Hope & Same
David Loewe, Jr.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
--
"Chances are you're playing with fire
I thought by now you'd learned
You're gonna get your fingers burned."
Alan Parsons & Eric Woolfson
Harry Mary Andruschak
> Rendition of terror suspects to continue under Obama.
Play him off, keyboard cat
William December Starr
"David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> said:
> Rendition of terror suspects to continue under Obama.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
Please don't stop me if you've heard this one before:
Let's face it: Barrack Obama is what would have been called a
Republican if the Republican Party hadn't first been seduced
by Ronald Reagan and then taken over by batshit crazies. It's
nice that we've pried the crazies' hands off the steering
wheel, but let's stop making the mistake of believing that
leftists, progressives, liberals or even Democrats have a
friend or ally in the White House. We don't.
-- me, April 2009
-- wds
David V. Loewe, Jr
Starr) wrote:
Just keep on lying to yourself, William.
--
"Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed."
-Lazarus Long
David Friedman
Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe Obama as a Chicago Democrat,
that being what he is--a product of the last of the big city machines?
And, in terms of fiscal policy, don't you have the time sequence
backwards? The traditional Republican policy, honored sometimes in
practice and sometimes only in rhetoric, was keeping down government
spending in contrast to the "tax and spend" Democrats. The big shift
away from that was Bush II, who sharply increased government spending
and ran a big deficit (unlike his Democratic predecessor). Obama is
increasing government spending by much more, and running a still bigger
deficit. So insofar as Obama is a Republican, he's a Bush
Republican--and presumably you count Bush as part of the crazies.
If anything, it's Clinton you should label as a Republican in Democratic
clothing, Obama as a big government Democrat.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
David Loewe, Jr.
"You talkin' to *me*?"
--
"I aim to misbehave."
Malcolm Reynolds
Will in New Haven
> In article <tta69519ood933hpcaj16b64d7r8hbu...@4ax.com>,
Who is _we_ supposed to be? There is an assumption of political
identity for this newsgroup there. I know I'm not the only one here
who isn't a leftist, progressive or even Democrat. I would argue that
I am a liberal, in the sense that Marxists and socialists always hate
liberals, but I don't recognize many fellow liberals on the left.
However, the issue of rendition is one where I find myself very
disappointed wiith the Obama administration. I never _expected_ them
to do any of the things that would make them more in tune with my
political philosopy. They weren't elected on the grounds that they
would, after all. Matters of common decency like this are different.
--
Will in New Haven
David V. Loewe, Jr
<bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>On Aug 25, 7:02�am, wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>> "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> said:
>>
>> > Rendition of terror suspects to continue under Obama.
>>
>> >http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
>>
>> Please don't stop me if you've heard this one before:
>>
>> � �Let's face it: Barrack Obama is what would have been called a
>> � �Republican if the Republican Party hadn't first been seduced
>> � �by Ronald Reagan and then taken over by batshit crazies. �It's
>> � �nice that we've pried the crazies' hands off the steering
>> � �wheel, but let's stop making the mistake of believing that
>> � �leftists, progressives, liberals or even Democrats have a
>> � �friend or ally in the White House. �We don't.
>>
>
>Who is _we_ supposed to be?
Obviously YMDV, but I took "we" to be "leftists, progressives, liberals
or even Democrats."
>There is an assumption of political
>identity for this newsgroup there. I know I'm not the only one here
>who isn't a leftist, progressive or even Democrat. I would argue that
>I am a liberal, in the sense that Marxists and socialists always hate
>liberals, but I don't recognize many fellow liberals on the left.
You're using the classical definition of liberal - which is meaningless
in the current debate environment (you would be either a libertarian or
conservative in the current debate).
>However, the issue of rendition is one where I find myself very
>disappointed wiith the Obama administration. I never _expected_ them
>to do any of the things that would make them more in tune with my
>political philosopy. They weren't elected on the grounds that they
>would, after all. Matters of common decency like this are different.
--
"Why do we never get an answer
When we're knocking at the door
With a thousand million questions
About hate and death and war?"
David J. Hayward
Mike Van Pelt
David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Rendition of terror suspects to continue under Obama.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
"Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss"
I await the "Street Theater of the Absurd" folks to start
marching around in their goofy costumes and face paint,
with signs saying the sorts of things about the new boss
that they said about the old boss.
<sound of crickets chirping>
I don't guess I'll hold my breath, though.
The Democrats had a valid point that the previous administration
was spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors out on leave.
Alas, they're spending money like a bunch of cocaine-crazed
blonde billionaire heiresses on Rodeo Drive with Daddy's
American Express Centurion Card, which is hardly an improvement.
--
Mike Van Pelt When guns are outlawed,
mvp.at.calweb.com only Carl Rowan will have guns.
KE6BVH
Harry Mary Andruschak
wrote:
.
>
> You're using the classical definition of liberal - which is meaningless
> in the current debate environment (you would be either a libertarian or
> conservative in the current debate)
.Well, I have been accused of being a libertarian, of being a
conservative, or maybe even a centrist, as well as a foaming at the
mouth homophobic, perhaps a racist, CERTAINLY a sexist, blah blah
blah.
I WILL, however, admit to being a Cat-Daddy.
Keith F. Lynch
> I await the "Street Theater of the Absurd" folks to start marching
> around in their goofy costumes and face paint, with signs saying the
> sorts of things about the new boss that they said about the old boss.
> <sound of crickets chirping>
> I don't guess I'll hold my breath, though.
I don't know about that particular group, but there are plenty of
protestors. The perpetual protest just north of the White House was
still there last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to
have been there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
> The Democrats had a valid point that the previous administration
> was spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors out on leave.
> Alas, they're spending money like a bunch of cocaine-crazed blonde
> billionaire heiresses on Rodeo Drive with Daddy's American Express
> Centurion Card, which is hardly an improvement.
Indeed. I don't know how anyone can seriously claim that the
government represents the people, given that most people want
government spending to decrease, and both major parties not only
want it to increase, but want it to do so at an accelerating rate.
What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions upon
trillions without consequences? Do they think they'll still have jobs
or pensions after the economy completely collapses and the dollar
becomes worthless?
As much as I'd love to see both Bush and Obama living in the woods,
dressed in rags, eating nothing but bugs and twigs, it won't be much
consolation since I'll be doing the same -- as will everyone else.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Karl Johanson
news:h721iv$p9n$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> Mike Van Pelt <m...@web1.calweb.com> wrote:
>> I await the "Street Theater of the Absurd" folks to start marching
>> around in their goofy costumes and face paint, with signs saying the
>> sorts of things about the new boss that they said about the old boss.
>
>> <sound of crickets chirping>
>
>> I don't guess I'll hold my breath, though.
>
> I don't know about that particular group, but there are plenty of
> protestors. The perpetual protest just north of the White House was
> still there last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to
> have been there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
>
>> The Democrats had a valid point that the previous administration
>> was spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors out on leave.
>> Alas, they're spending money like a bunch of cocaine-crazed blonde
>> billionaire heiresses on Rodeo Drive with Daddy's American Express
>> Centurion Card, which is hardly an improvement.
>
> Indeed. I don't know how anyone can seriously claim that the
> government represents the people, given that most people want
> government spending to decrease, and both major parties not only
> want it to increase, but want it to do so at an accelerating rate.
>
> What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
> somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions upon
> trillions without consequences?
Some people are that way with population as well.
> Do they think they'll still have jobs
> or pensions after the economy completely collapses and the dollar
> becomes worthless?
>
> As much as I'd love to see both Bush and Obama living in the woods,
> dressed in rags, eating nothing but bugs and twigs, it won't be much
> consolation since I'll be doing the same -- as will everyone else.
Karl Johanson
Keith F. Lynch
> Let's face it: Barrack Obama is what would have been called a
> Republican if the Republican Party hadn't first been seduced
> by Ronald Reagan and then taken over by batshit crazies.
Neither party has a monopoly on batshit crazy. From the outside,
I don't see much difference between them.
All I ever expected of Obama is that he wouldn't be Bush. And so
far, I'm not in the least disappointed. He is indeed not Bush.
He acts a lot like Bush, but so would any Republican or Democrat,
so that's no surprise. I don't like it, of course, but so what?
It's not as if there was anything I could do about it.
David Loewe, Jr.
<adopts...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Aug 25, 11:13?am, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>
>> You're using the classical definition of liberal - which is meaningless
>> in the current debate environment (you would be either a libertarian or
>> conservative in the current debate)
>
>.Well, I have been accused of being a libertarian, of being a
>conservative, or maybe even a centrist, as well as a foaming at the
>mouth homophobic, perhaps a racist, CERTAINLY a sexist, blah blah
>blah.
