Re: Roofers drinking beer
Shawn Wilson
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Yes. If it's OK with your employer and doesn't interfere with the
job, why not?
Les Albert
wrote:
>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>people supported the roofers;
And a lot of people text on their cell phone when they drive.
>it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
It is a bad idea.
Les
K_S_ONeill
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Get back to us after you've finished season 1 of Mad Men.
I worked construction in college. We weren't allowed to drink beer
where people could see us, it upsets the mommyish elements.
--
Kevin
Snidely
I once worked with a guy who transferred from the power supply
production line test stations to the chassis development group. He
had a "what were we thinking?" expression when he discussed the lunch
protocol for the test people: huge hamburgers and bigger beers.
/dps
Cheetah99218
>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
I agree with you, Cindbear. There are liability issues and quality
issues here, too.
Just my two cents.
--
Cheetah
Mac
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
It's a bad idea. Wet job sites have a much higher accident rate than
dry ones, and roofing accidents have a way of making what happens a
public problem, and not a private one.
David J. Martin
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Were they convicts drinking Bohemian beer?
David
jeff_wisnia
> Cindbear wrote:
>
>
>>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>
>
> themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
if they get injured or killed on the job.
Jeff
--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight.
>
> Then again, it's a philosophical issue too - I tend towards letting
> people do what the hell they want as long as it doesn't do any harm to
> anyone else.
>
> [1] For the porpoises of this exorcism, "real" is defined as something
> like the danger of drunk driving.
danny burstein
>I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
>they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
>if they get injured or killed on the job.
They also represent a very real danger to their coworkers.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Slow Motion Apocalypse
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
There was a period where my job site degenerated into open drinking
and semi-open pot smoking at a certain time. It was fun for awhile but
I can't really work like that anymore. And we made lots of stupid
mistakes too.
Nasti J
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
http://www.neatorama.com/2010/04/09/brewery-workers-strike-when-told-to-drink-beer-only-at-lunchtime/
Apr 9, 2010
Workers at the Carlsberg brewery in Denmark are on strike after
management handed down new rules about drinking on the job. Now,
employees are allowed to drink beer only while at lunch.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-90044.html
Breweries in the US used to allow drinking during the workday.
njg
John Hatpin
> John Hatpin wrote:
> > Cindbear wrote:
> >
> >>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> >>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> >>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> >>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
> >
> > As long as they're not presenting a real danger[1] to anyone else but
> > themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>
> I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
> they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
> if they get injured or killed on the job.
And I'm wondering if the logic "if enough guys drink beer on the roof,
and they drink enough beer, enough of them will fall off and claim
worker's comp to cause insurance companies to raise their premiums" is
the same as "a real danger".
--
John Hatpin
Dover Beach
news:qd1l169d10jpfh7kn...@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:04:31 -0400, Cindbear <cind...@phonehome.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:56:47 -0800, Tim <admins...@nowhere.org>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I know this is not a simple issue but how much longer can we afford
>>>to not deal with it?
>>
>>Do you want to be the political party to take on the AARP?
>
> Can I take that as saying we can never afford to address it?
>
> I would be surprised if the AARP would have an official position
> opposed to highway safety? Have they taken a public position on this
> issue. Shirley it must have come up a time or two at a board or
> members meeting.
Somebody anonymously reported my dad to the DMV. He had to fight to get
his license back, and then it was limited to daylight hours and certain
destinations, like the doctor's office or the grocery store. Anyway,
you can address it that way.
And no, I wasn't the one who turned him in, though he and Mom thought I
was, and a heeeyuuuge fight ensued.
--
Dover
QueBarbara
wrote:
>Somebody anonymously reported my dad to the DMV. He had to fight to get
>his license back, and then it was limited to daylight hours and certain
>destinations, like the doctor's office or the grocery store. Anyway,
>you can address it that way.
>
>And no, I wasn't the one who turned him in, though he and Mom thought I
>was, and a heeeyuuuge fight ensued.
Last fall, when my dad first got sick, he got pretty goofy for a while
and had a few fender benders. His wife hid his keys, and they almost
got a divorce over this issue.
--
QueBarbara
"Turns out, Acme is a subsidiary of BP." groo
Dominic
"Cindbear" <cind...@phonehome.com> wrote in message
news:eipk165hkr7qin4fg...@4ax.com...
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Nope, don't think you are but if they were fixing my roof and drinking beer,
they'd be off the job in a nano second. I don't give much of a stuff about
their safety but I want the slates hung right. Tis all a question of
priorities.
Dominic
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Lesmond
>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
I just hired a roofing guy today. He's a third generation slate roofer.
He's in his late fifties, has a long grey ponytail, gave me some good dirt on
some of my ex-neighbors and was wearing a Harley shirt. I'd be surprised if
he wasn't drinking beer when he does my roof.
--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.
Lesmond
>John Hatpin wrote:
>> Cindbear wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>>>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>>>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>>>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>>
>>
>> As long as they're not presenting a real danger[1] to anyone else but
>> themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>
>
>I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
>they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
>if they get injured or killed on the job.
Most roofers around here are independent contractors.
Lesmond
>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:30:58 +0100, John Hatpin
><RemoveThi...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote:
>
>>Cindbear wrote:
>>
>>> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>>> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>>> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>>> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>>
>>As long as they're not presenting a real danger[1] to anyone else but
>>themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>>
>>Then again, it's a philosophical issue too - I tend towards letting
>>people do what the hell they want as long as it doesn't do any harm to
>>anyone else.
>>
>>[1] For the porpoises of this exorcism, "real" is defined as something
>>like the danger of drunk driving.
>
>What about driving while under the influence of advanced age? I'm
>pretty sure I can slug down at least 4 beer and beat my 89 year old
>dad in any driving test you can devise yet there is no stopping him
>from getting behind the wheel. I could drink an additional two or
>three beer and outdrive my mom any day and they are not the worst
>driving senior citizens I know about.
>
>I was teaching a class at a senior citizen center awhile back and the
>director was all agitated because one of the seniors was just pulling
>out of the parking lot in his Toyota land cruiser. She said he was
>subject to passing out from low blood sugar. The next day I watched
>him at the wheel pulling out into traffic again.
