there is some truth in the statement, "The rich are getting richer because they are doing those things that made them rich, while the poor are getting poorer because they continue to do those things that made them poor."
There is a growing descrepancy between the rich and the poor in this country, but it is NOT because the poor are getting poorer. The poor are not any more poor than they were in the 1930's, the 1940's or the 1950's. In fact, when was the last time anyone has seen mass starvation in the US? People boiling their shoes for the leather? The biggest problems among the "poor" in America seem to be obesity and drug use.
The rich are getting richer, and it is primarily because they can invest their money in business, and the value of business is growing. Their investments grow, so EVERYONE who has invested in them gets richer. That includes people in the lower middle class who invest what little they can, and the "merchant class" who own small businesses or farms.
When someone comes to me and says, "the poor are only poor because the rich made them that way" they are also saying, "anyone who has achieved a comfortable life is evil, because they are repressing the poor." Does this mean that all of my hard work and sacrifice have been a sham, and I'm really part of a secret conspiracy to exploit the innocent poor? I beg to differ. We have to get away from cult of the repressed, and start encouraging "the poor" to do those things that will make them more productive and more comfortable.
In an ideal world, we would not have a "poor" class. We would have a baseline of people who live a simple, yet comfortable life and a rising level of families who strive for more. We would stop using the word "poor" to describe an economic status, because it would be recognized that the people in the lower income bracket (in our ideal world) are content with the level of income they make, or are just beginning their climb to higher incomes and a more expensive lifestyle.
RTFM The kid did not threaten the school, or blatantly accuse them of anything. He discussed HIS FEELINGS. He wrote, and I quote, "I feel threatened by you," to which the District replied, that the district will take action if it believes there is a safety issue. The student has been suspened for 10 days, and is being forced to go through an Expulsion hearing. I'd say they are "taking action."
If a student came to the office with a vague complaint of being threatened by a Teacher, with such a lame example, they'd be told to get over it. Why can the entire school system get by with being more "sensitive?"
I FEEL that they are just a bunch of whining crybabies, and should be immediately fired and replaced by more responsible adults.
It's too bad you feel this way. I am often very disappointed in our current leadership as well, but what can you do? I tend to try to vote for the least objectionable of the group. I don't like our choices either. Still, one choice was worse than the other...
The other thing we have to do is get control of our congressional choices. Most of them SUCK. Of course, the one's that I think suck the worst have very loyal bases, so what do I know? In the end, we'll get the leadership we deserve, God help us.
Yeah, I think about the blind spots when I fly some of the planes in Flight Sim. It's even funny when I can line up a support pole on the screen with the divider line between my screens. I just imagine that the edges of the monitors are part of the plane:o).
In real life, I fly weight-shift controlled ultralight gliders, so my view is nearly unobstructed. Of course, it's a high-wing, so I have to take care when clearing my turns, but that's not usually a problem.
My real point was that adding monitors is the best way to increase the enjoyment of the flight sims that I know. I configure my screens as a single large view, and adjust windows accordingly for the perfect match. Makes VFR flight much more realistic in FS2004.
Once you've flown just about any Flight Sim on multiple monitors, it's hard to go back to just one. Two is good, but there is the problem of having to deal with the divider in the screen, or living with your view being offset from center. I usually opt to fly with one monitor just offset from the center, and the other looking out one window. Three is much better, because you can center the main monitor and use the two on the sides for side window views. I've used multiple video cards and a product called WidevieW to achieve this. WidevieW allows Microsoft Flight Sim to run on multiple machines in Slave mode so that one machine controls the plane and the others just handle the view.
The difference it makes in flying sims is too big to describe. I know guys who have opted for many more monitors (13 or 19 even) to get a full surround view. I think that 3 or 5 would be gracious plenty.
The cost is not that big a deal, either. Fifteen or seventeen inch flat panel monitors are available for less than $250 each, and can be used on other systems if the multi-monitor setup is not needed all the time.
You are right. After looking at your post again, you did not say anything about any particular administration. I'm sorry to have assumed so. I've just had so many conversations with people who blame the current federal administration (or more correctly, President George W. Bush, himself) that I reacted to that instead of your actual post. Again, I apologise for jumping to conclusions.
Back you your comment about the Corps of Engineers. I'm curious about your views. You are obviously very angry about something. I've heard for years that New Orleans might not survive a Cat 3 Hurricane. I've lived through a couple of lesser hurricanes when I lived in Lake Charles, so I understand the power those storms have.
What, in your opinion, could have/should have been done differently that could have averted this disaster?
By the way, the reason I brought up the sea wall is because some people (obviously not you) don't know that there was more than just a levee break involved in the flooding. There were multiple points where the water came in, and the first was a thin steel wall that was never intended to keep out that much water.
Still, I'd like to know what you think should have been done, and by whom.
------ I'm not trying to pick a fight. I really want to know what you think.