>
>I WILL, however, admit to being a Cat-Daddy.
I want a cat. A big ol' Maine Coon.
Unfortunately, I can barely afford to feed myself and my current lease
forbids pets.
--
"On a morning from a Bogart movie
In a country where they turn back time
You go strolling through the crowd like Peter Lorre
Contemplating a crime."
Al Stewart & Peter Wood
Keith F. Lynch
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
>> somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions
>> upon trillions without consequences?
> Some people are that way with population as well.
What is this, '70s day? Over the past 30 years, birth rates have
plummeted everywhere. If present trends continue, world population
will peak within a generation, at levels not much higher than today,
and will then drop at an accelerating rate.
US population would already be dropping if not for immigration.
If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human tendency
to clump together rather than distributing ourselves evenly over the
countryside. The average population density of North America is only
about 21 people per square kilometer.
This "birth dearth" isn't entirely a good thing. The US Social
Security system, and similar Ponzi-like retirement systems, depend
on ever-increasing populations.
ObSF: Stross's _Saturn's Children_ never specifically says how
our species went extinct, but the implication is that we just stopped
reproducing, perhaps because we were distracted by our entertainment
systems, from the Internet to high-def TV to sex robots that were much
better than the real thing.
It's not clear to what extent people have ever reproduced because they
wanted to, rather than because contraceptives were too much hassle or
hadn't been invented yet. Some have, of course, but enough to maintain
the population?
Karl Johanson
news:h724nq$jrt$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
>>> somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions
>>> upon trillions without consequences?
>
>> Some people are that way with population as well.
>
> What is this, '70s day? Over the past 30 years, birth rates have
> plummeted everywhere. If present trends continue, world population
> will peak within a generation, at levels not much higher than today,
> and will then drop at an accelerating rate.
>
> US population would already be dropping if not for immigration.
According to The World Factbook, the US birthrate (July 2009 estimate) is
13.82 per 1,000 while the death rate is 8.38 per 1,000. Sounds like growth
rate of 5.44 per 1,000, unless the stats measured in a way I don't
understand.
Net immigration rate is 4.31 per 1,000.
> If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human tendency
> to clump together rather than distributing ourselves evenly over the
> countryside. The average population density of North America is only
> about 21 people per square kilometer.
Some people still want unlimited population growth.
> This "birth dearth" isn't entirely a good thing. The US Social
> Security system, and similar Ponzi-like retirement systems, depend
> on ever-increasing populations.
Assumintg that's true, why don't you think that's a good thing, as it might
mean the US government might fall apart and you don't want a government.
> ObSF: Stross's _Saturn's Children_ never specifically says how
> our species went extinct, but the implication is that we just stopped
> reproducing, perhaps because we were distracted by our entertainment
> systems, from the Internet to high-def TV to sex robots that were much
> better than the real thing.
Don't let it keep you up nights: )
> It's not clear to what extent people have ever reproduced because they
> wanted to, rather than because contraceptives were too much hassle or
> hadn't been invented yet. Some have, of course, but enough to maintain
> the population?
Dunno.
Karl Johanson
David Friedman
Actually, I was talking to whomever that "Let's face it:" quote was
from--I think Starr.
David Harmon
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote,
>protestors. The perpetual protest just north of the White House was
>still there last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to
>have been there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
Are they 24*7, or do they work business hours?
David Harmon
Mary Andruschak <adopts...@aol.com> wrote,
>
>I WILL, however, admit to being a Cat-Daddy.
I invite you to see my posts in alt.binaries.pictures.animals
Harry Mary Andruschak
>
> I want a cat. �A big ol' Maine Coon. �
When the time (and an understanding apartment manager allows), you
might want to find out if the Maine Coon Rescue League, or
equivilents, are still in action. I picked up Max that way. A 10 year
old pure male, at no cost.
"He ruled my apartment with arrogance and pride,
and broke my heart the day he died"
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> Karl Johanson <karljo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
>>> somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions
>>> upon trillions without consequences?
>
>> Some people are that way with population as well.
>
> What is this, '70s day? Over the past 30 years, birth rates have
> plummeted everywhere. If present trends continue, world population
> will peak within a generation, at levels not much higher than today,
> and will then drop at an accelerating rate.
>
> US population would already be dropping if not for immigration.
Not really... Immigration only accounts for about 45% of the increase
and the excess of births over deaths accounts for the rest. It's true
that first generation immigrants generally have a higher birth rate than
the US average but the difference isn't dramatic enough to have much
effect on the overall numbers.
From the CIA World Factbook entry for the US (2009 est):
Birth rate 13.82/1000
Death rate 8.38/1000
Net migration rate 4.31/1000
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html>
However, the US has an unusually high fertility rate for an industrialized
country.
Your statement is correct for some other countries, like Germany:
Birth rate 8.18/1000
Death rate 10.9/1000
Net migration rate 2.19/1000
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gm.html>
> If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human tendency
> to clump together rather than distributing ourselves evenly over the
> countryside. The average population density of North America is only
> about 21 people per square kilometer.
Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities. Dallas
county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring Collin county
has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and Delta county is 7.4.
All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
James Nicoll
Judging by Cleo, they are great cats but be warned the warranty
time on Maine Coons appears to be shorter than for other breeds. The
breed is apparently more prone to heart disease (feline hypertrophic
cardiomyopathy in particular), spinal muscular atrophy, and polycystic
kidney disease. Cleo was eventually done in by an unfortunate combination
health problems where treatment of one would mean a horrible death due
to the other condition [1]. We opted to euthenize him rather than let
him starve or suffocate.
On the plus side, we're still talking a decade or more of
life span and not the callous indifference to suffering that is the
Scottish Fold (one in four SF kittens have a painful, crippling
genetic disorder).
I'm thinking Maine Coon/something else cross might
be more durable. Just not sure what the something else should be.
1: Mind you, I had a tabby with kidney problems and a burmese who
died suddenly of a heart attack. Something will eventually break on
any cat.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
David V. Loewe, Jr
<adopts...@aol.com> wrote:
>lOn Aug 25, 6:48?pm, "David Loewe, Jr." <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> I want a cat. ?A big ol' Maine Coon. ?
>
>When the time (and an understanding apartment manager allows), you
>might want to find out if the Maine Coon Rescue League, or
>equivilents, are still in action. I picked up Max that way. A 10 year
>old pure male, at no cost.
Thanks for the info, Harry. I had no idea there were rescue
organizations for specific breeds.
>"He ruled my apartment with arrogance and pride,
>and broke my heart the day he died"
James Nicoll
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <615995ppfvi1gb98g...@4ax.com>,
>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>I want a cat. A big ol' Maine Coon.
>
> I'm thinking Maine Coon/something else cross might
>be more durable. Just not sure what the something else should be.
>
The scenario I am trying to avoid having a starring role in
is a hybrid cat that weighs 15 kg and thinks of me as prey.
David V. Loewe, Jr
Nicoll) wrote:
>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>I want a cat. A big ol' Maine Coon.
>
> Judging by Cleo, they are great cats but be warned the warranty
>time on Maine Coons appears to be shorter than for other breeds.
Well, with the cancer, the warranty time on me probably isn't too good.
In fact, I wonder if that condition might be a deal breaker with the
Maine Coon Rescue League.
>The breed is apparently more prone to heart disease (feline hypertrophic
>cardiomyopathy in particular), spinal muscular atrophy, and polycystic
>kidney disease. Cleo was eventually done in by an unfortunate combination
>health problems where treatment of one would mean a horrible death
>due to the other condition [1]. We opted to euthenize him rather than
>let him starve or suffocate.
>
> On the plus side, we're still talking a decade or more of
>life span and not the callous indifference to suffering that is the
>Scottish Fold (one in four SF kittens have a painful, crippling
>genetic disorder).
>
> I'm thinking Maine Coon/something else cross might
>be more durable. Just not sure what the something else should be.
>
>1: Mind you, I had a tabby with kidney problems and a burmese who
>died suddenly of a heart attack. Something will eventually break on
>any cat.
--
"It is a consolation to the wretched to have companions in misery."
- Publius Syrus
David Friedman
rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote:
> > What is this, '70s day? Over the past 30 years, birth rates have
> > plummeted everywhere. If present trends continue, world population
> > will peak within a generation, at levels not much higher than today,
> > and will then drop at an accelerating rate.
> >
> > US population would already be dropping if not for immigration.