>
>I know this is not a simple issue but how much longer can we afford to
>not deal with it?
Old folks behind the wheel are a real issue around here. But you're not
allowed to say anything. Even after they hit you. There are no requirements
in NJ about renewing licenses based on age. And this is an *old* town.
Jesper Lauridsen
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:09:12 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
><dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>In <hvdv1p$boa$1...@news.eternal-september.org> jeff_wisnia <jwisniaDu...@conversent.net> writes:
>>
>>>I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
>>>they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
>>>if they get injured or killed on the job.
>>
>>They also represent a very real danger to their coworkers.
>
> to coworkers? On a do it yourself building project, most of the time
> it would be impossible to get friends to help if you prohibited beer
> drinking on the job.
Falling down is a bigger killer than traffic.
art...@yahoo.com
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea.
Especially if someone slips them a roofie.
huey.c...@gmail.com
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
I only worked construction for a year or so, and granted, this was
twenty years ago, but I'd bet the average construction worker in the
greater Chicago area back then probably drank three or four beers in
the average workday, and I'd be surprised if it were much different now.
Sure, there's plenty that don't drink at all. There are also plenty who
kill an entire twelve-pack by themselves. And the statistics are
markedly different if it's somebody's birthday, or somebody just got a
big contract for something.
Working outside in the summer is rough. You're going to want a cold
drink. This is why I have a beer fridge in my garage. And no, I'm not
going to give the tree guys a bunch of shit for having a few beers while
they're taking a tree down, because I had more than a few beers while
putting up the garden shed that it was fixin' to fall on.
So, yes. You're just a party pooper.
--
Huey
Dover Beach
news:oibl16hmbvd61ribg...@4ax.com:
> Tim wrote:
>>
>> I don't think I could do it and they would know it was me. If there
>> is an accident, I know I will have to live with a lifetime of guilt.
>>
>> Besides, I can't come up with any reasonable way for them to live
>> without be able to drive. I've asked them what their plans are for
>> the inevitable and they don't have any. This sucks, it really does.
>
> When my father got too careless to drive safely, my mother and I said
> gently to him that his driving had got too dangerous. He looked
> puzzled, and I pointed out that a couple of days previously he'd very
> nearly hit a pedestrian without ever seeing him (or noticing the
> pedestrian gesticulating and shouting afterwards). He nodded, quietly
> accepting the inevitable, and never drove again.
>
> For a man of his generation and upbringing, this would not have been
> at all easy for him, and I still hugely admire him for being so calm
> about it. I hope that you have a similar experience.
A lot depends on where they live. There are many, many places in the US
where not being able to drive means not being able to get groceries, go
to the doctor, etc. Some urban areas have decent public transit; many
do not. I've been thinking about this a lot as I drive my geezer
clients around to their various appointments. An aging Baby Boom
population will make this a front-and-center issue. Maybe better
transit options will spring up in response. Not that that helps Tim
now. My sympathies, Tim.
--
Dover
Les Albert
Blue collar bullshit.
Les
Les Albert
Right, and drunks who fall down rarely hurt themselves because they
are so relaxed. So, drinking is a good preventitive for roofers while
they are on the job.
Les
huey.c...@gmail.com
How do you figure? It's not particular to the class (see also: the
three-martini lunch) and it's not particularly bullshit, insofar as the
dozen-odd different construction crews I regularly interacted with. This
leads me to believe that the three-beer lunch is every bit as common
amongst the skilled trades as the three-martini lunch is among the
shirt-and-tie crowd.
Can you not drink on the job? Not even at lunch? Consider a different job.
--
Huey
QueBarbara
>
>How do you figure? It's not particular to the class (see also: the
>three-martini lunch) and it's not particularly bullshit, insofar as the
>dozen-odd different construction crews I regularly interacted with. This
>leads me to believe that the three-beer lunch is every bit as common
>amongst the skilled trades as the three-martini lunch is among the
>shirt-and-tie crowd.
>
>Can you not drink on the job? Not even at lunch? Consider a different job.
Alcohol at lunch hasn't been acceptable around here since the 1980's,
early 1990's at the latest. Do they still slip slides of naked chicks
into presentations where you live, just to make sure everyone is
paying attention? That was pretty common around the same time, too.
Mary
> A lot depends on where they live. There are many, many places in the US
> where not being able to drive means not being able to get groceries, go
> to the doctor, etc. Some urban areas have decent public transit; many
> do not. I've been thinking about this a lot as I drive my geezer
> clients around to their various appointments. An aging Baby Boom
> population will make this a front-and-center issue. Maybe better
> transit options will spring up in response. Not that that helps Tim
> now. My sympathies, Tim.
>
Depends, Dover. My dad can't drive any more due to the Alzheimer's, but
we arranged with a home help service that someone comes to see him three
times a week. She makes sure he's eating right, taking his meds, and
takes him to the store, to get his hair cut, to the doctor, whatever.
Costs about $1000/month and is CHEAP at the price.
Mary
Dover Beach
news:GNSdnRRGTqPPQIfR...@mchsi.com:
Right. The thing is, "cheap" is highly variable and subject to
interpretation.
There are people who live on SS who collect less than $1000 a month.
Those people will need some other options.
I had a whole other rant but I deleted it.
I just deleted ANOTHER one.
I'll look at this in the morning when I'm fresh and see if I can say
anything useful.
--
Dover
Mary
Oh, I do know that. I'm just saying that since it's affordable for us
it's well worth it.
Yeah, though - this country isn't set up for non-drivers, really.
Mary
Les Albert
>> Blue collar bullshit.
There is nothing that you can say that can convince me that it is
alright to drink while taking a few trees down, or having drinks at
lunch with the shirt-and-tie crowd. The kind of thinking that tells
the tree trimmer or the cubicle warrior that he/she can handle it is
just a short step away from the schmuck who says he can handle his
drinking and then drive. It's the same thinking that you hear people
saying they know using their cell phone while driving is wrong, but
they can handle it.
If a person absolutely feels that they must have a drink while on the
job (any job) then I suggest that person has problems that will
eventually cause grief to others.