Doc, I think you're right about reducing emmisions. They are clearly harmful, and it is a step we can take right now without huge changes in infrastructure. In fact, if you look over the last 25 years, I think you will find that we have in fact reduced emmisions a great deal. True there is work still to be done.
I don't think it is the role of Government to enforce these things, I believe it is our duty as public citizens to make this happen. I have made choices in my life that have a great effect on my personal contribution to the problem. I telecommute two or three days a week, and ride the bus on those days where I do work. It makes my commute take about three hours a day, but it's something that I feel I must do.
We the people need to wake up and use our purchasing power to encourage companies to produce products that help the environment, and eliminate those products that harm the environment. The government is not the answer. The true power lies with the people. We can make it happen if we want, regardless of what Governement does.
The problem is that most of America is clueless, and billions of others (Chinese, Indian, etc) couldn't care less. Let's stop blaming the Administration that we don't like, and start making a REAL difference by convincing the PEOPLE who DO MATTER that they need to get on the team.
Were you expecting the Army Corps of Engineers to suddenly rush out and fix the Sea Wall that had been in place for several administrations in the two weeks that we had before Katrina hit? Why do you not blame the Clinton Administration for not fixing the thing while Bill was in office? He had eight years to fix it, and did nothing.
Or, do you think that George W. fired the entire Corps of Engineers when he entered office? And, I suppose he completely replaced the Justice Department as well. No Democrats left in Government now, hmmmm? Just George W. Bush's flunkies.
Grow up. The same people are in govenrment jobs through several opposing administrations. They do their job the same no matter who's at the top spot. Or, do you really think that the President of the United States, democrat or republican, makes every little decision that gets made by the Federal Government?
My point is that blaming the President for things that happen DURING his adminsistration regardless of whether he had anything to do with a decision regarding the issue is like blaming the Chinese when something happens during the Year of the Monkey.
Bogtha said, "the USA of yesterday that broke up Ma Bell was a democracy..."
The USA is not now, and never has been a Democracy. I has been from it's inception a Republic. A Democracy is a system of government where the citizens vote directly on the laws that govern them.
Assumed Guild said, " Now, to touch on race again, a larger percentation of the black population in the US is porr than in the white population. Therefore, a black person is more likely to spend time in jail than a white man. Furthermore, a man is more likely to spend time in jail if his father has spent significant time in jail."
The fact is that there are more poor whites than poor blacks in raw numbers. If money was a factor, then there would be more whites in jail. As it stands, as a percentage of the population, blacks are 9 times more likely to commit a crime than whites.
There are mistakes made in the judicial system, it's true, but more often than not, the juries that convict blacks are more than half black themselves, so if the problem is prejudice, then who is it that is prejudiced?
In other western countries, the blacks DO NOT HAVE the same issues, and are not more likely to commit crimes. It is therefore not a racial thing, but a social one. To make this more topical, blacks are much less likely to burn illegal tunes onto a CD than whites.
Did you just call the entire online community theives? I believe you just did, or at least claimed the everyone in the online community (including yourself, interestingly enough, since you are online) is disrespectful of other's intellectual property rights.
I beg to differ. There are many in the online community who respect IP rights, but who do not use CD's to record music. I do not often listen to recorded music, even though I have about a hundred purchased CDs. I recorded all of them onto my hard drive, then put the originals in storage. I do not EVER listen to the CDs, and rarely listen to the hard drive recordings.
I do, however, burn pictures from my camera, burn ISO's of Linux distributions, archival copies of my emails, etc, to CD. I object to sending money to the RIAA every time I purchase a CD, but they seem to have a lock on the industry, and powerful friends in Congress, so I'm stuck. To retaliate, I have decided to never, ever, buy music again. I listen to the radio, instead. The last time I purchased music, it was through the iTunes music store. I have bought about 25 individual songs through iTunes, that I can now not use, because I no longer use Windows, and they don't have a Linux version of the software.
I kept the files, since I may one day buy a Mac, but do not plan to buy any more music. If I want music, I turn on the radio, or listen through XM digital. They get paid, but they would get paid whether I listened that way or not, so there is nothing I can do about it.
I just had to re-install my Father-in-law's OS (XP home) again last week. He seems to need it done about twice a year because the system tends to get slower and crashes more frequently with time. After an OS re-install, he is back to running quickly, but it does take a while to accomplish. Three weeks ago, my wife's computer died, and I built her a new one with Fedora Core 4 instead of Windows.
With the BS about taking two weeks to install Linux, and the implied no-brainer of installing Windows, I'd like to point out that it took me all of 45 minutes to install Fedora, complete with Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, plenty of games, etc. All of the peripherials worked out of the box. When I installed my Father-in-law's OS, it took significantly longer. I had to load driver disks for everything, and when a few of them didn't work, I had to download newer drivers from the vendor's web sites. The manditory OS updates from Microsoft took about an hour by themselves (go to the website, download the updater, run it, let it "recommend" updates, install a couple, reboot, go back to the website, let it run the updater, let it "recomment other updates, etc.)