>
> Not really...
I suspect the original poster was remembering figures on Net
Reproduction Rate or Total Fertility Rate, in terms of which I think his
statement is correct.
To see the difference, imagine a society in which, for past demographic
reasons, a large fraction of the population is in the child bearing
years, a small fraction old. Further imagine that each woman has, on
average, one and a half children during her lifetime. Since lots of
women are having children and hardly anyone is dying, total population
is growing. But if the same pattern of fertility continues long enough,
it will eventually start to shrink.
NRR is a calculated rate, not an observed rate. At NRR=1, current age
specific fertility is such that, if it doesn't change, a woman, over her
lifetime, will on average have one daughter. NRR<1 implies a population
that will eventually start to decline.
For an explanation of NRR and Total Fertility Rate, a slightly different
but related measure, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate
According to the text, the figure for native born American women is
currently below replacement
For a graph of NRR in China, Europe, the US and India over time,
including projections, see:
http://www.china-profile.com/data/fig_WPP2008_NRR_1.htm
It's about 1 for the U.S.,including native born and foreign born women.
Note that the initial "if not for immigration" can be interpreted as
including in the effect of immigration the higher fertility rates of
immigrant women. It's about .7 for Europe.
James Nicoll
>Nicoll) wrote:
>
>>David Loewe, Jr. <dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I want a cat. A big ol' Maine Coon.
>>
>> Judging by Cleo, they are great cats but be warned the warranty
>>time on Maine Coons appears to be shorter than for other breeds.
>
>Well, with the cancer, the warranty time on me probably isn't too good.
>
>In fact, I wonder if that condition might be a deal breaker with the
>Maine Coon Rescue League.
I found the process of putting Cleo down surprisingly stressful*
and my grandfather had the first of a series of strokes that eventually
led to his death the after after he put his cat Tommy down so it may be
the thing to consider here is what effect having a short lived pet could
have on you.
* Oddly, it was a first for me. Usually the cat dies while I am trying to
extend its life.
David Friedman
<ddfr-080790.0...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.com>,
David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> Note that the initial "if not for immigration" can be interpreted as
> including in the effect of immigration the higher fertility rates of
> immigrant women. It's about .7 for Europe.
>
NRR for Europe is about .7--I shouldn't have combined that with my point
about immigrant women, since it has nothing to do with it. Careless
writing.
Michael Stemper
>NRR is a calculated rate, not an observed rate. At NRR=1, current age
>specific fertility is such that, if it doesn't change, a woman, over her
>lifetime, will on average have one daughter. NRR<1 implies a population
>that will eventually start to decline.
That is an incredibly lucid explanation.
Thanks!
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently large values of 2
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> In article <h73db6$skt$1...@memoryalpha.rosettacon.com>,
> rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote:
>
>> > What is this, '70s day? Over the past 30 years, birth rates have
>> > plummeted everywhere. If present trends continue, world population
>> > will peak within a generation, at levels not much higher than today,
>> > and will then drop at an accelerating rate.
>> >
>> > US population would already be dropping if not for immigration.
>>
>> Not really...
>
> I suspect the original poster was remembering figures on Net
> Reproduction Rate or Total Fertility Rate, in terms of which I think his
> statement is correct.
Probably... However, it might have been better to say that without
immigrants the birth rate is below replacement level. Even with no
additional immigration and assuming TFR drops to the "native"
level in one generation the population wouldn't start to decline
for close to a century. Even without the immigration of the last
35 years we wouldn't be looking at a drop for another 25 or so years.
The big drop in TFR was in the 1970s and population wouldn't have
stabilized yet.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>> The Democrats had a valid point that the previous administration
>> was spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors out on leave.
>> Alas, they're spending money like a bunch of cocaine-crazed blonde
>> billionaire heiresses on Rodeo Drive with Daddy's American Express
>> Centurion Card, which is hardly an improvement.
>
> Indeed. I don't know how anyone can seriously claim that the
> government represents the people, given that most people want
> government spending to decrease, and both major parties not only
> want it to increase, but want it to do so at an accelerating rate.
Surveys usually show that "the people" are in favor of decreasing
government spending. Unfortunately they're not so much in favor of
cutting specific programs. That's the secret of big government...most
people like having money spent on their pet programs more than they
dislike spending in general. Notice that even when people talk about
certain government spending being a "waste" they tend to phrase it in
terms of what other government programs the money could be spent on
rather than on how much spending could be reduced in general.
> What do the parties hope to accomplish? Do they believe this can
> somehow go on forever? Debts can keep on increasing by trillions upon
> trillions without consequences? Do they think they'll still have jobs
> or pensions after the economy completely collapses and the dollar
> becomes worthless?
Politicians look as far as the next election, corporate officers look
as far as the next quarter's earnings. The voters and the stock holders,
respectively, need to give them some reason to think this is a bad idea
or they'll have no reason to change.
William December Starr
"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
>> Let's face it: Barrack Obama is what would have been called a
>> Republican if the Republican Party hadn't first been seduced
>> by Ronald Reagan and then taken over by batshit crazies. It's
>> nice that we've pried the crazies' hands off the steering
>> wheel, but let's stop making the mistake of believing that
>> leftists, progressives, liberals or even Democrats have a
>> friend or ally in the White House. We don't.
>>
>> -- me, April 2009
>
> Just keep on lying to yourself, William.
When it comes to the financial banking crisis, he hires people in
bed with big finance to handle it. When it comes to equal rights
for gays, he doesn't want to hear about it. When it comes to
investigating possible crimes by the Bush administration, "I
don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I
also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to
looking backwards... My orientation is going to be to move
forward."<1> And now the rendition thing, and so on.
*1: As someone -- I wish I could remember who and where --
sarcastically noted in a column I read about his experiences
doing volunteer remedial education for street-level convicts
living in a halfway house, wouldn't it be great if
_everybody_ could benefit from that doctrine? Any time
anybody's charged with any crime, they could just say "Your
Honor, while no one is above the law, we need to look
forward as opposed to looking backwards," and the judge
would say "You're right, case dismissed."
-- wds
David Loewe, Jr.
Starr) wrote:
>"David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> said:
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>>
>>> Let's face it: Barrack Obama is what would have been called a
>>> Republican if the Republican Party hadn't first been seduced
>>> by Ronald Reagan and then taken over by batshit crazies. It's
>>> nice that we've pried the crazies' hands off the steering
>>> wheel, but let's stop making the mistake of believing that
>>> leftists, progressives, liberals or even Democrats have a
>>> friend or ally in the White House. We don't.
>>>
>>> -- me, April 2009
>>
>> Just keep on lying to yourself, William.
>
>When it comes to the financial banking crisis, he hires people in
>bed with big finance to handle it. When it comes to equal rights
>for gays, he doesn't want to hear about it. When it comes to
>investigating possible crimes by the Bush administration, "I
>don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I
>also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to
>looking backwards... My orientation is going to be to move
>forward."<1> And now the rendition thing, and so on.
That doesn't make him "what would have been called a Republican if the
Republican Party hadn't first been seduced by Ronald Reagan and then
taken over by batshit crazies."
Moreover, it is amusing that you implicitly call me "batshit" crazy
after the umbrage you took when I applied a similar term to you in
recent years.[1]
> *1: As someone -- I wish I could remember who and where --
> sarcastically noted in a column I read about his experiences
> doing volunteer remedial education for street-level convicts
> living in a halfway house, wouldn't it be great if
> _everybody_ could benefit from that doctrine? Any time
> anybody's charged with any crime, they could just say "Your
> Honor, while no one is above the law, we need to look
> forward as opposed to looking backwards," and the judge
> would say "You're right, case dismissed."
[1] Not to mention that the party hasn't been taken over by batshit
crazies, but I digress...
--
"I would take even money that England will not exist in
the year 2000."
Paul Ehrlich 1969
David Friedman
Oddly enough, I discuss that argument in the first chapter of my _Law's
Order_. It's because the law is forward looking that you punish him.
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/laws_order/index.shtml
(chapter 1, page 11)
David Friedman
rksh...@rosettacondot.com wrote:
> Politicians look as far as the next election, corporate officers look
> as far as the next quarter's earnings. The voters and the stock holders,
> respectively, need to give them some reason to think this is a bad idea
> or they'll have no reason to change.
You are correct about politicians, but I think wrong about corporate
officers. If it's possible to predict, with enough expertise and
information, that earnings will be much better (or much worse) in the
quarter after next, a speculator can make lots of money buying (or
selling) the stock. In doing so he changes the current stock price,
which is one of the signals that other stockholders, and corporate
officers, are watching.