Les
QueBarbara
Which, by the way, is not the story I got at the time.
Bill Bonde
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>
feet up on a steep pitched roof, what could possibly go wrong?
Bill Bonde
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:30:58 +0100, John Hatpin
> <RemoveThi...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>>> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>>> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>>> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>>
>> themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>>
>> Then again, it's a philosophical issue too - I tend towards letting
>> people do what the hell they want as long as it doesn't do any harm to
>> anyone else.
>>
>> [1] For the porpoises of this exorcism, "real" is defined as something
>> like the danger of drunk driving.
>
> What about driving while under the influence of advanced age? I'm
> pretty sure I can slug down at least 4 beer and beat my 89 year old
> dad in any driving test you can devise yet there is no stopping him
> from getting behind the wheel. I could drink an additional two or
> three beer and outdrive my mom any day and they are not the worst
> driving senior citizens I know about.
>
> I was teaching a class at a senior citizen center awhile back and the
> director was all agitated because one of the seniors was just pulling
> out of the parking lot in his Toyota land cruiser. She said he was
> subject to passing out from low blood sugar. The next day I watched
> him at the wheel pulling out into traffic again.
>
> I know this is not a simple issue but how much longer can we afford to
> not deal with it?
>
Bill Bonde
quadriplegics, the lawsuit is to take your house.
Greg Goss
>Cindbear wrote:
>
>> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>
>As long as they're not presenting a real danger[1] to anyone else but
>themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>
>Then again, it's a philosophical issue too - I tend towards letting
>people do what the hell they want as long as it doesn't do any harm to
>anyone else.
>
>[1] For the porpoises of this exorcism, "real" is defined as something
>like the danger of drunk driving.
I read the thread title as "roofies" in your beer. That's an entirely
different thread, one where we can all agree it's wrong.
Roofers are burning off a lot of calories. Is alcohol breakdown
related to metabolic rate and how hard you're working, or is your
liver working at whatever rate it's going to work regardless of how
much you're doing?
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Greg Goss
>Tim <admins...@nowhere.org> wrote in
>news:qd1l169d10jpfh7kn...@4ax.com:
>Somebody anonymously reported my dad to the DMV. He had to fight to get
>his license back, and then it was limited to daylight hours and certain
>destinations, like the doctor's office or the grocery store. Anyway,
>you can address it that way.
>
>And no, I wasn't the one who turned him in, though he and Mom thought I
>was, and a heeeyuuuge fight ensued.
My sister disconnected my mother's battery and told her to take a cab.
"The nice boy from next door fixed my car. Something was wrong with
the battery connections." Next, my sister took the battery home with
her. My mother used cabs. It was too bad that the car quit working
so suddenly. It had been a reliable car up to then.
(My brother tried to drive that car into the ground. Really tried.
Let his teen daughters drive it. He finally gave up on trying to wear
it out and sold it last year. 91 Tempo, bought off "executive lease
return" at 1 year old. Part of the estate in 2000, and sold in good
condition in 2009. Whatever happened to "found on road dead"?)
Greg Goss
>I had a whole other rant but I deleted it.
>
>I just deleted ANOTHER one.
You need a blog. (grin)
What's the point of throwing all that energy into writing, then just
destroying all that creativity?
huey.c...@gmail.com
> There is nothing that you can say that can convince me that it is
> alright to drink while taking a few trees down, or having drinks at
> lunch with the shirt-and-tie crowd. The kind of thinking that tells
> the tree trimmer or the cubicle warrior that he/she can handle it is
> just a short step away from the schmuck who says he can handle his
> drinking and then drive. It's the same thinking that you hear people
> saying they know using their cell phone while driving is wrong, but
> they can handle it.
>
> If a person absolutely feels that they must have a drink while on the
> job (any job) then I suggest that person has problems that will
> eventually cause grief to others.
Ah. Zealot bullshit.
--
Huey
John Mc
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:04:31 -0400, Cindbear <cind...@phonehome.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:56:47 -0800, Tim <admins...@nowhere.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I know this is not a simple issue but how much longer can we afford to
>>> not deal with it?
>
> Can I take that as saying we can never afford to address it?
>
> I would be surprised if the AARP would have an official position
> opposed to highway safety? Have they taken a public position on this
> issue. Shirley it must have come up a time or two at a board or
> members meeting.
They would cite some study that shows older people are safer drivers. It
will state that older driver are more careful and have fewer accidents.
BS. How they jigger the studies I don't know but I DO know from
observation that senior citizens drive badly. They forget their turn
signals, don't check before changing lanes and pull out into oncoming
traffic. Those are some of the errors I've seen lately. This isn't to
say younger people don't drive just as badly but when you add elderly
folks' slower reaction time to the mix and add to that the fact that not
one of them knows what the long skinny pedal is for, it's worse. BTW, I
turn 55 in November, so I'm not some young punk complaining about old
geezers' driving. If I had my druthers once you turned 65 to renew your
license would require a driving test in busy downtown traffic not some
little side street or shopping mall. No extra charge for the license but
you MUST PROVE you can drive in traffic. Of course, we'd have to give
the BMV test instructor hazardous duty pay.
John Mc.
Dover Beach
news:880kho...@mid.individual.net:
> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I had a whole other rant but I deleted it.
>>
>>I just deleted ANOTHER one.
>
> You need a blog. (grin)
>
> What's the point of throwing all that energy into writing, then just
> destroying all that creativity?
Because it was boring. And in the evenings I can't always tell if my
tone is off. I might have sounded like I was yelling at Mary and I
intended to yell at the universe.
--
Dover
Mary
> Dover Beach <moon.blanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Tim <adminstra...@nowhere.org> wrote in
> >news:qd1l169d10jpfh7kn...@4ax.com:
> >Somebody anonymously reported my dad to the DMV. He had to fight to get
> >his license back, and then it was limited to daylight hours and certain
> >destinations, like the doctor's office or the grocery store. Anyway,
> >you can address it that way.
>
> >And no, I wasn't the one who turned him in, though he and Mom thought I
> >was, and a heeeyuuuge fight ensued.