All in all I was able to build her machine in one fourth time time it took to re-build his. So far, I have not had to "tweak" either computer at all, possibly because I built them correctly the first time. It is true that more peripherials work on Windows machines than Linux boxes, but if one chooses the peripherials wisely, it does not seem to be an issue.
I must admit that I've been a Unix admin for nine years, and was a Windows system admin for several years before that. I have installed and operated every version of Windows that has come out, and have been "playing" with Linux since Slackware 5.1.
The truth is that a well set-up Linux box can be more secure, and more malware free, than the average Windows installation. It is also true that a well installed Windows system can be made to be very secure. It's probably easier to make a Unix variant secure than Windows, due to the nature of the underlying design philosophy, but the difference is more in how the system is configured than the OS archetecture itself.
I spent nearly a week working in Ocean Springs in one of the Distribution Centers for donated supplies. The VAST majority of the donations were from Churches. I went down there with a Church group. We were one of several groups that went, each taking from 3 days to 6 days to work in the area.
We WORKED. We were not there to "convert" anyone, but to help them. Before working, at lunch, and every evening, we got together to pray. If anyone asked us where we were from (10 times a day) we responded with the organization name and city we were from (Serv Missions International, Hickory Flat Georgia.)
While we were there, we slept a one church, and ate our meals at another one. Between the churches, the mission groups and the distribution center, we were in contact with several thousand people a day. People who needed food, shelter, and sometimes a shoulder to cry on or simply someone to tell their story to. Without the churches, none of this would have been possible.
We responded with gifts and service to our fellow man, without regard to their social status, education level, race or religion. Not everyone that worked with us was a member of a church, or even Christian. It didn't matter, because that was not the goal. We went where we were needed, doing the work that I believe God wanted us to do. Help each other.
Anyone can sit on the sidelines and critisize Christians for being too pushy with their zeal to bring others into their religion. I try to treat them understanding and respect. I'm just sad that people take pot-shots at folks who volunteer their time, effort and money to help others.
When I went to Biloxi (and Ocean Springs) Mississippi to be part of the recovery effort, I did not see a large difference in the damage to the houses that were "stick built" as opposed to other construction. The majority of the damage was not due to wind. It was the storm surge that did the big damage.
While wind did tear some roofs off, and made a mess of trees, fences, porches, etc, the storm surge destroyed everything in it's path. I saw concrete and steel hotels torn apart, cars split in half, huge floating casinos thrown around like they were child's toys.
Standard housing is not my preference, but I don't think that a well constructed house made out of 2x4 pine is at any more risk than the other homes. They can be made to withstand 150 mile per hour winds. Nothing is going to stand up against a 20 foot high wall of water driven by 150 mph winds.
I saw a shrimp processing plant in Ocean Springs. It was concrete, with plenty of heavy rebar in the mix. There were two foot square columns torn in half, sheared off at the base by the force of the wind and water. The stainless steel racks and machinery was strewn about like a bomb had gone off inside. It was total devistation. Very litte was left of the original structure. No wooden home, no matter what type of wood used, would have survived that force.
Two blocks inland, the scene was completely different. The houses were fine, except for flood damage. Everything was soaked, and molding. Some of the shingles had to be replace from the roofs, and some of the smaller outbuildings (gardening sheds, etc) were thrown about, but other than that, the wind did little damage.
If you live exposed to the sea, build high and strong. Large blocks of hewn stone come to mind. If you live a couple of thousand feet inland, put up a wind break, and don't be in a valley, you should be fine with conventional "Habitat for Humanity" style construction.
I just got back from a week working in the Swingster Distribution Center in Ocean Springs, Mississippi. 16 of us went down and worked in the center helping them to receive, organize and distribute supplies to the victims of the Hurricanes.
I learned several things while I was there. It is hot, and the work is hard. You simply can't drink enough water. By the end of the day, we would be sucking down a quart of water every 15 minutes, and didn't stop until a couple of hours after the "work day" was over. Keep this in mind.
The Gulf Coast region, with the exception of New Orleans, is in pretty good shape as far as public services are concerned. We were a half mile from the ocean, and were working in a sound building with power and water. I actually didn't make it into the building very often, mostly working in the yard unloading trucks or moving supplies.
Just about everything that was actually on the coast was destroyed. Those houses that were not completely devistated were damaged severely and will need massive reconstruction efforts. The houses just a little distance away from the coast, a quarter to a half of a mile or more, were not destroyed, but still suffered some sort of damage. The wind did some damage to roofs, knocked down trees, fences, etc, but the biggest problem was still water damamge.
Several of my crew left the distribution center one day to help an elderly gentleman "muck out" his house. He was 80 years old, mostly blind (he had 15% vision) and was trying to clean up/repair his home by himself with no tools and no power. He'd sent his wife away because the house wasn't safe to be in.