The mechanisms for making corporations pay attention to long term
consequences are far from perfect, but they are a whole lot better than
the corresponding mechanisms in the political system.
Thomas Womack
> On the plus side, we're still talking a decade or more of
>life span and not the callous indifference to suffering that is the
>Scottish Fold (one in four SF kittens have a painful, crippling
>genetic disorder).
Isn't that only if you breed SF to SF? My housemate from grad school
ended up moving to South Carolina to marry a breeder of Scottish Fold
cats; she said that ethical breeders crossed known-XX cats with
obviously-XY cats and put up with half the kittens being XX and not
sellable as Scottish Fold, whilst unethical breeders kept a cossetted
male YY cat in the basement to guarantee XY kittens with XX females.
Tom
Keith F. Lynch
> administration, "I don't believe that anybody is above the law.
> On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look
> forward as opposed to looking backwards... My orientation is going
> to be to move forward."<1> And now the rendition thing, and so on.
> *1: As someone -- I wish I could remember who and where --
> sarcastically noted in a column I read about his experiences doing
> volunteer remedial education for street-level convicts living in a
> halfway house, wouldn't it be great if _everybody_ could benefit
> from that doctrine? Any time anybody's charged with any crime, they
> could just say "Your Honor, while no one is above the law, we need
> to look forward as opposed to looking backwards," and the judge
> would say "You're right, case dismissed."
My thoughts exactly.
When I was talked into pleading guilty by my court-appointed attorney,
my parents, and my friends, after spending months in jail unable to
make bail, I thought I was putting my case behind me and getting on
with life. Little did I know that my plea would result in a six-year
prison sentence, in never being allowed to own a firearm or do many
other commonplace things, in my losing a security clearance more than
20 years later, or in my being not allowed to travel to Canada 31 years
later, after having traveled there uneventfully 16 and 25 years later.
A man who was convicted of drunk driving at about the same time as
I was falsely convicted of breaking into an office later became
President of the United States. I for one consider drunk driving to
be a more serious crime, as it's far more likely to get someone killed.
Different rules apply to the powerful. Ford pardoned Nixon. Clinton
didn't go to jail or even get fired for lying under oath, a felony.
And if you or I were responsible for something like Chappaquiddick,
we'd be probably go to prison for several years and be permanently
forbidden from voting, running for public office, or holding a
government job. We wouldn't spend the next 40 years in the Senate
and be highly praised when we died.
If you or I were to lie to our employer, we'd probably lose our jobs.
But politicians, who are allegedly employed by us, that's how they
*get* their jobs. To win a major office, a candidate has to make
contradictory promises, i.e. they have to lie. Honest people have
about as much chance of being elected to major offices as high-school
dropouts have of becoming Harvard professors.
I do not understand why anyone still looks to government as the
solution to our problems, rather than as a major source of our
problems. Government is about as likely to make medical care better
as the next major hurricane is. At least hurricanes don't lie, or
claim to represent us.
Keith F. Lynch
> The scenario I am trying to avoid having a starring role in is a
> hybrid cat that weighs 15 kg and thinks of me as prey.
Are you sure you haven't dropped a decimal point? A 150 kilogram
cat might think of you as prey, but i doubt a 15 kilgram animal
would do so.
Keith F. Lynch
> Judging by Cleo, they are great cats but be warned the warranty time
> on Maine Coons appears to be shorter than for other breeds. The
> breed is apparently more prone to heart disease (feline hypertrophic
> cardiomyopathy in particular), spinal muscular atrophy, and
> polycystic kidney disease.
ObSF (sort of): We need a Howard Foundation for cats -- a group that
breeds long-lived cats together for several generations, until there's
a breed of cat that lasts a human lifetime.
Keith F. Lynch
This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
previously been familiar.
Are they defining it as anywhere, no matter how rural, that's closer
to Dallas than to any other city of comparable size? And is our solar
system defined as everywhere that's closer to the Sun than to any
other star?
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> The scenario I am trying to avoid having a starring role in is a
>> hybrid cat that weighs 15 kg and thinks of me as prey.
>
>Are you sure you haven't dropped a decimal point? A 150 kilogram
>cat might think of you as prey, but i doubt a 15 kilgram animal
>would do so.
I can see that Keith has never had a cat.
Dave <-- who has been pounced on by a 2 kg cat.
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
><rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> Keith F. Lynch <k...@keithlynch.net> wrote:
>>> If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human
>>> tendency to clump together rather than distributing ourselves
>>> evenly over the countryside. The average population density of
>>> North America is only about 21 people per square kilometer.
>
>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>
>This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>previously been familiar.
>
>Are they defining it as anywhere, no matter how rural, that's closer
>to Dallas than to any other city of comparable size? And is our solar
>system defined as everywhere that's closer to the Sun than to any
>other star?
See? This is yet another example of Keith A) being annoying and B)
ignoring the fact that he's been *corrected* on this several times (by
me and by Robert at minimum). Yet, he blithely keeps trotting out this
absurd notion that only the builtup section of an area can be part of
the metro area.
--
"Are you hiding somewhere behind those eyes?"
Ira Davies and John Oates
Keith F. Lynch
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to have been
>> there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
> Are they 24*7, or do they work business hours?
They claim to be 24*7. I've never checked whether they were there in
the middle of the night, but they've certainly been there on evenings,
weekends, and holidays.
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>David Harmon <b...@example.invalid> wrote:
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> The perpetual protest just north of the White House was still there
>>> last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to have been
>>> there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
>
>> Are they 24*7, or do they work business hours?
>
>They claim to be 24*7.
I wonder just how you get the job of night shift protester...
>I've never checked whether they were there in the middle of the night,
>but they've certainly been there on evenings, weekends, and holidays.
--
"Anything a human being does to a LaRouche follower is justifiable on
the grounds of self-defense."
- Kevin Bold
Jay E. Morris
On 26-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
> > Keith F. Lynch <k...@keithlynch.net> wrote:
> >> If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human
> >> tendency to clump together rather than distributing ourselves
> >> evenly over the countryside. The average population density of
> >> North America is only about 21 people per square kilometer.
>
> > Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
> > Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
> > Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
> > Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
> This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
> previously been familiar.
>
> Are they defining it as anywhere, no matter how rural, that's closer
> to Dallas than to any other city of comparable size? And is our solar
> system defined as everywhere that's closer to the Sun than to any
> other star?
Wikipedia: A metropolitan area is a large population center consisting of a
large metropolis and its adjacent zone of influence, or of more than one
closely adjoining neighboring central cities and their zone of influence.
www.cenus.gov as defined by OMB: Each metro or micro area consists of one or
more counties and includes the counties containing the core urban area, as
well as any adjacent counties that have a high degree of social and economic
integration (as measured by commuting to work) with the urban core.
Britannica: a major city together with its suburbs and nearby cities, towns,
and environs over which the major city exercises a commanding economic and
social influence.
I'd say his description of the Dallas metro area pretty much agree with
these definitions. Especially the OMB one. Using the commuting rule I'd
say it's within an hours drive. Although I've worked with people that do
two or more hours drive to work but that's rare.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> Keith F. Lynch <k...@keithlynch.net> wrote:
>>> If places look overcrowded, that's only because of the human
>>> tendency to clump together rather than distributing ourselves
>>> evenly over the countryside. The average population density of
>>> North America is only about 21 people per square kilometer.
>
>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>
> This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
> previously been familiar.
Technically it's the "Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan
Statistical Area" or, if you'd prefer a smaller region, the
"Dallas-Plano-Irving Metropolitan Division". The definition, from
the Office of Management and Budget, is "at least one urbanized area
of 50,000 or more population, plus adjacent territory that has a high
degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured by
commuting ties."
> Are they defining it as anywhere, no matter how rural, that's closer
> to Dallas than to any other city of comparable size? And is our solar
> system defined as everywhere that's closer to the Sun than to any
> other star?
I gather the surveys show a significant percentage of the inhabitants of
Delta county commute to Dallas. That would be a painful commute (at
least 1.5 hours each way) although I've known people who had longer.
Other counties in the area aren't part of the MSA so apparently are more
self sufficient.
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
I expect Keith will ignore this correction as well...
--
"Girls will be boys and boys will be girls
It's a mixed up muddled up shook up world except for Lola."
Raymond Douglas Davies
James Nicoll
David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>On 26 Aug 2009 20:38:58 -0400, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net>
>wrote:
>
>>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>> The scenario I am trying to avoid having a starring role in is a
>>> hybrid cat that weighs 15 kg and thinks of me as prey.