>
> My sister disconnected my mother's battery and told her to take a cab.
> "The nice boy from next door fixed my car. Something was wrong with
> the battery connections." Next, my sister took the battery home with
> her. My mother used cabs. It was too bad that the car quit working
> so suddenly. It had been a reliable car up to then.
That's what we did with Dad's car - disconnected the battery and took
the cables away. Also, hid the keys. But luckily he accepted his
inability to drive any more with surprising equanimity and sold the
car.
Mary
N Jill Marsh
>(My brother tried to drive that car into the ground. Really tried.
>Let his teen daughters drive it. He finally gave up on trying to wear
>it out and sold it last year. 91 Tempo, bought off "executive lease
>return" at 1 year old. Part of the estate in 2000, and sold in good
>condition in 2009. Whatever happened to "found on road dead"?)
I bought a Tempo for a hundred bucks about twelve year ago, it was a
90 or 91 but had been used hard. I put a couple hundred dollars of
parts into it, drove it moderately for a couple of years, and sold it
for two hundred dollars. As far as I could tell, it hadn't changed at
all.
nj"it probably haunting dwyer hill"m
--
"I do not rhyme to that dull elf
Who cannot imagine to himself..."
Hactar
John Mc <Jo...@tdcogre.com> wrote:
> Tim wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:04:31 -0400, Cindbear <cind...@phonehome.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:56:47 -0800, Tim <admins...@nowhere.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I know this is not a simple issue but how much longer can we afford to
> >>> not deal with it?
> >> Do you want to be the political party to take on the AARP?
> >
> > Can I take that as saying we can never afford to address it?
> >
> > I would be surprised if the AARP would have an official position
> > opposed to highway safety? Have they taken a public position on this
> > issue. Shirley it must have come up a time or two at a board or
> > members meeting.
>
>
> They would cite some study that shows older people are safer drivers. It
> will state that older driver are more careful and have fewer accidents.
> BS. How they jigger the studies I don't know but I DO know from
> observation that senior citizens drive badly.
IIRC if you measure it in "wrecks per year per $NUMBER population" then
they come out better. But if you measure it as "wrecks per year per
$DISTANCE driven" they come out much worse, since they drive much less
than your average Joe.
> They forget their turn
> signals, don't check before changing lanes and pull out into oncoming
> traffic. Those are some of the errors I've seen lately. This isn't to
> say younger people don't drive just as badly but when you add elderly
> folks' slower reaction time to the mix and add to that the fact that not
> one of them knows what the long skinny pedal is for, it's worse.
My granddad knew. Boy did he know. He eventually sold his car and
moved first into a retirement community then into assisted living. It's
good that he recognized his own limitations and dealt with them.
> BTW, I
> turn 55 in November, so I'm not some young punk complaining about old
> geezers' driving. If I had my druthers once you turned 65 to renew your
> license would require a driving test in busy downtown traffic not some
> little side street or shopping mall. No extra charge for the license but
> you MUST PROVE you can drive in traffic. Of course, we'd have to give
> the BMV test instructor hazardous duty pay.
Of course you'd get a smarmy lawyer saying "the instructor made my
client flustered" or "traffic was extra-heavy that day". Color me not
very sympathetic.
--
"On two occasions I have been asked, -- 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put
into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?'
... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas
that could provoke such a question." -- Charles Babbage, 1864.
Richard R. Hershberger
> John Hatpin <RemoveThisjfhop...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote innews:oibl16hmbvd61ribg...@4ax.com:
Many areas which don't have decent public transit do have some sort of
demand-response shuttle system. See http://www.carrolltransit.org/
for what we have in my area. While anyone can use it, I strongly
suspect that the vast majority of users are elderly.
My guess is that this sort of system will become more widespread as
the Baby Boomers age.
Richard R. Hershberger
Richard R. Hershberger
<RemoveThisjfhop...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote:
> jeff_wisnia wrote:
> > John Hatpin wrote:
> > > Cindbear wrote:
>
> > >>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> > >>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> > >>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> > >>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>
> > > As long as they're not presenting a real danger[1] to anyone else but
> > > themselves, it wouldn't bother me at all. YMMV, and all that.
>
> > they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
> > if they get injured or killed on the job.
>
> and they drink enough beer, enough of them will fall off and claim
> worker's comp to cause insurance companies to raise their premiums" is
> the same as "a real danger".
Sure it is. That roofing contractor will have to raise his prices to
accommodate the higher premiums. In the meantime, the roofing
contractor down the road who doesn't allow his workers to drink beer
on the job will be able to offer lower prices, driving the first
contractor out of business.
Richard R. Hershberger
Richard R. Hershberger
wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:11:21 -0500, huey.calli...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >How do you figure? It's not particular to the class (see also: the
> >three-martini lunch) and it's not particularly bullshit, insofar as the
> >dozen-odd different construction crews I regularly interacted with. This
> >leads me to believe that the three-beer lunch is every bit as common
> >amongst the skilled trades as the three-martini lunch is among the
> >shirt-and-tie crowd.
>
> >Can you not drink on the job? Not even at lunch? Consider a different job.
>
> Alcohol at lunch hasn't been acceptable around here since the 1980's,
> early 1990's at the latest. Do they still slip slides of naked chicks
> into presentations where you live, just to make sure everyone is
> paying attention? That was pretty common around the same time, too.
Does the three martini lunch still exist anywhere? I've never seen
it. The drinking is one of the things that Mad Men uses to set the
era. I've had jobs where some people might have one beer at lunch,
but none where you can get away with staggering in from lunch. More
common in my experience with law firms is that there is no drinking at
all during the day, and no booze in the office at all. Going to a bar
after work is another matter entirely.
Richard R. Hershberger
N Jill Marsh
>Roofers are burning off a lot of calories. Is alcohol breakdown
>related to metabolic rate and how hard you're working, or is your
>liver working at whatever rate it's going to work regardless of how
>much you're doing?
Pretty much the latter, if I recall correctly. Alcohol metabolizes at
close to a constant rate for an individual, I think because the
enzymes in the liver that metabolize it are more or less at capacity
once very low alcohol levels are reached, and they just chug along
after that.
nj"hic"m
Opus the Penguin
> In article <880kho...@mid.individual.net>,
> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I had a whole other rant but I deleted it.