The houses have water damage. This means that everything that was under 5 feet off the ground was soaked in water, and is now molding and rotting. It has to be torn out and carried to the street for the trash crews to pick up. Furnature, clothing, electronics, bedding, linens, pillows, appliences, TV's,... you name it, it's ruined.
The biggest job is just removing the trash. Once it's gone, the house has to be cleaned with bleach or some other mold inhibitor. Dishwashing gloves come in handy. Once cleaned, it can be rebuilt, and that is a fairly straightforward construction job. Any damaged framing must be replaced, drywall goes up, flooring goes down, trim and moulding goes in.
There is also "yard work" that needs to be done. Some homes have already fixed this problem. They look like nothing has happened. It has been several weeks, so if their house was not too badly damaged, they had time to fix the yard up. Others look like a war zone. There is debris of every imaginable kind there. I could show you some pictures. I found a microwave oven with a crab living in it, next to a torn street sign. 10 feet over, there was a Grand Piano laying upside down.
There are crews that move through the streets with large grapplers and trucks to haul away the debris. They take it to a central point where it's piled up. The piles are HUGE. While I was there, I ate meals along side crews that did nothing but cut up downed limbs with chainsaws. Other crews then moved the cut wood to the street. It's a massive effort.
That they need most is people willing to go and work, and not be picky about the job that needs to be done. I am not a manual labor kind of guy. I'm a computer geek and work in Infrastructure Problem Management, which means that I sit at a desk all day and talk on the phone for a living. Still, the job that they needed at the time involved moving large numbers of heavy boxes. That's what I did.
When you go to help, just do the job that needs doing. Don't worry too much about having everything that you need with you. There are TONS of supplies there. They may not be easy to find, but they are there. People have been shipping tools and supplies to the Gulf Coast area for weeks. What we need are PEOPLE getting involved.
You're right, that was well written. It's basically a balanced look at what some wild hemp advocates have been saying for a few years (save the world, etc.) While I have seen some evidence that DuPont had more to do with the outlawing of marijuana than this guy believes, there probably isn't any true hard evidence.
The fact is that there was a concerted effort to show that marijuana is a evil, soul-sucking drug that will turn the average young person into a raging dope fiend. The truth is that, while not good for you, dope probably isn't much worse than alcohol or tobacco.
I think the current laws are silly, and I also feel that without some sort of rational (read: money) the campaign to eradicate all forms of hemp would not have happened. It's ancient history, but intesting nonetheless.
When you talk about climbing, there are some things that you want in rope. Nylon is great for those things. When used in other applications, there is no reason that you couldn't use hemp rope.
I'm not saying that's still the reason. It was (one of) the original reasons. Now, it's still one of the reasons. After all, don't you know that rope is used for things other than climbing? It would still work great in boating/binding/trucking/hauling. Sure, nylon and polyprop works very well, too.
I don't have the link, but I was surprised to see just how strong hemp rope is. Look it up. It's still used in some parts of the world.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree to 99% of what "an onerous coward" has written. It is truly shameful what some of the powerful have done in congress. I agree that some of the power players have warped the political process for personal gain. I know that it happens, and I deplore the practice. There is rampant corruption in the system. I agree to that.
That having said, there is NOTHING in the system that keeps anyone at the bottom. There are corridors of power at the top that those of us climbing the ladder may never break into, but there's enough water in the ocean for all of boats, big and small.
Strangely enough, there are also more rich people in the country, and the number of millionares (not the fortunes of the existing ones, but the shear number of people with over a million dollars) is much higher than in anytime in history.
Home ownership is at an alltime high percentage. I'm not saying that there is not a problem that needs to be addressed. Being poor sucks, trust me, I know. What I'm saying is that we can't just blame "the rich" and take no responsibility for our own actions.
Also, look at the number of single parent "families" that are counted amoung the poor, and coorelate that info to your number of families living in poverty. Compare that to the number of single parent families in the seventies. I don't have the numbers in front of me now, but I do seem to remember that it's much harder to become rich if you are a single parent trying to support four kids from four different fathers.
No, I think it probably does work the way you suggest. After all, one does not make effective soldiers by protecting their feelings, or train a top athlete by protecting him from having to excercise.
If one wants to excel in anything in this life, one needs to learn the value of hard work.
Like I said, I don't think his reference was threatening, anymore than people's continuing comparison of people they don't like to Hitler is threatening. After all, we all know what happened to him, don't we? If someone suggested that "Bush is behaving like Hitler," can we view that as a vieled threat that the White House will be bombed and invaded by armed forces? That the President's body will never be found, and that the only indication of what happened to him is vague and unsubstaniated rumors of suicide?
One can carry supposition of "veiled threats" too far.