>>
>>Are you sure you haven't dropped a decimal point? A 150 kilogram
>>cat might think of you as prey, but i doubt a 15 kilgram animal
>>would do so.
>
>I can see that Keith has never had a cat.
>
>Dave <-- who has been pounced on by a 2 kg cat.
One of the worst maulings I received was from a terrified
feral kitten I couldn't put down (because it would have run away).
Every time I take Nameless to the vet, I lose blood. She's
lived with me for over a decade but she still thinks I will eat
her one day (The fact that I took two of her favourite older cats
away and never returned with them weighs against me, I think),
She's maybe 3 kg.
Michael Stemper
><rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>
>This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>previously been familiar.
It's one that doesn't match up with what most people think of when
they think of a "metropolitan area", for sure. It probably has some
perfectly valid application, though.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
This message contains at least 95% recycled bytes.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
> In article <h74l34$dip$1...@panix2.panix.com>, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>><rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>
>>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>>
>>This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>>previously been familiar.
>
> It's one that doesn't match up with what most people think of when
> they think of a "metropolitan area", for sure. It probably has some
> perfectly valid application, though.
It's pretty close to what I'd think of as a metropolitan area if I had to
use county boundaries to define them. OTOH I grew up in the Dallas-Fort
Worth metro area which is (a) enormous and (b) low density so I'm used to
seeing those sorts of numbers. The town I live in, with only a single
retailer and almost no employers, is definitely a Dallas suburb. It has a
population density of 170/sq km.
Tim McDaniel
<rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> In article <h74l34$dip$1...@panix2.panix.com>, "Keith F. Lynch"
>> <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>><rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>>>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>>>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>>>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>>>
>>>This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>>>previously been familiar.
>
>had to use county boundaries to define them.
For example, the Dallas city limits includes land in each of Dallas
County, Collin County, Denton County, Rockwall County, and Kaufman
County, if Wikipedia be believed. I don't know anything about Hunt
and Delta Counties; I was up against the Collin County line.
--
Tim McDaniel, tm...@panix.com
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
Greenville is in the center of Hunt county and given its position on
I-30 I can easily see the association. It's a shorter commute from there
to Dallas than my wife has to her job. Delta, the next county further out,
is harder to see.
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>Tim McDaniel <tm...@panix.com> wrote:
>> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>>>><rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>>>>>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>>>>>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>>>>>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>>>>>
>>>>>This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>>>>>previously been familiar.
>>>
>>>It's pretty close to what I'd think of as a metropolitan area if I
>>>had to use county boundaries to define them.
>>
>> For example, the Dallas city limits includes land in each of Dallas
>> County, Collin County, Denton County, Rockwall County, and Kaufman
>> County, if Wikipedia be believed. I don't know anything about Hunt
>> and Delta Counties; I was up against the Collin County line.
>
>Greenville is in the center of Hunt county and given its position on
>I-30 I can easily see the association. It's a shorter commute from there
>to Dallas than my wife has to her job. Delta, the next county further out,
>is harder to see.
<shrug>
My Uncle (once removed, which is to say my father's Uncle - normally
referred to improperly as my Great-Uncle or just Uncle Bob), used to
drive all the way from Bonne Terre to the north side of Saint Louis to
work at the GM plant. MapQuest makes that distance as some 65 miles one
way. That was during the 50s through the 70s. I bet a fair percentage
of people in Delta County commute to further in.
--
"When I hold you in my arms, And I feel my finger on your trigger,
I know no one can do me no harm, because happiness is a warm gun,
Yes it is."
John Lennon and Paul McCartney
David V. Loewe, Jr
<dlo...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>My Uncle (once removed, which is to say my father's Uncle - normally
>referred to improperly as my Great-Uncle
Looking this up, I sit corrected. He is my Great-Uncle.
Ouch.
>or just Uncle Bob),
--
"He either fears his fate too much,
Or his deserts are small,
Who dares not put it to the touch,
To win or lose it all."
- James Graham, Marquis of Montrose
David Goldfarb
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>I do not understand why anyone still looks to government as the
>solution to our problems, rather than as a major source of our
>problems. Government is about as likely to make medical care better
>as the next major hurricane is. At least hurricanes don't lie, or
>claim to represent us.
Perhaps because government-run health care seems to be able to work
in places such as Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and,
oh, just about every single other developed country in the world?
People vaunt America for its ingenuity and know-how; why is learning
from their examples so impossible?
--
David Goldfarb |"Our experts are convinced that such notions as
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | the 'round-square' are meaningful, and what's
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | more, are of potentially great military value!"
| - Norman Kagan, "Four Brands of Impossible"
David Loewe, Jr.
Goldfarb) wrote:
>Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>I do not understand why anyone still looks to government as the
>>solution to our problems, rather than as a major source of our
>>problems. Government is about as likely to make medical care better
>>as the next major hurricane is. At least hurricanes don't lie, or
>>claim to represent us.
>
>Perhaps because government-run health care seems to be able to work
What is meant by that? Shouldn't the standard be "works better"? The
jury is still out on that one.
I'll point out once again that (I've posted the studies elsewhere), when
you adjust for accidents, homicides and lifestyle choices, none of which
are obviously part of health care, the US Life Expectancy rises to the
top. And when you adjust for (low birth weight) teen pregnancies US
infant mortality doesn't look so bad.
>in places such as Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and,
>oh, just about every single other developed country in the world?
>People vaunt America for its ingenuity and know-how; why is learning
>from their examples so impossible?
--
"A witty saying proves nothing."
- Voltaire
Keith F. Lynch
> The definition, from the Office of Management and Budget, is "at
> least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population, plus adjacent
> territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration
> with the core as measured by commuting ties."
> I gather the surveys show a significant percentage of the
> inhabitants of Delta county commute to Dallas.
That strikes me as a perverse definition. If a county has just five
residents, perhaps because it's not near anything and the land is
worthless for farming, then five more people, all of them extreme
commuters, move in, does that make it part of a metro area? What if
it's halfway between two distant cities, and some commute to each?
Is it then part of both metro areas at once? Or at the metro areas
thereby welded together? If the latter, a few dozen such counties
could weld together every metro area in the continent into one big
metro area, even if most of this "metro" area is wilderness in which
someone can be lost for weeks and starve to death.
> That would be a painful commute (at least 1.5 hours each way)
> although I've known people who had longer.
With the recent deterioration of the DC Metro system, many commutes
are longer than that. It's been more than two months since the fatal
accident, but Metro is still as screwed up as a highway 20 minutes
after a comparable crash. Bicycling is generally faster.
Keith F. Lynch
> work but that's rare.
Two-hour commutes are becoming more and more common on the DC Metro.
They keep announcing that you should add at least 30 minutes to any
trip taken on the Orange Line, and at least 45 minutes to any trip
taken on the Red Line, etc. Most trips traverse two lines. And often
a bus link at one or both ends.
And that's when things are running relatively smoothly. Yesterday
evening some moron forgot his briefcase at the one station which is
on four of Metro's five lines. So of course they shut down all four
lines until the briefcase had been "secured," which took a couple
hours. And after that, there were probably a couple more hours
until trains were uncrowded enough that everyone waiting could board.
(Fortunately, I had already gotten home before any of this happened.)
Needless to say, the briefcase was not a bomb.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
>> The definition, from the Office of Management and Budget, is "at
>> least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population, plus adjacent
>> territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration
>> with the core as measured by commuting ties."
>
>> I gather the surveys show a significant percentage of the
>> inhabitants of Delta county commute to Dallas.
>
> That strikes me as a perverse definition. If a county has just five
> residents, perhaps because it's not near anything and the land is
> worthless for farming, then five more people, all of them extreme
> commuters, move in, does that make it part of a metro area? What if
> it's halfway between two distant cities, and some commute to each?
> Is it then part of both metro areas at once? Or at the metro areas
> thereby welded together? If the latter, a few dozen such counties
> could weld together every metro area in the continent into one big
> metro area, even if most of this "metro" area is wilderness in which
> someone can be lost for weeks and starve to death.
I don't doubt there's a lower limit on the total number of people it
takes to create a "commuting tie", although I don't particularly want
to look through hundreds of pages of documents to discover it. After
all, there are around 200 counties in Texas that aren't included in
metro areas.
>> That would be a painful commute (at least 1.5 hours each way)
>> although I've known people who had longer.
>
> With the recent deterioration of the DC Metro system, many commutes
> are longer than that. It's been more than two months since the fatal
> accident, but Metro is still as screwed up as a highway 20 minutes
> after a comparable crash. Bicycling is generally faster.