>> >
>> >I just deleted ANOTHER one.
>>
>> You need a blog. (grin)
>>
>> What's the point of throwing all that energy into writing, then
>> just destroying all that creativity?
>
> I'm not Dover, but I find the act of writing something down (even
> if I subsequently delete it) to be cathartic. I have this sense
> of "I feel this way", so I write something scathing, then read
> what I've written and think "I can't send/post that" and delete
> it. But I got it off my psychological chest in the writing.
>
I hate you people.
I probably shouldn't post this.
--
Opus the Penguin
The best darn penguin in all of Usenet
Mary
wrote:
Same experience here - I probably could have ONE drink at lunch, but I
don't.
And I wouldn't consider the need to have a drink with lunch a deal-
breaker on a job, either. It's just not that important.
Mary
Greg Goss
We valued it for the estate at $3300, (actually by an administrative
error at $2300 -- shrugged off) I think Mom paid something like $12K
for it at the one-year mark. I think he got $1600 for it when he gave
up on killing it. He hates selling cars when they still work well,
but it never really fit his needs. After his wife died (2006 was a
nasty year for Goss wives) he had three vehicles and two drivers in
the family. When the third driver flew off for college at the far end
of the country, he couldn't justify a third car and one of them had to
go.
Paint was still perfect. Took a tranny repair in 2003 or so. Tires,
oil, etc. That was it.
It takes twenty years to get over a "trash" label. My 1983 Escort had
real problems. A friend has either a 92 or 93 Escort that's never had
a problem (other than lost keys -- she goes through keys like I go
through chocolate). And 17 years after those 91 and 92 cars were
built right, Ford didn't need government money to survive. I'm
finally willing to say nice things about an American car.
(Wendy's Tribute, built in a Ford Escape factory, did have some
reliability issues, though. I still wish I'd been able to see under
the hood when the alternator exploded -- wire everywhere. Five
recalls and four three digit repairs in its first five years.)
Greg Goss
>They would cite some study that shows older people are safer drivers. It
>will state that older driver are more careful and have fewer accidents.
>BS. How they jigger the studies I don't know but I DO know from
>observation that senior citizens drive badly.
Neither of the parking lot accidents that led to the removal of my
mother's battery got reported to the authorities. The various
judgement errors (pulling out wrong etc) never caused a major
accident.
Hactar
>
> >Roofers are burning off a lot of calories. Is alcohol breakdown
> >related to metabolic rate and how hard you're working, or is your
> >liver working at whatever rate it's going to work regardless of how
> >much you're doing?
>
> Pretty much the latter, if I recall correctly. Alcohol metabolizes at
> close to a constant rate for an individual, I think because the
> enzymes in the liver that metabolize it are more or less at capacity
> once very low alcohol levels are reached, and they just chug along
> after that.
How much variation is there between individuals?
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81
Your pretended fear lest error might step in is like the man who
would keep all wine out of the country lest men should be drunk.
-- Oliver Cromwell
Kajikit
wrote:
>On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
>having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
>people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
>matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
DH would agree with you... he was a roofer in his younger days - and
an alcoholic. Going to work half-drunk doesn't do you any favours,
especially when you lose your balance and fall off the roof you're
working on... it took two years of surgeries to put him back together
again.
Kajikit
wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:05:49 +0000 (UTC), Jesper Lauridsen
><rors...@sorrystofanet.dk> wrote:
>>On 2010-06-17, Tim <admins...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:09:12 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
>>><dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>> jeff_wisnia <jwisniaDu...@conversent.net> writes:
>
>>>>>I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
>>>>>they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
>>>>>if they get injured or killed on the job.
>
>>>>They also represent a very real danger to their coworkers.
>
>>> Really? Drinking any amount of beer while roofing increases the danger
>>> to coworkers? On a do it yourself building project, most of the time
>>> it would be impossible to get friends to help if you prohibited beer
>>> drinking on the job.
>
>>Falling down is a bigger killer than traffic.
>
>
>Right, and drunks who fall down rarely hurt themselves because they
>are so relaxed. So, drinking is a good preventitive for roofers while
>they are on the job.
>
>Les
As I said above, just ask DH about that... it doesn't matter how
'relaxed' you are when you hit a pile of sand at falling velocity.
(the docs said he would have actually been better off if he missed the
sand pile and fell on the solid ground - it distributed the impact
back up into his shoulder and back, driving his various bones into
places that turned the paramedics white with horror.)
huey.c...@gmail.com
> N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> > > Roofers are burning off a lot of calories. Is alcohol breakdown
> > > related to metabolic rate and how hard you're working, or is your
> > > liver working at whatever rate it's going to work regardless of
> > > how much you're doing?
> > Pretty much the latter, if I recall correctly. Alcohol metabolizes
> > at close to a constant rate for an individual, I think because the
> > enzymes in the liver that metabolize it are more or less at capacity
> > once very low alcohol levels are reached, and they just chug along
> > after that.
> How much variation is there between individuals?
I am not a doctor, but my guess would be none more than is accounted for
by size. If you have the stomach, liver, and kidneys of a 300lb dude,
your body can probably metabolize things significantly faster than if
you have the internal organs of a 100lb woman.
That's not the only issue, though. What gets described as 'tolerance' is
probably a function of practice. I've seen people drink a fifth of cheap
vodka in the space of a couple hours, and then walk like a sober person.
The fact that they aren't staggering isn't 'tolerance' -- that much
vodka makes them every bit as inebriated as it would anybody else -- but
simply a matter of practice. The kind of people who can kill a fifth of
vodka in a couple hours, they've done that before, and enough times that
they've learned how to walk while shitfaced.
And some of them have learned how to drive, which is pretty terrifying.