You know, that may not entirely be true. I come from a very poor family. My grandparents were sharecroppers (they worked other people's land for a share of the yeild) and my parents struggled to make ends meet. We were evicted from a half a dozen homes, and moved from a dozen or so before we could be evicted, because we could not pay the rent. I clearly remember wondering if we were going to eat on Christmas (much less get any presents,) one year.
Still, even with alcoholism, prescription drug addiction, infidelity and the inability to keep jobs, my family worked it's way out of poverty to a decent middle-class life.
My sister left home at 15, got pregnant by 17 by a resident-alien (here legally, but not a citizen,) and was married and divorced before the baby was a year old. That baby is now 16, is an honor student at a decent high school, dances classical ballet, tap, jazz, etc, and was awarded the "best student of her year" by her principal last week.
With a little hard work and some principles, anyone can work his way out of poverty and into a decent life. Children who are cared for and taught the right principles can excel, even in public schools.
I ended up joining the armed forces, then getting out and using the Montgomery GI bill to go to school. I'm now a professional with a Masters degree, earning a six figure income and have a bright future ahead of me. Don't say the poor are being univerisally exploited by the rich. They are being held back by their own habits.
America is the land of opportunity, where anyone can be rich. No one is going to hand it to you, it takes hard work and perseverance, and a clear understanding that one's choices define one's circumstances, not the other way around.
It's true that it's harder for someone with no resources to climb out of poverty. I'm not claiming that isn't. Also, I acknowlege that there are plenty of soft rich kids out there who will do just fine because they had every advantage given to them. Also, I will be a working stiff all of my life, where some people will get to dabble in whatever suits their fancy because Daddy gave them an huge inheritance.
All of that having been said, there is some truth in the statement, "The rich are getting richer because they are doing those things that made them rich, while the poor are getting poorer because they continue to do those things that made them poor."
There is a growing descrepancy between the rich and the poor in this country, but it is NOT because the poor are getting poorer. The poor are not any more poor than they were in the 1930's, the 1940's or the 1950's. In fact, when was the last time anyone has seen mass starvation in the US? People boiling their shoes for the leather? The biggest problems among the "poor" in America seem to be obesity and drug use.
The rich are getting richer, and it is primarily because they can invest their money in business, and the value of business is growing. Their investments grow, so EVERYONE who has invested in them gets richer. That includes people in the lower middle class who invest what little they can, and the "merchant class" who own small businesses or farms.
When someone comes to me and says, "the poor are only poor because the rich made them that way" they are also saying, "anyone who has achieved a comfortable life is evil, because they are repressing the poor." Does this mean that all of my hard work and sacrifice have been a sham, and I'm really part of a secret conspiracy to exploit the innocent poor? I beg to differ. We have to get away from cult of the repressed, and start encouraging "the poor" to do those things that will make them more productive and more comfortable.
In an ideal world, we would not have a "poor" class. We would have a baseline of people who live a simple, yet comfortable life and a rising level of families who strive for more. We would stop using the word "poor" to describe an economic status, because it would be recognized that the people in the lower income bracket (in our ideal world) are content with the level of income they make, or are just beginning their climb to higher incomes and a more expensive lifestyle.
RTFM The kid did not threaten the school, or blatantly accuse them of anything. He discussed HIS FEELINGS. He wrote, and I quote, "I feel threatened by you," to which the District replied, that the district will take action if it believes there is a safety issue. The student has been suspened for 10 days, and is being forced to go through an Expulsion hearing. I'd say they are "taking action."
If a student came to the office with a vague complaint of being threatened by a Teacher, with such a lame example, they'd be told to get over it. Why can the entire school system get by with being more "sensitive?"
I FEEL that they are just a bunch of whining crybabies, and should be immediately fired and replaced by more responsible adults.
It's too bad you feel this way. I am often very disappointed in our current leadership as well, but what can you do? I tend to try to vote for the least objectionable of the group. I don't like our choices either. Still, one choice was worse than the other...
The other thing we have to do is get control of our congressional choices. Most of them SUCK. Of course, the one's that I think suck the worst have very loyal bases, so what do I know? In the end, we'll get the leadership we deserve, God help us.
Yeah, I know what....hey, is that a butterfly?
Yeah, I think about the blind spots when I fly some of the planes in Flight Sim. It's even funny when I can line up a support pole on the screen with the divider line between my screens. I just imagine that the edges of the monitors are part of the plane :o).
In real life, I fly weight-shift controlled ultralight gliders, so my view is nearly unobstructed. Of course, it's a high-wing, so I have to take care when clearing my turns, but that's not usually a problem.
My real point was that adding monitors is the best way to increase the enjoyment of the flight sims that I know. I configure my screens as a single large view, and adjust windows accordingly for the perfect match. Makes VFR flight much more realistic in FS2004.