Ugh. My commute almost exactly matches the mean for where I live, 32.9
minutes.
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
>Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> Although I've worked with people that do two or more hours drive to
>> work but that's rare.
>
>Two-hour commutes are becoming more and more common on the DC Metro.
>They keep announcing that you should add at least 30 minutes to any
>trip taken on the Orange Line, and at least 45 minutes to any trip
>taken on the Red Line, etc. Most trips traverse two lines. And often
>a bus link at one or both ends.
And you think this is unremarkable (you have claimed to believe that DC
is not overly congested compared to other cities) because... WHY?
--
"The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its
credibility. And vice versa."
-Lazarus Long
Richard Kennaway
> breeds long-lived cats together for several generations, until there's
> a breed of cat that lasts a human lifetime.
Has anyone ever done that experiment? Choose some suitable animal
species, keep on breeding from those that have four unusually long-lived
grandparents, and see if there's any radical increase in lifespan?
--
Richard Kennaway
Tim McDaniel
I dimly recall seeing an article showing just how ineffective eugenics
or controlled breeding can be. As best I recall, which is vague, it
posited that N% of the human population had a recessive gene that was
immediately lethal when inherited from both parents. It then
mentioned that it would take thousands of years to drop the frequency
in humans merely to N/2%.
Does this spark any memories in other people? Can anyone find a
citation or debunking of this?
If it's true, then you can breed for long-lived mites, maybe fruit
flies.
--
Tim McDaniel, tm...@panix.com
Will in New Haven
> In article <615995ppfvi1gb98gatm4k2ckaroqt9...@4ax.com>,> >I want a cat. A big ol' Maine Coon.
>
> Judging by Cleo, they are great cats but be warned the warranty
> time on Maine Coons appears to be shorter than for other breeds. The
> breed is apparently more prone to heart disease (feline hypertrophic
> cardiomyopathy in particular), spinal muscular atrophy, and polycystic
> health problems where treatment of one would mean a horrible death due
> to the other condition [1]. We opted to euthenize him rather than let
> him starve or suffocate.
>
> On the plus side, we're still talking a decade or more of
> life span and not the callous indifference to suffering that is the
> Scottish Fold (one in four SF kittens have a painful, crippling
> genetic disorder).
>
> I'm thinking Maine Coon/something else cross might
> be more durable. Just not sure what the something else should be.
>
> 1: Mind you, I had a tabby with kidney problems and a burmese who
> died suddenly of a heart attack. Something will eventually break on
> any cat.
Maine Coon/anything else feline crosses seem to work out fine. On the
other paw, the only Maine Coon I know personally is fourteen and still
active and healthy. And he comes over when I am walking Bear, our Lab,
and stands just out of reach and tells Bear off with vigor. If I am
out alone he comes over to be petted, so he isn't cussing me when he
is swearing at us.
--
Will in New Haven
Will in New Haven
> In article <l6nb951asr8fv2kf8gjv9kkt8tlt7ml...@4ax.com>,
> David V. Loewe, Jr <davelo...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> >On 26 Aug 2009 20:38:58 -0400, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net>
> >wrote:
>
>
> >>> The scenario I am trying to avoid having a starring role in is a
> >>> hybrid cat that weighs 15 kg and thinks of me as prey.
>
> >>Are you sure you haven't dropped a decimal point? A 150 kilogram
> >>cat might think of you as prey, but i doubt a 15 kilgram animal
> >>would do so.
>
> >I can see that Keith has never had a cat.
>
> >Dave <-- who has been pounced on by a 2 kg cat.
>
> One of the worst maulings I received was from a terrified
> feral kitten I couldn't put down (because it would have run away).
>
> Every time I take Nameless to the vet, I lose blood. She's
> lived with me for over a decade but she still thinks I will eat
> her one day (The fact that I took two of her favourite older cats
> away and never returned with them weighs against me, I think),
> She's maybe 3 kg.
Missy weighs less than four pounds. Her ambition is to kill a human
being. She gets along great with our other cats, one of whom is her
mom, and with the dogs. When she has to go to the vet, I take quite a
bit of damage. But the vet and his assistant work with her without
complaint.
I don't know why she is like that. Her mother, Maggy May, is the
world's sweetest cat with the world's greatest purr. Missy has lived
her whole life with Maggy May and it is clear that this is a wonderful
thing for both mother and daughter. I wasn't here the whole time but
_no one_ would mistreat a cat in Micki's house, not and live.
David Friedman
tm...@panix.com (Tim McDaniel) wrote:
> In article
> <1j55tdp.18mtufb18x4bbiN%drachirREVERSE...@yawannek.gro.ku>,
> Richard Kennaway <drachirREVERSE...@yawannek.gro.ku> wrote:
> >Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> >> ObSF (sort of): We need a Howard Foundation for cats -- a group
> >> that breeds long-lived cats together for several generations, until
> >> there's a breed of cat that lasts a human lifetime.
> >
> >Has anyone ever done that experiment? Choose some suitable animal
> >species, keep on breeding from those that have four unusually
> >long-lived grandparents, and see if there's any radical increase in
> >lifespan?
>
> I dimly recall seeing an article showing just how ineffective eugenics
> or controlled breeding can be. As best I recall, which is vague, it
> posited that N% of the human population had a recessive gene that was
> immediately lethal when inherited from both parents. It then
> mentioned that it would take thousands of years to drop the frequency
> in humans merely to N/2%.
That depends on how large N is.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
Keith F. Lynch
> Richard Kennaway <drachirREVERSE...@yawannek.gro.ku> wrote:
>> Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> ObSF (sort of): We need a Howard Foundation for cats -- a group
>>> that breeds long-lived cats together for several generations,
>>> until there's a breed of cat that lasts a human lifetime.
>> Has anyone ever done that experiment? Choose some suitable animal
>> species, keep on breeding from those that have four unusually
>> long-lived grandparents, and see if there's any radical increase
>> in lifespan?
> I dimly recall seeing an article showing just how ineffective
> eugenics or controlled breeding can be. As best I recall, which is
> vague, it posited that N% of the human population had a recessive
> gene that was immediately lethal when inherited from both parents.
> It then mentioned that it would take thousands of years to drop the
> frequency in humans merely to N/2%.
> Does this spark any memories in other people? Can anyone find a
> citation or debunking of this?
It's a consequence of the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. Selective
pressure against a lethal recessive gene obviously goes down as it
becomes rarer, but it's not intuitive just how *rapidly* it goes down.
It goes down rapidly since the rarer it is, the less likely two such
genes will combine in one individual.
That doesn't necessarily apply to selective breeding, though. People
can check every animal for undesirable genes, and only breed those
that don't have them, thus eliminating the undesirable genes in a
single generation.
But breeding for long life has the difficulty that it takes a long
time to find out which individuals are long-lived. (Unless, as you
mention, you're working with a species much shorter-lived than cats.)
We don't *know* which combinations of genes are associated with the
longest lives.
Research projects tend to be short, for obvious reasons. There are
probably few dissertations on the full life cycle of 17-year cicadas,
as fascinating as those insects are.
Keith F. Lynch
> Has anyone ever done that experiment? Choose some suitable animal
> species, keep on breeding from those that have four unusually
> long-lived grandparents, and see if there's any radical increase
> in lifespan?
Not quite what you're asking, but see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah_Foundation#The_Mprize
Richard Kennaway
> > Has anyone ever done that experiment? Choose some suitable animal
> > species, keep on breeding from those that have four unusually
> > long-lived grandparents, and see if there's any radical increase
> > in lifespan?
> Not quite what you're asking, but see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah_Foundation#The_Mprize
Sounds like the perfect experiment for an amateur scientist, or a group
of them. No sophisticated lab equipment necessary, just being able to
breed mice and keep track of their identities, and keep the experiment
running indefinitely. $4 million Methuselah prize if it works.
--
Richard Kennaway
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> In article <h74l34$dip$1...@panix2.panix.com>, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>
>>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
>>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
>>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
>>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
>> This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
>> previously been familiar.
>
> It's one that doesn't match up with what most people think of when
> they think of a "metropolitan area", for sure.
Not necessarily. As Keith himself pointed out, the average
population density of NorAm is only 21 people per square kilometer
-- average density of large places doesn't tell you much if you
don't know the distribution. Delta County could have a couple large
towns that are suburbs of Dallas and everything else is sparsely
populated farmland.