--
Huey
Les Albert
wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:52:29 -0700, Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:05:49 +0000 (UTC), Jesper Lauridsen
>><rors...@sorrystofanet.dk> wrote:
>>>On 2010-06-17, Tim <admins...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:09:12 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein
>>>><dan...@panix.com> wrote:
>>>>> jeff_wisnia <jwisniaDu...@conversent.net> writes:
>>
>>>>>>I would say that they present a very real danger to the business which
>>>>>>they are working for, via an increase in worker's compensation premiums
>>>>>>if they get injured or killed on the job.
>>
>>>>>They also represent a very real danger to their coworkers.
>>
>>>> Really? Drinking any amount of beer while roofing increases the danger
>>>> to coworkers? On a do it yourself building project, most of the time
>>>> it would be impossible to get friends to help if you prohibited beer
>>>> drinking on the job.
>>>Falling down is a bigger killer than traffic.
>>Right, and drunks who fall down rarely hurt themselves because they
>>are so relaxed. So, drinking is a good preventitive for roofers while
>>they are on the job.
>As I said above, just ask DH about that... it doesn't matter how
>'relaxed' you are when you hit a pile of sand at falling velocity.
>(the docs said he would have actually been better off if he missed the
>sand pile and fell on the solid ground - it distributed the impact
>back up into his shoulder and back, driving his various bones into
>places that turned the paramedics white with horror.)
My post was meant to be humor, not fact.
Les
art...@yahoo.com
> > If a person absolutely feels that they must have a drink while on the
> > job (any job) then I suggest that person has problems that will
> > eventually cause grief to others.
>
> Ah. Zealot bullshit.
Yeah, I can see some exceptions. Like hookers for example. I have a
second job in which I tutor. Sometimes I will have a client and then
have a free hour before the next client. Down the street from the
tutor place is a little place called the Traveller's club and Tuba
Museum (http://www.travelerstuba.com/) which serves beer and wine.
Once or twice I have gone their for dinner and had a beer, but I do
worry about students smelling alcohol on my breath, so I know longer
do it. My bosses have never said one thing or another about it.
N Jill Marsh
wrote:
>In article <javm16torlir6sndt...@4ax.com>,
>N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Pretty much the latter, if I recall correctly. Alcohol metabolizes at
>> close to a constant rate for an individual, I think because the
>> enzymes in the liver that metabolize it are more or less at capacity
>> once very low alcohol levels are reached, and they just chug along
>> after that.
>
>How much variation is there between individuals?
I'm not sure, but I think quite a bit, though probably not as much as
is commonly believed. An individual's alcohol absorption rate varies
a lot, by the way, and of course, alcohol tolerance varies extremely
widely.
nj"will try to post real facts later"m
Les Albert
> > Ah. Zealot bullshit.
Why are you concerned that the students may smell alcohol on your
breath?
Les
art...@yahoo.com
If that got back to my bosses, I could be in deep shit.
Les Albert
<art...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why should they care? When you are tutoring you are not involved with
anything that might cause injury to others.
Les
art...@yahoo.com
They could complain that I am not performing my job optimally. I
can't wear jeans for this job. My wearing jeans will probably not
injure any of them either.
Hactar
So what kind of test would show that inebration (besides something
chemical like a Breathalyzer)? That twitching thing your eyes do when
you point them to the side? Reaction time? "He smelled drunk" isn't
really admissable in court, nor is it detectable in a bar.
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81
Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be
adequately explained by stupidity." Derived from Robert Heinlein
John Hatpin
> John Hatpin <RemoveThi...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote in
> news:oibl16hmbvd61ribg...@4ax.com:
>
> > Tim wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't think I could do it and they would know it was me. If there
> >> is an accident, I know I will have to live with a lifetime of guilt.
> >>
> >> Besides, I can't come up with any reasonable way for them to live
> >> without be able to drive. I've asked them what their plans are for
> >> the inevitable and they don't have any. This sucks, it really does.
> >
> > When my father got too careless to drive safely, my mother and I said
> > gently to him that his driving had got too dangerous. He looked
> > puzzled, and I pointed out that a couple of days previously he'd very
> > nearly hit a pedestrian without ever seeing him (or noticing the
> > pedestrian gesticulating and shouting afterwards). He nodded, quietly
> > accepting the inevitable, and never drove again.
> >
> > For a man of his generation and upbringing, this would not have been
> > at all easy for him, and I still hugely admire him for being so calm
> > about it. I hope that you have a similar experience.
>
> A lot depends on where they live. There are many, many places in the US
> where not being able to drive means not being able to get groceries, go
> to the doctor, etc. Some urban areas have decent public transit; many
> do not. I've been thinking about this a lot as I drive my geezer
> clients around to their various appointments. An aging Baby Boom
> population will make this a front-and-center issue. Maybe better
> transit options will spring up in response. Not that that helps Tim
> now. My sympathies, Tim.
It's very different here, of course. Most people, no matter how
important they say their car is to them, could survive pretty well
without one. My father still gets about, either by walking for short
distances, using his mobility scooter for longer distances, or by bus
for the furthest distances and during poor weather. The bus is free
for anyone over pensionable age. Even if none of those options are
open, there are taxis.
Most of his day-to-day needs can be served by shops within 5 minutes'
walk; the vast majority of the remainder by the other means. That's
the key difference, I think between a 'typical' example here and in
the USA, or Canada, or Australia, or the Tibetan Plateau.
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
You and I have different understandings of the word "danger".
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
There's also a significant variation between the sexes - woman
metabolise alcohol less efficiently than men.
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
> Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com> wrote:
> > There is nothing that you can say that can convince me that it is
> > alright to drink while taking a few trees down, or having drinks at
> > lunch with the shirt-and-tie crowd. The kind of thinking that tells
> > the tree trimmer or the cubicle warrior that he/she can handle it is
> > just a short step away from the schmuck who says he can handle his
> > drinking and then drive. It's the same thinking that you hear people
> > saying they know using their cell phone while driving is wrong, but
> > they can handle it.
> >
> > If a person absolutely feels that they must have a drink while on the
> > job (any job) then I suggest that person has problems that will
> > eventually cause grief to others.
>
> Ah. Zealot bullshit.
Yup. My thoughts too. And it's nothing whatsoever to do with class.
--
John Hatpin
John Hatpin
Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
(specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
I know I'm not exactly a poster child for drinking in moderation, what
with my past and all, but this kind of language sounds to me more like
preemptive holier-than-thou tut-tutting than rational debate.