David
Once you've flown just about any Flight Sim on multiple monitors, it's hard to go back to just one. Two is good, but there is the problem of having to deal with the divider in the screen, or living with your view being offset from center. I usually opt to fly with one monitor just offset from the center, and the other looking out one window. Three is much better, because you can center the main monitor and use the two on the sides for side window views. I've used multiple video cards and a product called WidevieW to achieve this. WidevieW allows Microsoft Flight Sim to run on multiple machines in Slave mode so that one machine controls the plane and the others just handle the view.
The difference it makes in flying sims is too big to describe. I know guys who have opted for many more monitors (13 or 19 even) to get a full surround view. I think that 3 or 5 would be gracious plenty.
The cost is not that big a deal, either. Fifteen or seventeen inch flat panel monitors are available for less than $250 each, and can be used on other systems if the multi-monitor setup is not needed all the time.
You are right. After looking at your post again, you did not say anything about any particular administration. I'm sorry to have assumed so. I've just had so many conversations with people who blame the current federal administration (or more correctly, President George W. Bush, himself) that I reacted to that instead of your actual post. Again, I apologise for jumping to conclusions.
Back you your comment about the Corps of Engineers. I'm curious about your views. You are obviously very angry about something. I've heard for years that New Orleans might not survive a Cat 3 Hurricane. I've lived through a couple of lesser hurricanes when I lived in Lake Charles, so I understand the power those storms have.
What, in your opinion, could have/should have been done differently that could have averted this disaster?
By the way, the reason I brought up the sea wall is because some people (obviously not you) don't know that there was more than just a levee break involved in the flooding. There were multiple points where the water came in, and the first was a thin steel wall that was never intended to keep out that much water.
Still, I'd like to know what you think should have been done, and by whom.
------
I'm not trying to pick a fight. I really want to know what you think.
Doc, I think you're right about reducing emmisions. They are clearly harmful, and it is a step we can take right now without huge changes in infrastructure. In fact, if you look over the last 25 years, I think you will find that we have in fact reduced emmisions a great deal. True there is work still to be done.
I don't think it is the role of Government to enforce these things, I believe it is our duty as public citizens to make this happen. I have made choices in my life that have a great effect on my personal contribution to the problem. I telecommute two or three days a week, and ride the bus on those days where I do work. It makes my commute take about three hours a day, but it's something that I feel I must do.
We the people need to wake up and use our purchasing power to encourage companies to produce products that help the environment, and eliminate those products that harm the environment. The government is not the answer. The true power lies with the people. We can make it happen if we want, regardless of what Governement does.
The problem is that most of America is clueless, and billions of others (Chinese, Indian, etc) couldn't care less. Let's stop blaming the Administration that we don't like, and start making a REAL difference by convincing the PEOPLE who DO MATTER that they need to get on the team.
Were you expecting the Army Corps of Engineers to suddenly rush out and fix the Sea Wall that had been in place for several administrations in the two weeks that we had before Katrina hit? Why do you not blame the Clinton Administration for not fixing the thing while Bill was in office? He had eight years to fix it, and did nothing.
Or, do you think that George W. fired the entire Corps of Engineers when he entered office? And, I suppose he completely replaced the Justice Department as well. No Democrats left in Government now, hmmmm? Just George W. Bush's flunkies.
Grow up. The same people are in govenrment jobs through several opposing administrations. They do their job the same no matter who's at the top spot. Or, do you really think that the President of the United States, democrat or republican, makes every little decision that gets made by the Federal Government?
My point is that blaming the President for things that happen DURING his adminsistration regardless of whether he had anything to do with a decision regarding the issue is like blaming the Chinese when something happens during the Year of the Monkey.
Bogtha said, "the USA of yesterday that broke up Ma Bell was a democracy..."
The USA is not now, and never has been a Democracy. I has been from it's inception a Republic. A Democracy is a system of government where the citizens vote directly on the laws that govern them.
When did you vote to break up the old Ma Bell?
Assumed Guild said, " Now, to touch on race again, a larger percentation of the black population in the US is porr than in the white population. Therefore, a black person is more likely to spend time in jail than a white man. Furthermore, a man is more likely to spend time in jail if his father has spent significant time in jail."
The fact is that there are more poor whites than poor blacks in raw numbers. If money was a factor, then there would be more whites in jail. As it stands, as a percentage of the population, blacks are 9 times more likely to commit a crime than whites.
There are mistakes made in the judicial system, it's true, but more often than not, the juries that convict blacks are more than half black themselves, so if the problem is prejudice, then who is it that is prejudiced?
In other western countries, the blacks DO NOT HAVE the same issues, and are not more likely to commit crimes. It is therefore not a racial thing, but a social one. To make this more topical, blacks are much less likely to burn illegal tunes onto a CD than whites.
Did you just call the entire online community theives? I believe you just did, or at least claimed the everyone in the online community (including yourself, interestingly enough, since you are online) is disrespectful of other's intellectual property rights.