--
Sean O'Hara <http://www.diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
New audio book: As Long as You Wish by John O'Keefe
<http://librivox.org/short-science-fiction-collection-010/>
Will in New Haven
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Michael Stemper
> declared:
>
> >> <rkshul...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Indeed. Density can drop off quickly outside of major cities.
> >>> Dallas county has an average density of 1038.9/sq km. Neighboring
> >>> Collin county has a density of 332.7/sq km, Hunt county is 33.5 and
> >>> Delta county is 7.4. All of these are part of the Dallas metro area.
> >> This must be some new definition of "metro area" with which I hadn't
> >> previously been familiar.
>
> > It's one that doesn't match up with what most people think of when
> > they think of a "metropolitan area", for sure.
>
> Not necessarily. As Keith himself pointed out, the average
> population density of NorAm is only 21 people per square kilometer
> -- average density of large places doesn't tell you much if you
> don't know the distribution. Delta County could have a couple large
> towns that are suburbs of Dallas and everything else is sparsely
> populated farmland.
Aren't Texans counted as 3/5 or something?
Keith F. Lynch
> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As Keith himself pointed out, the average population density of
>> NorAm is only 21 people per square kilometer -- average density
>> of large places doesn't tell you much if you don't know the
>> distribution. Delta County could have a couple large towns that
>> are suburbs of Dallas and everything else is sparsely populated
>> farmland.
If so, then those large towns are part of the Dallas metro area and
the rest of the county is not.
> Aren't Texans counted as 3/5 or something?
They're counted as 5/3. Just ask any Texan.
Will in New Haven
> Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>
> > Sean O'Hara <seanoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> As Keith himself pointed out, the average population density of
> >> NorAm is only 21 people per square kilometer -- average density
> >> of large places doesn't tell you much if you don't know the
> >> distribution. Delta County could have a couple large towns that
> >> are suburbs of Dallas and everything else is sparsely populated
> >> farmland.
>
> If so, then those large towns are part of the Dallas metro area and
> the rest of the county is not.
>
> > Aren't Texans counted as 3/5 or something?
>
> They're counted as 5/3. Just ask any Texan.
Not for how many "liberries" an area needs.
Jette Goldie
> On 26 Aug 2009 21:19:46 -0400, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net>
> wrote:
>
>> David Harmon <b...@example.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
>>>> last I checked, which was just last month. It claims to have been
>>>> there for *decades*, and I can believe it.
>>> Are they 24*7, or do they work business hours?
>> They claim to be 24*7.
>
> I wonder just how you get the job of night shift protester...
>
On a rota.
--
Jette Goldie
jette....@gmail.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfette/
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
http://wolfette.livejournal.com/
("reply to" is spamblocked - use the email addy in sig)
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Will in New Haven <bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> As Keith himself pointed out, the average population density of
>>> NorAm is only 21 people per square kilometer -- average density
>>> of large places doesn't tell you much if you don't know the
>>> distribution. Delta County could have a couple large towns
Given the population of Delta County, there are no "large towns."
>>> that are suburbs of Dallas and everything else is sparsely
>>> populated farmland.
>
>If so, then those large towns are part of the Dallas metro area and
>the rest of the county is not.
It doesn't work that way. It is based on full counties. Either the
county is in or the county is out.
>> Aren't Texans counted as 3/5 or something?
>
>They're counted as 5/3. Just ask any Texan.
A joke I heard once:
Mortician: There once was a Texan SO big, we couldn't find a coffin big
enough to hold him.
Man: So what did you DO?
Mortician: We gave him an enema and buried him in a shoebox.
--
"No rational argument will have a rational effect on a man who
does not want to adopt a rational attitude."
Sir Karl Popper
Jay E. Morris
On 27-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
> > Although I've worked with people that do two or more hours drive to
> > work but that's rare.
>
> Two-hour commutes are becoming more and more common on the DC Metro.
> They keep announcing that you should add at least 30 minutes to any
> trip taken on the Orange Line, and at least 45 minutes to any trip
> taken on the Red Line, etc. Most trips traverse two lines. And often
> a bus link at one or both ends.
>
> And that's when things are running relatively smoothly. Yesterday
> evening some moron forgot his briefcase at the one station which is
> on four of Metro's five lines. So of course they shut down all four
> lines until the briefcase had been "secured," which took a couple
> hours. And after that, there were probably a couple more hours
> until trains were uncrowded enough that everyone waiting could board.
> (Fortunately, I had already gotten home before any of this happened.)
> Needless to say, the briefcase was not a bomb.
Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an average here
of probably 50 mph, So the two hour drivers would be coming in from around
100 miles out. My commute is 30 minutes, unless I would choose to take
public transportation, in which case it would be about an hour and twenty.
Last time I checked anyway.
rksh...@rosettacondot.com
I just maintain my own. It's why I have to buy a bigger house
periodically.
William December Starr
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) said:
> Perhaps because government-run health care seems to be able to
> work in places such as Canada, the United Kingdom, the
> Netherlands, and, oh, just about every single other developed
> country in the world? People vaunt America for its ingenuity and
> know-how; why is learning from their examples so impossible?
Because so many people -- a microscopic fraction compared to the
total population, but wielding large political power -- prefer to
apply that ingenuity and know-how (though in fact most of them are
not employing either of those properties themselves but rather are
simply relying on legacy knowledge) to enriching themselves by
screwing other people.
It's the American Way!
-- wds
David Harmon
Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote,
>It doesn't work that way. It is based on full counties. Either the
>county is in or the county is out.
That's just ridiculous, then. The north end of Los Angeles County isn't
part of the Los Angeles metropolitan area, in my opinion. The north end
of Los Angeles County isn't metropolitan anything, it's desert. When
they drew up counties in southern California,they were still using the
same philosophy as "I claim this continent for the King of Spain."
Keith F. Lynch
> "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote,
>> It doesn't work that way. It is based on full counties. Either
>> the county is in or the county is out.
> That's just ridiculous, then.
I concur. These people are morons.
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>On 27-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> > Although I've worked with people that do two or more hours drive to
>> > work but that's rare.
>>
>> Two-hour commutes are becoming more and more common on the DC Metro.
>> They keep announcing that you should add at least 30 minutes to any
>> trip taken on the Orange Line, and at least 45 minutes to any trip
>> taken on the Red Line, etc. Most trips traverse two lines. And often
>> a bus link at one or both ends.
>>
>> And that's when things are running relatively smoothly. Yesterday
>> evening some moron forgot his briefcase at the one station which is
>> on four of Metro's five lines. So of course they shut down all four
>> lines until the briefcase had been "secured," which took a couple
>> hours. And after that, there were probably a couple more hours
>> until trains were uncrowded enough that everyone waiting could board.
>> (Fortunately, I had already gotten home before any of this happened.)
>> Needless to say, the briefcase was not a bomb.
>
>Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an average here
>of probably 50 mph,
Keith seems unconvinced that such places exist.
>So the two hour drivers would be coming in from around
>100 miles out. My commute is 30 minutes, unless I would choose to take
>public transportation, in which case it would be about an hour and twenty.
>Last time I checked anyway.
--
"...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess.
They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a
characteristic of them."
- Margaret Thatcher
Keith F. Lynch
I second David Loewe's recommendation of
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care
It's an excellent explanation for why medical care is so badly screwed
up in the US, and why Obama's proposal for how to fix it is a very
bad idea.
The problem *isn't* greedy people who need to be put in their place.
Keith F. Lynch
> Will in New Haven <bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> Not for how many "liberries" an area needs.
> I just maintain my own. It's why I have to buy a bigger house
> periodically.
Those of us who own lots of books ought to get a carbon credit.
It's not a library, it's a carbon sequestration facility.
Keith F. Lynch
> Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
David Loewe, Jr.
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>David Harmon <b...@example.invalid> wrote:
>> "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote,
>>> It doesn't work that way. It is based on full counties. Either
>>> the county is in or the county is out.
>
>> That's just ridiculous, then.
>
>I concur. These people are morons.
You are both wrong. There are political consequences to being in the
metropolitan area. The county level is as far as they are willing to
break it down.
--
"Reading Solzhenitsyn makes it difficult to take seriously the
people in this culture who insist that Dissent has been squelched.
Brother, you have no idea."
James Lileks
David Friedman
"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>
> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
What's the difference between rush hour in New York and rush hour in Los
Angeles?
About fifty miles an hour.
David V. Loewe, Jr
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>> average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>
>During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
Mere minutes after opining that Keith would be unconvinced that such
places exist - Vindication!
--
"'Funny Republican' is an oxymoron in the public
mind. Sense of humor and conservatism are not
supposed to go together."