--
John Hatpin
Lee Ayrton
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers having
> a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many people
> supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no matter how
> little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Roofing is murderously hard on the body, and it isn't unusual to find
that a rack of beer is the first load up the ladder in the morning. It
begins as pain relief and goes downhill from there. After a few years
the "breakfast beer" is simply to stave off shakes until lunch.
Good idea? No. Does it make sense from their rationalized point of
view? Yes.
And, in some settings, it becomes institutionalized. I was talking to a
construction foreman on a movie years ago and he told me that, in his wet-
behind-the-ears days in construction, he noticed that the foreman on the
job would hand out cans of beer to certain guys on the way in in the
morning. By the end of the week he noticed that those who didn't drink
their beer right away didn't come back the next day. That foreman was
filtering the new guys for the ones he could trust, if you didn't drink
on the job you might turn in those who did.
These days there's a surprising number of AA members in east coast movie
construction. And a slightly smaller number who show up with new dents
in their truck in the morning.
S. Checker
> On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers
> having a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many
> people supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no
> matter how little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
Yeah, you are.
Of course sooner or later you're going to get the roofer who snuck a
pint of Jack on his way into work, had a six-pack through the morning,
then drank half a can of beer at lunch and fell into a keg of nails.
This will make a hilarious movie. So really, as a roofing-company
owner, you should say "no drinking at work."
But I had a friend, from another generation, who was asked to accompany
his high-school students on a field trip. At lunch he ordered his usual
beer. Shortly thereafter he was asked to leave the school. I blame you,
Cind. Directly.
--
for they had a machine, a dream of a machine, with springs and gears and
perfect in every respect. And they lived with it, and on it, and under
it, and inside it, for it was all they had
-- Stanislaw Lem
Hactar
As much as the smaller liver would imply, or not?
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81
Q: What did one photon say to the other photon?
A: I'm sick and tired of your interference. -- thebigmike1983 on Fark
QueBarbara
In particular, many Asians have low alcohol tolerance:
http://leherensuge.blogspot.com/2010/01/east-asian-alcohol-intolerance-gene.html
--
QueBarbara
"Turns out, Acme is a subsidiary of BP." groo
Opus the Penguin
> It's very different here, of course. Most people, no matter how
> important they say their car is to them, could survive pretty well
> without one. My father still gets about, either by walking for
> short distances, using his mobility scooter for longer distances,
> or by bus for the furthest distances and during poor weather. The
> bus is free for anyone over pensionable age. Even if none of those
> options are open, there are taxis.
>
> Most of his day-to-day needs can be served by shops within 5
> minutes' walk; the vast majority of the remainder by the other
> means. That's the key difference, I think between a 'typical'
> example here and in the USA, or Canada, or Australia, or the
> Tibetan Plateau.
I think that's true in general. As noted, there are places in the US
where one can live pretty well without needing a car. My addition to
that observation is that one can even do this in suburbia. Sometimes
it's just a matter of choosing your location shrewdly. I can think
of a few places in my area that I might move to if I became unable
to drive safely.
Needing to move makes it a bigger decision to give up the car, of
course. You can't just try it and see how it goes and prove to
yourself that it will work.
--
Opus the Penguin
The best darn penguin in all of Usenet
John Hatpin
> In article <80in16lqacbar60re...@4ax.com>,
> John Hatpin <RemoveThi...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote:
> > N Jill Marsh wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:43:09 -0400, ebenZ...@verizon.net (Hactar)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >In article <javm16torlir6sndt...@4ax.com>,
> > > >N Jill Marsh <njm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Pretty much the latter, if I recall correctly. Alcohol metabolizes at
> > > >> close to a constant rate for an individual, I think because the
> > > >> enzymes in the liver that metabolize it are more or less at capacity
> > > >> once very low alcohol levels are reached, and they just chug along
> > > >> after that.
> > > >
> > > >How much variation is there between individuals?
> > >
> > > I'm not sure, but I think quite a bit, though probably not as much as
> > > is commonly believed. An individual's alcohol absorption rate varies
> > > a lot, by the way, and of course, alcohol tolerance varies extremely
> > > widely.
> > >
> > > nj"will try to post real facts later"m
> >
> > There's also a significant variation between the sexes - woman
> > metabolise alcohol less efficiently than men.
>
> As much as the smaller liver would imply, or not?
It's not just down to size. There's something about enzymes too, I
believe.
--
John Hatpin
Lee Ayrton
It is the American cultural tendency towards both temperance and excess.
Drinking is something done after hours, a beer with lunch in most
professions is frowned upon. We (broadly tarring here) don't trust
people to have just one.
Les Albert
<art...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> > > Ah. Zealot bullshit.
So, are they zealots about the drinking?
Les
Les Albert
Of course it doesn't. But Huey likes to relate his stories to blue
collar doings, like the guys working the tree that he offered the
drinks to. And he used the example of the construction workers, etc.
Les
(You got yer blue collar wannabees ...)
Hidden Draggin
>
> Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
> (specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
> have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
>
> I know I'm not exactly a poster child for drinking in moderation, what
> with my past and all, but this kind of language sounds to me more like
> preemptive holier-than-thou tut-tutting than rational debate.
I just had a can of the evil brew: a deadly Busch Beer, more deadly
because it mirrors the name of a Republican President.
I will now go on a rampage of crashing cars, sexual assaults, workplace
accidents, and internet trolling! Life is so good...wait...there is MORE
in the fridge, calling to me.
Take me! Take Me! Foamy, cold drink of insanity!
--
The Hidden Draggin
Les Albert
> Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
> (specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
> have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
> I know I'm not exactly a poster child for drinking in moderation, what
> with my past and all, but this kind of language sounds to me more like
> preemptive holier-than-thou tut-tutting than rational debate.
It's not a debate. It's just people sounding off about how they feel
about the subject. A couple of beers here, a couple of beers there,
rinse and repeat, and you could develop a beer belly and cirrhosis of
the liver.