I beg to differ. There are many in the online community who respect IP rights, but who do not use CD's to record music. I do not often listen to recorded music, even though I have about a hundred purchased CDs. I recorded all of them onto my hard drive, then put the originals in storage. I do not EVER listen to the CDs, and rarely listen to the hard drive recordings.
I do, however, burn pictures from my camera, burn ISO's of Linux distributions, archival copies of my emails, etc, to CD. I object to sending money to the RIAA every time I purchase a CD, but they seem to have a lock on the industry, and powerful friends in Congress, so I'm stuck. To retaliate, I have decided to never, ever, buy music again. I listen to the radio, instead. The last time I purchased music, it was through the iTunes music store. I have bought about 25 individual songs through iTunes, that I can now not use, because I no longer use Windows, and they don't have a Linux version of the software.
I kept the files, since I may one day buy a Mac, but do not plan to buy any more music. If I want music, I turn on the radio, or listen through XM digital. They get paid, but they would get paid whether I listened that way or not, so there is nothing I can do about it.
I just had to re-install my Father-in-law's OS (XP home) again last week. He seems to need it done about twice a year because the system tends to get slower and crashes more frequently with time. After an OS re-install, he is back to running quickly, but it does take a while to accomplish. Three weeks ago, my wife's computer died, and I built her a new one with Fedora Core 4 instead of Windows.
With the BS about taking two weeks to install Linux, and the implied no-brainer of installing Windows, I'd like to point out that it took me all of 45 minutes to install Fedora, complete with Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, plenty of games, etc. All of the peripherials worked out of the box. When I installed my Father-in-law's OS, it took significantly longer. I had to load driver disks for everything, and when a few of them didn't work, I had to download newer drivers from the vendor's web sites. The manditory OS updates from Microsoft took about an hour by themselves (go to the website, download the updater, run it, let it "recommend" updates, install a couple, reboot, go back to the website, let it run the updater, let it "recomment other updates, etc.)
All in all I was able to build her machine in one fourth time time it took to re-build his. So far, I have not had to "tweak" either computer at all, possibly because I built them correctly the first time. It is true that more peripherials work on Windows machines than Linux boxes, but if one chooses the peripherials wisely, it does not seem to be an issue.
I must admit that I've been a Unix admin for nine years, and was a Windows system admin for several years before that. I have installed and operated every version of Windows that has come out, and have been "playing" with Linux since Slackware 5.1.
The truth is that a well set-up Linux box can be more secure, and more malware free, than the average Windows installation. It is also true that a well installed Windows system can be made to be very secure. It's probably easier to make a Unix variant secure than Windows, due to the nature of the underlying design philosophy, but the difference is more in how the system is configured than the OS archetecture itself.
La la la la. I'm not hearing nothing! La la la la.
I spent nearly a week working in Ocean Springs in one of the Distribution Centers for donated supplies. The VAST majority of the donations were from Churches. I went down there with a Church group. We were one of several groups that went, each taking from 3 days to 6 days to work in the area.
We WORKED. We were not there to "convert" anyone, but to help them. Before working, at lunch, and every evening, we got together to pray. If anyone asked us where we were from (10 times a day) we responded with the organization name and city we were from (Serv Missions International, Hickory Flat Georgia.)
While we were there, we slept a one church, and ate our meals at another one. Between the churches, the mission groups and the distribution center, we were in contact with several thousand people a day. People who needed food, shelter, and sometimes a shoulder to cry on or simply someone to tell their story to. Without the churches, none of this would have been possible.
We responded with gifts and service to our fellow man, without regard to their social status, education level, race or religion. Not everyone that worked with us was a member of a church, or even Christian. It didn't matter, because that was not the goal. We went where we were needed, doing the work that I believe God wanted us to do. Help each other.
Anyone can sit on the sidelines and critisize Christians for being too pushy with their zeal to bring others into their religion. I try to treat them understanding and respect. I'm just sad that people take pot-shots at folks who volunteer their time, effort and money to help others.
David
When I went to Biloxi (and Ocean Springs) Mississippi to be part of the recovery effort, I did not see a large difference in the damage to the houses that were "stick built" as opposed to other construction. The majority of the damage was not due to wind. It was the storm surge that did the big damage.
While wind did tear some roofs off, and made a mess of trees, fences, porches, etc, the storm surge destroyed everything in it's path. I saw concrete and steel hotels torn apart, cars split in half, huge floating casinos thrown around like they were child's toys.
Standard housing is not my preference, but I don't think that a well constructed house made out of 2x4 pine is at any more risk than the other homes. They can be made to withstand 150 mile per hour winds. Nothing is going to stand up against a 20 foot high wall of water driven by 150 mph winds.
I saw a shrimp processing plant in Ocean Springs. It was concrete, with plenty of heavy rebar in the mix. There were two foot square columns torn in half, sheared off at the base by the force of the wind and water. The stainless steel racks and machinery was strewn about like a bomb had gone off inside. It was total devistation. Very litte was left of the original structure. No wooden home, no matter what type of wood used, would have survived that force.