- P. J. O'Rourke
Jay E. Morris
On 30-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>
> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
There are a couple of places where one might be down to 10mph for a mile or
two or three, and a few areas with construction that's bad, but I can get
from one side of SA to the other in rush hour within an hour.
This has been helped by much construction to improve things which has
finished up within the last year.
And we are the 9th largest city in the US. (Don't ask how we rank when the
Metro area is considered.)
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:14:36 -0500 in rec.arts.sf.fandom, "David V.
>Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote,
>>It doesn't work that way. It is based on full counties. Either the
>>county is in or the county is out.
>
>That's just ridiculous, then. The north end of Los Angeles County isn't
>part of the Los Angeles metropolitan area, in my opinion. The north end
>of Los Angeles County isn't metropolitan anything, it's desert.
Lancaster and Palmdale have around 300,000 people between them and they
are in the north end of Los Angeles County.
You'd have been better off mentioning the east ends of San Bernardino
and Riverside Counties.
Poking around Wikipedia, it appears that the term you and Keith are
looking for is "Urbanized Area."[1] That said, the Palmdale/Lancaster
Urbanized Area out there in the north end of Los Angeles County holds
more than 470,000 people.
>When
>they drew up counties in southern California,they were still using the
>same philosophy as "I claim this continent for the King of Spain."
Only three of the top 25 counties by area are in California and I don't
really think Inyo or Kern (San Bernardino is *the* largest county in
America) count as southern California in the minds of most people - one
being in the San Joaquin Valley and the other being east of the Sierra
Nevada. As a comparison, Arizona has 7 of the top 25 and Nevada has 6
of the top 25. Los Angeles County is a relative piker at 74th.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanized_Area#United_States
"The U.S. Census Bureau defines an urban area as: "Core census block
groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000 people
per square mile (386 per square kilometer) and surrounding census blocks
that have an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile (193
per square kilometer)."
The concept of Urbanized Areas as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau are
often used as a more accurate gauge of the size of a city, since in
different cities and states the lines between city borders and the
urbanized area of that city are often not the same. For example, the
city of Greenville, South Carolina has a city population under 60,000
but an urbanized area over 300,000, while Greensboro, North Carolina has
a city population over 200,000 but an urbanized area population of
around 270,000 � meaning that Greenville is actually "larger" for some
intents and purposes, but not for others, such as taxation, local
elections, etc."
--
"Leave your worries behind...
'Cause rain, shine don't mind
We're ridin' on the Groove Line tonight."
Rod Temperton
David V. Loewe, Jr
wrote:
>On 30-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>>
>> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
>
>There are a couple of places where one might be down to 10mph for a mile or
>two or three, and a few areas with construction that's bad, but I can get
>from one side of SA to the other in rush hour within an hour.
>
>This has been helped by much construction to improve things which has
>finished up within the last year.
>
>And we are the 9th largest city in the US.
7th
>(Don't ask how we rank when the Metro area is considered.)
28th
--
"Is anybody goin' to San Antone
Or Phoenix, Arizona?
Anyplace is alright as long as I
Can forget I've ever known her."
--
"...you know, it seems to me you suffer from the problem of
wanting a tailored fit in an off the rack world."
Dennis Juds
Jay E. Morris
On 30-Aug-2009, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:25:24 GMT, "Jay E. Morris" <mor...@epsilon3.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 30-Aug-2009, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> >> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
> >> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
> >>
> >> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
> >
> >There are a couple of places where one might be down to 10mph for a mile
> >or
> >two or three, and a few areas with construction that's bad, but I can get
> >from one side of SA to the other in rush hour within an hour.
> >
> >This has been helped by much construction to improve things which has
> >finished up within the last year.
> >
> >And we are the 9th largest city in the US.
>
> 7th
>
> >(Don't ask how we rank when the Metro area is considered.)
>
> 28th
Thank you. Two years ago we were 9th and I hadn't paid enough attention to
know we'd move up. And we were 36th in the metro area (there ain't really
any metro area) so that large a jump suprises me.
Keith F. Lynch
> There are a couple of places where one might be down to 10mph for a
> mile or two or three, and a few areas with construction that's bad,
> but I can get from one side of SA to the other in rush hour within
> an hour.
> This has been helped by much construction to improve things which
> has finished up within the last year.
Around here, perpetual construction and improvements are a source of
delays, not speedups, both for roads and for Metro.
Metro has been doing a tremendous number of improvements over the past
couple years, meaning the service has been worse than ever.
I really feel sorry for folks in wheelchairs when they improve the
elevators, as that means there'll be no elevator service at whatever
station for the next several months (after which the elevator will go
back to normal, until the next improvement).
Ben Yalow
>Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>> average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
I just was driving 70 during rush hour through Baltimore on Friday.
That's pretty close to you, so it shouldn't be too hard to imagine.
>--
>Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
>Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Ben
--
Ben Yalow yb...@panix.com
Not speaking for anybody
Karl Johanson
news:h7ed0b$1nl$9...@reader1.panix.com...
> <rksh...@rosettacondot.com> wrote:
>> Will in New Haven <bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>>> Not for how many "liberries" an area needs.
>
>> I just maintain my own. It's why I have to buy a bigger house
>> periodically.
>
> Those of us who own lots of books ought to get a carbon credit.
> It's not a library, it's a carbon sequestration facility.
I'll knock 10% off the top of what you owe me in royalties for the Carbon
dioxide you've produced.
Karl Johanson
Seth
>wrote:
>>Two-hour commutes are becoming more and more common on the DC Metro.
>>They keep announcing that you should add at least 30 minutes to any
>>trip taken on the Orange Line, and at least 45 minutes to any trip
>>taken on the Red Line, etc. Most trips traverse two lines. And often
>>a bus link at one or both ends.
>
>And you think this is unremarkable (you have claimed to believe that DC
>is not overly congested compared to other cities) because... WHY?
Incompetence in running a transit system is not a function of
population congestion.
Seth
Seth
David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>In article <h7edi7$1nl$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>>
>> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
>
>What's the difference between rush hour in New York and rush hour in Los
>Angeles?
>
>About fifty miles an hour.
In whose favor?
(The subway in NY is more like 30 mph.)
Seth
David Loewe, Jr.
wrote:
>"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>>> Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>>> average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>
>>During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
>
>I just was driving 70 during rush hour through Baltimore on Friday.
>That's pretty close to you, so it shouldn't be too hard to imagine.
Despite your personal testimony, Keith will not believe.
--
"On a morning from a Bogart movie
In a country where they turn back time
You go strolling through the crowd like Peter Lorre
Contemplating a crime."
Al Stewart & Peter Wood
David Loewe, Jr.
I wasn't referring to *population*. I was referring to *traffic* (as in
motor vehicle traffic).
--
"Anything a human being does to a LaRouche follower is justifiable on
the grounds of self-defense."
- Kevin Bold
David V. Loewe, Jr
>David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>>In article <h7edi7$1nl$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>> Jay E. Morris <mor...@epsilon3.com> wrote:
>>> > Well, I was thinking more along the lines of driving, with an
>>> > average here of probably 50 mph, ...
>>>
>>> During commuting hours? That's hard to imagine.
>>
>>What's the difference between rush hour in New York and rush hour in Los
>>Angeles?
>>
>>About fifty miles an hour.
>
>In whose favor?
>
>(The subway in NY is more like 30 mph.)
Again... what is being referenced is vehicular traffic.
--
"I want to know what became of the changes
We waited for love to bring.
Were they only the fitful dreams
Of some greater awakening?"
Clyde J. Browne
David Friedman
wrote:
Faster traffic jams in L.A.
In fact, I think the line is supposed to be "What's the difference
between a traffic jam in New York and a traffic jam in Los Angeles,"
which is better.
cryptoguy
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:37:32 GMT, goldf...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David
>
> Goldfarb) wrote:
> >Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
> >>solution to our problems, rather than as a major source of our
> >>problems. Government is about as likely to make medical care better
> >>as the next major hurricane is. At least hurricanes don't lie, or
> >>claim to represent us.
>
> >Perhaps because government-run health care seems to be able to work
>
> jury is still out on that one.
>
> I'll point out once again that (I've posted the studies elsewhere), when
> you adjust for accidents, homicides and lifestyle choices, none of which
> are obviously part of health care, the US Life Expectancy rises to the
> top. And when you adjust for (low birth weight) teen pregnancies US
> infant mortality doesn't look so bad.
That's interesting. Could you repost the links? I don't recall you
posting this info over the past several years. BTW, whats a 'lifestyle
choice', and how do you correct for it?
Seriously, I'd like to see the data.
pt