On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:45:39 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:42:21 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:

On Oct 28, 11:13*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:30:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC"





wrote:
On 10/28/2010 5:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:20:54 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
*wrote:

I read that the Peoples Republic of China now lays claim to the world's
fastest supercomputer. I don't know if any of the scientists involved in
that project were trained in the United States, but it would not
surprise me to learn some were.

I think the sun is setting on the United States for many reasons.

You may be right but that's a political statement anyway you slice it.
This is supposed to be (mostly) a boating group and past history here
is that nothing will get a food fight going faster than political or
religious pronouncements.

Don't start undoing your good work !

Political? A non-partisan observation about this country is political?
So, if I posted that "Democracy in the United States has worked well,"
that would be political?

How about, "The sun is setting on new boat sales in the United States
because of the price of fuel, the economy, and the closure of many boat
manufacturers and dealerships."

Better?

Is it political to discuss the lack of dredging in the ICW?

I thought the idea was to avoid partisan political posting.

It doesn't matter what you say here. There are some who'll find
political fault with it. Mostly, they're mean-spirited little men.
--
Nom=de=Plume
- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparently is doesn't matter what we say here, you are still stuck on
name calling...

So, you're claiming I called you a mean-spirited little man? Wow. I
was thinking of someone else, but if the shoe fits....

Can you knock it off? If me and ***** can do it, you should be able to.
When you came here a year or so ago, you said it was for boats but were
immediately consumed in the fire. Now you have a chance to join the
group you tried to join a year or so ago. Maybe you are not so motivated
as some of us, but then you don't remember how fun this boat group was a
decade ago, I do.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. What does consumed by fire
mean? Some people were obnoxious, and I occasionally responded to
that. You guys have been at this "war" for a while. Don't put it on
me.

If you don't like what I have to say, feel free to plonk me.

FYI, I don't respond to spoofers like Harry(r) if that's not obvious.
--
Nom=de=Plume

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:15:31 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:39:48 -0700, wrote:

Actually I saw a Chinese lady on Charley Rose a few weeks ago
explaining why she and a lot of other Chinese students chose to go
back home when they graduate from an American school ... growth and
opportunity. They are growing exponentially and the US is not. We
scoff at a business where you may only be making a few cents a unit
but when your customer base is a billion, that is a lot of pennies.

As long as you don't mind being oppressed and censored, not to mention
practically no environmental regulations, sure lot's of "opportunity."
--

You are basically describing the US back when we were great.

Come on.. Love Canal? McCarthy's era? Jim Crow? I think I'll pass.

Much like the Chinese, we didn't know we were oppressed.

So, I guess the active and vocal right and left media don't identify
any problems. Who knew? I guess you never heard of Edward R. Murrow
calling out McCarthyism?

In the 40s the press was not allowed to talk about the president's
health, in the 60s we couldn't talk about the president's girlfriends,
in the 50s, 60s and 70s we had the "equal time" law that restricted
political commentary on TV. There was plenty of censorship about
things that were "immoral" or just in bad taste on TV with the
government largely making that decision.

And this was when we were "great"???

And, it was mostly untrue. It was a gentleman's agreement not to talk
about it. All of the rest has changed, mostly for the better. That's
not happened in China, esp. if you're of a religion they don't like.

As for environmental laws. under our current law, there would have
been no Hoover Dam, the LA water system and hence the development of
most of Southern and central California. There would also not have
been a TVA, and that probably meant no atom bomb.

So, we should go back and keep on polluting? That's going to make us
great again?

We only have to look at the super fund sites to see what industries
would not exist with current laws. That may have been horrible
environmentally but it was the opportunity that let us dominate in
technology.

And, again... you want us to dominate what exactly? How about we
actually get our collective sh*t together, which means getting our
sh*t cleaned up, and actually competing through intellect
..
As for personal freedom, we did not have the woman's right to chose,
civil rights, the EPA, OSHA, CPSC and other things the chinese lack.

Yet we do now. So, you're saying that a woman's right to VOTE or
Choose or be a full citizen was required to be competitive? You're
claiming we should scrap OSHA and the EPA for the sake of competing
with the Chinese??

Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually
got a raise. (pre 1973)

I don't know what Bob said.
--
Nom=de=Plume

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:00:54 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:45:39 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:42:21 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:

On Oct 28, 11:13*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:30:05 -0400, "Paul@BYC"





wrote:
On 10/28/2010 5:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:20:54 -0400, "Paul@BYC"
*wrote:

I read that the Peoples Republic of China now lays claim to the world's
fastest supercomputer. I don't know if any of the scientists involved in
that project were trained in the United States, but it would not
surprise me to learn some were.