Two blocks inland, the scene was completely different. The houses were fine, except for flood damage. Everything was soaked, and molding. Some of the shingles had to be replace from the roofs, and some of the smaller outbuildings (gardening sheds, etc) were thrown about, but other than that, the wind did little damage.
If you live exposed to the sea, build high and strong. Large blocks of hewn stone come to mind. If you live a couple of thousand feet inland, put up a wind break, and don't be in a valley, you should be fine with conventional "Habitat for Humanity" style construction.
David
I just got back from a week working in the Swingster Distribution Center in Ocean Springs, Mississippi. 16 of us went down and worked in the center helping them to receive, organize and distribute supplies to the victims of the Hurricanes.
I learned several things while I was there. It is hot, and the work is hard. You simply can't drink enough water. By the end of the day, we would be sucking down a quart of water every 15 minutes, and didn't stop until a couple of hours after the "work day" was over. Keep this in mind.
The Gulf Coast region, with the exception of New Orleans, is in pretty good shape as far as public services are concerned. We were a half mile from the ocean, and were working in a sound building with power and water. I actually didn't make it into the building very often, mostly working in the yard unloading trucks or moving supplies.
Just about everything that was actually on the coast was destroyed. Those houses that were not completely devistated were damaged severely and will need massive reconstruction efforts. The houses just a little distance away from the coast, a quarter to a half of a mile or more, were not destroyed, but still suffered some sort of damage. The wind did some damage to roofs, knocked down trees, fences, etc, but the biggest problem was still water damamge.
Several of my crew left the distribution center one day to help an elderly gentleman "muck out" his house. He was 80 years old, mostly blind (he had 15% vision) and was trying to clean up/repair his home by himself with no tools and no power. He'd sent his wife away because the house wasn't safe to be in.
The houses have water damage. This means that everything that was under 5 feet off the ground was soaked in water, and is now molding and rotting. It has to be torn out and carried to the street for the trash crews to pick up. Furnature, clothing, electronics, bedding, linens, pillows, appliences, TV's,... you name it, it's ruined.
The biggest job is just removing the trash. Once it's gone, the house has to be cleaned with bleach or some other mold inhibitor. Dishwashing gloves come in handy. Once cleaned, it can be rebuilt, and that is a fairly straightforward construction job. Any damaged framing must be replaced, drywall goes up, flooring goes down, trim and moulding goes in.
There is also "yard work" that needs to be done. Some homes have already fixed this problem. They look like nothing has happened. It has been several weeks, so if their house was not too badly damaged, they had time to fix the yard up. Others look like a war zone. There is debris of every imaginable kind there. I could show you some pictures. I found a microwave oven with a crab living in it, next to a torn street sign. 10 feet over, there was a Grand Piano laying upside down.
There are crews that move through the streets with large grapplers and trucks to haul away the debris. They take it to a central point where it's piled up. The piles are HUGE. While I was there, I ate meals along side crews that did nothing but cut up downed limbs with chainsaws. Other crews then moved the cut wood to the street. It's a massive effort.
That they need most is people willing to go and work, and not be picky about the job that needs to be done. I am not a manual labor kind of guy. I'm a computer geek and work in Infrastructure Problem Management, which means that I sit at a desk all day and talk on the phone for a living. Still, the job that they needed at the time involved moving large numbers of heavy boxes. That's what I did.
When you go to help, just do the job that needs doing. Don't worry too much about having everything that you need with you. There are TONS of supplies there. They may not be easy to find, but they are there. People have been shipping tools and supplies to the Gulf Coast area for weeks. What we need are PEOPLE getting involved.
David
Neat. That's the first time I've seen that. Good find.
You're right, that was well written. It's basically a balanced look at what some wild hemp advocates have been saying for a few years (save the world, etc.) While I have seen some evidence that DuPont had more to do with the outlawing of marijuana than this guy believes, there probably isn't any true hard evidence.
The fact is that there was a concerted effort to show that marijuana is a evil, soul-sucking drug that will turn the average young person into a raging dope fiend. The truth is that, while not good for you, dope probably isn't much worse than alcohol or tobacco.
I think the current laws are silly, and I also feel that without some sort of rational (read: money) the campaign to eradicate all forms of hemp would not have happened. It's ancient history, but intesting nonetheless.
When you talk about climbing, there are some things that you want in rope. Nylon is great for those things. When used in other applications, there is no reason that you couldn't use hemp rope.
I'm not saying that's still the reason. It was (one of) the original reasons. Now, it's still one of the reasons. After all, don't you know that rope is used for things other than climbing? It would still work great in boating/binding/trucking/hauling. Sure, nylon and polyprop works very well, too.
I don't have the link, but I was surprised to see just how strong hemp rope is. Look it up. It's still used in some parts of the world.
William Randolf Hearst, the newspaper dude. See http://www.zpub.com/sf/history/will2.html