Les
Lee Ayrton
> John Hatpin wrote:
>
>
>> Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
>> (specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
>> have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
>>
>> I know I'm not exactly a poster child for drinking in moderation, what
>> with my past and all, but this kind of language sounds to me more like
>> preemptive holier-than-thou tut-tutting than rational debate.
>
> I just had a can of the evil brew: a deadly Busch Beer, more deadly
> because it mirrors the name of a Republican President.
Busch makes a beer called "Nixon"?
> I will now go on a rampage of crashing cars, sexual assaults, workplace
> accidents, and internet trolling! Life is so good...wait...there is MORE
> in the fridge, calling to me.
Back when I was an EMT (stop groaning you in the back, this one's a short
story) I realized that if I was called out of my nice warm bed in the wee
hours of the morning for a road accident there was a very high
possibility that when we forced the car door open empty Bud cans would
roll out. Alternately, if the driver was able when we arrived, he would
be throwing empty bud cans out of the car and into the bushes. But
always Bud. Always in cans.
Just doing my part to further the stereotypes.
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> I just had a can of the evil brew: a deadly Busch Beer, more deadly
> because it mirrors the name of a Republican President.
Strictly speaking, on most occasions I would prefer a glass of water to
a glass of Busch. My top three brews by order of descending preference
right now are:
Anchor Porter
Hebrew Messiah
Arrogant Bastard
Rasputin Imperial Stout
Ommergang Belgian-style Abbey Ale
In colder weather I might shuffle the list.
Hactar
That's not as bad as cirrhosis of the foot.
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81
This message was created using recycled electrons.
Les Albert
wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:34:47 +0100, John Hatpin
><RemoveThi...@gmailAndThisToo.com> wrote:
>>Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
>>(specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
>>have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
>Another little tidbit, just to stir the pot some more.
>Ok, here's a link for a BA calculator.
>http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/blood-alcohol-calculator.html
>A 180 lb man drinking 3 beers in an hour will have a BA of .0524.
>'round here, that means if he got pulled over while driving, he'd get
>a 12 hour suspension, and a $150 fine.
And in Norway it will result in a 3 week stay at a work camp, and the
loss of the driver's license for two years. No exceptions.
Les
Hidden Draggin
And you don't even want to know what happens when you
get caught under the influence of lutefisk!!
--
The Hidden Draggin
Hactar
The jury says "he's suffered enough" and lets you go?
--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81
GEMINI: Your birthday party will be ruined once again by your explosive
flatulence. Your love life will run into trouble when your fiancee hurls
a javelin through your chest. -- Weird Al, _Your Horoscope for Today_
Mac
You might want, if traveling in appropriate climes, to try Silver
City's Fat Scotch Ale. Dunno how well it ships, though.
Mac
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:19:18 -0400, Cindbear wrote:
> > On another board I'm on, someone posted some pictures of roofers having
> > a couple of beers while working. What surprised me was how many people
> > supported the roofers; it seems to me drinking on the job, no matter how
> > little, is a bad idea. Am I just a party pooper?
>
> Roofing is murderously hard on the body, and it isn't unusual to find
> that a rack of beer is the first load up the ladder in the morning. It
> begins as pain relief and goes downhill from there. After a few years
> the "breakfast beer" is simply to stave off shakes until lunch.
>
> Good idea? No. Does it make sense from their rationalized point of
> view? Yes.
Painting was once similar. Lotta wet crews. It was never the threat
that roofing was -ever see what a slate that gets loose can do? Or hot
tar in the wrong places?- so it never got the attention, but it was a
real personal problem for a lot of guys. As with roofing, it was
partly, maybe largely, self-medication, and once lead paint went away,
a lot of the trouble slowly went with it. Headachy stuff, white lead.
>
> And, in some settings, it becomes institutionalized. I was talking to a
> construction foreman on a movie years ago and he told me that, in his wet-
> behind-the-ears days in construction, he noticed that the foreman on the
> job would hand out cans of beer to certain guys on the way in in the
> morning. By the end of the week he noticed that those who didn't drink
> their beer right away didn't come back the next day. That foreman was
> filtering the new guys for the ones he could trust, if you didn't drink
> on the job you might turn in those who did.
His clone was running a company in Bainbridge Island, WA until not
that long ago.
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
<opusthepen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hactar (ebenZ...@verizon.net) wrote:
>
> > In article <880kho...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
> >> Dover Beach <moon.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I had a whole other rant but I deleted it.
> >> >
> >> >I just deleted ANOTHER one.
> >>
> >> You need a blog. (grin)
> >>
> >> What's the point of throwing all that energy into writing, then
> >> just destroying all that creativity?
> >
> > I'm not Dover, but I find the act of writing something down (even
> > if I subsequently delete it) to be cathartic. I have this sense
> > of "I feel this way", so I write something scathing, then read
> > what I've written and think "I can't send/post that" and delete
> > it. But I got it off my psychological chest in the writing.
> >
>
> I hate you people.
We're not all that fond of you, either.
> I probably shouldn't post this.
Leroy.
Mary "Fun in a rather guilt-inducing way."
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
We didn't just do weird stuff at Dryden, we wrote reports about it.
reunite....@gmail.com or mil...@qnet.com
Visit my blog at http://thedigitalknitter.blogspot.com/
John Hatpin
> In article <n13o16d574fb96dme...@4ax.com>,
> Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com> wrote:
> > John Hatpin wrote:
> >
> > > Why are so many people in this thread taking a "couple of beers"
> > > (specified in the OP) and extrapolating it to "half-drunk" and "must
> > > have a drink" and "staggering in from lunch"?
> > > I know I'm not exactly a poster child for drinking in moderation, what
> > > with my past and all, but this kind of language sounds to me more like
> > > preemptive holier-than-thou tut-tutting than rational debate.
> >
> > It's not a debate. It's just people sounding off about how they feel
> > about the subject. A couple of beers here, a couple of beers there,
> > rinse and repeat, and you could develop a beer belly and cirrhosis of
> > the liver.
>
> That's not as bad as cirrhosis of the foot.
That's true. The foot can't regenerate itself. Not in humans, anyway,
and starfish are all teetotalers.
--
John Hatpin