I think the sun is setting on the United States for many reasons.

You may be right but that's a political statement anyway you slice it.
This is supposed to be (mostly) a boating group and past history here
is that nothing will get a food fight going faster than political or
religious pronouncements.

Don't start undoing your good work !

Political? A non-partisan observation about this country is political?
So, if I posted that "Democracy in the United States has worked well,"
that would be political?

How about, "The sun is setting on new boat sales in the United States
because of the price of fuel, the economy, and the closure of many boat
manufacturers and dealerships."

Better?

Is it political to discuss the lack of dredging in the ICW?

I thought the idea was to avoid partisan political posting.

It doesn't matter what you say here. There are some who'll find
political fault with it. Mostly, they're mean-spirited little men.
--
Nom=de=Plume
- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparently is doesn't matter what we say here, you are still stuck on
name calling...

So, you're claiming I called you a mean-spirited little man? Wow. I
was thinking of someone else, but if the shoe fits....

Can you knock it off? If me and ***** can do it, you should be able to.
When you came here a year or so ago, you said it was for boats but were
immediately consumed in the fire. Now you have a chance to join the
group you tried to join a year or so ago. Maybe you are not so motivated
as some of us, but then you don't remember how fun this boat group was a
decade ago, I do.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. What does consumed by fire
mean? Some people were obnoxious, and I occasionally responded to
that. You guys have been at this "war" for a while. Don't put it on
me.

What I meant by "consumed by fire" is.. I seriously doubt you came here
with the goal of becoming one of the most prolific one line, name
callers in the group, but you did. You probably came in to try to talk
boats, or meet some nice folks on line and once you jumped in, you found
out quickly rec.boats was an inferno already. Instead of jumping out of
the fire, you became just more fuel like so many others..


If you don't like what I have to say, feel free to plonk me.

Well as you know, I have had you plonked for months already pretty much
since you came here, but opened my filters last week to see how everyone
was gonna' act and I have had (and probably given) some pleasant
surprises. You have surprised me too, as although I don't feel you have
life experiences or point of view that would produce much of interest to
me, I never doubted you were an intelligent person and actually thought
you of all the folks here (involved in the flame fest) would pick up on
this "thing" a lot quicker than you have...



FYI, I don't respond to spoofers like Harry(r) if that's not obvious.

Yeah, well as long as he is being harry, and not trying to be Karen or
Harry Krause... I will let it ride for now...

I certainly disagree that I was anywhere near as prolific or
vociferous as others. Calling someone a moron is a bit different that
some of the more extreme terms I've seen used here. Certainly, I did
want to and still want to converse about boats.

Your plonking me or not is your concern not mine. My recollection is
that you were unwilling to listen to contrary points of view, it upset
you that I might have a different opinion and was willing to support
it forcefully.

And, then your next comment... "don't feel you have the life
experiences" .. well, many could say the same about your support of
the bickering and devisiveness of others of similar political views.

Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and
I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean
up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly.
--
Nom=de=Plume

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and
I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean
up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly.

Cool....

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

Let me know how that works out. ;-)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry®" wrote:

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and
I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean
up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly.

Cool....

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

Let me know how that works out. ;-)



I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here
in the early stages, more so than I might have expected.

Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry®" handle that
you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that
might be. :-)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote:

He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise
since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here.

Maybe Bob's middle class didn't but certainly a lot of other middle
class folks did better by any reasonable measure. I'd agree that a
lot of that was the result of two income families and better job
opportunities for women. Of course the unfortunate result of better
opportunities for women meant fewer for guys with marginal skils or
work ethic.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:12:04 -0400, "Harry®" wrote:

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Forgive me, but I've been out of town until a couple of days ago, and
I didn't see, except second-hand, that there was a movement to clean
up the newsgroup. I'm happy to support that, certainly.

Cool....

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!

Let me know how that works out. ;-)



I'm happy to report that there has been a great deal of progress here
in the early stages, more so than I might have expected.

Now for the next step, why don't you give up that "Harry®" handle that
you have adopted and go back to your old likable self, who ever that
might be. :-)


I've worked hard to make Harry® a household name around here...........and
you want me to abandon him. Whatever for?

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 10:45:28 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:15:31 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:39:48 -0700, wrote:

Actually I saw a Chinese lady on Charley Rose a few weeks ago
explaining why she and a lot of other Chinese students chose to go
back home when they graduate from an American school ... growth and
opportunity. They are growing exponentially and the US is not. We
scoff at a business where you may only be making a few cents a unit
but when your customer base is a billion, that is a lot of pennies.

As long as you don't mind being oppressed and censored, not to mention
practically no environmental regulations, sure lot's of "opportunity."
--

You are basically describing the US back when we were great.

Come on.. Love Canal? McCarthy's era? Jim Crow? I think I'll pass.


The fact remains the US was the engine of democracy and the growth
leader of the world in these times

The fact remains that we still are. Our economy is improving, big
corporations are making record profits, but it's going to take a while
to recover from all the years of bs.

Much like the Chinese, we didn't know we were oppressed.

So, I guess the active and vocal right and left media don't identify
any problems. Who knew? I guess you never heard of Edward R. Murrow
calling out McCarthyism?

I also remember one of the most quoted supreme court decisions was
Schenck where OW Holmes told is about fire in a crowded theater and
that was a decision that upheld the government's power to quash an
anti-war demonstration and throw Mr Schenck in jail for speaking out
about the draft.

And your point? Things are a bit better these days.

In the 40s the press was not allowed to talk about the president's
health, in the 60s we couldn't talk about the president's girlfriends,
in the 50s, 60s and 70s we had the "equal time" law that restricted
political commentary on TV. There was plenty of censorship about
things that were "immoral" or just in bad taste on TV with the
government largely making that decision.

And this was when we were "great"???

It was when we had an expanding middle class and when we were the
fastest growing economy in the world.


The middle class in this country is not extinct. It's been battered,
but not deep fried just yet. Having the "fastest growing economy in
the world" isn't the most important thing nor is it necessarily a good
thing.

As for environmental laws. under our current law, there would have
been no Hoover Dam, the LA water system and hence the development of
most of Southern and central California. There would also not have
been a TVA, and that probably meant no atom bomb.

So, we should go back and keep on polluting? That's going to make us
great again?

We only have to look at the super fund sites to see what industries
would not exist with current laws. That may have been horrible
environmentally but it was the opportunity that let us dominate in
technology.

And, again... you want us to dominate what exactly? How about we
actually get our collective sh*t together, which means getting our
sh*t cleaned up, and actually competing through intellect
.

I don't think we ever really competed on intellect. We were just very
good at bringing products to market cheaply and quickly. They were
seldom the best product, nor were they particularly innovative, we
just made a lot of them.

Huh? We have more Nobels than any other country and we're ranked 11th
out of 40 per capita.

What would you rather have, a 58 Chevy or a 58 Mercedes Benz?

Depends on it's condition of course. I imagine that there would be
some 58 Chevys that are worth quite a bit.

As for personal freedom, we did not have the woman's right to chose,
civil rights, the EPA, OSHA, CPSC and other things the chinese lack.

Yet we do now. So, you're saying that a woman's right to VOTE or
Choose or be a full citizen was required to be competitive? You're
claiming we should scrap OSHA and the EPA for the sake of competing
with the Chinese??

I agree we do not want to go back to the bad old days but that also
means we will lose significant market share. China is not going to
dominate the solar PV market because they make the best solar
collector. They will dominate because they make the cheapest one.

You can have a 100% market share of the buggy whip industry and still
lose.

Cheaper isn't always better. Example: McDs. And, it's not even clear
that cheaper is actually cheaper in the long run.

Yet Bob says those were the last days that the middle class actually
got a raise. (pre 1973)

I don't know what Bob said.

He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise
since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here.

Take it up with Bob. I am not his savior.
--
Nom=de=Plume

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:32:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:18:04 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote:

He said just what I said. The US Middle Class has not had a raise
since 1973 ... and he said it 30 times or more here.

Maybe Bob's middle class didn't but certainly a lot of other middle
class folks did better by any reasonable measure. I'd agree that a
lot of that was the result of two income families and better job
opportunities for women. Of course the unfortunate result of better
opportunities for women meant fewer for guys with marginal skils or
work ethic.

I believe that too. I just did not want to start that fight ;-)

It is a case of supply and demand. When you double the number of
workers, wages will fall.

That implies a steady-state economy, which doesn't exist.
--
Nom=de=Plume

On Oct 25, 11:13*am, "Paul@BYC" wrote:
I get a lunch break, but you guys get to post here all day.
Rich? Retired?

Or, maybe both!