|
Well ....
On 11/18/14 8:32 AM, Tim wrote:
Cute? Factual The two aren't mutually exclusive. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
Harold I noticed the mis-spelling after the post. iPhone spell check strikes again. Lol!
|
Well ....
On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. The squirrels, sparrows and rats in your neighborhood must live in fear of all your little animal traps. Apparently you don't know what a subsistence hunter is. It isn't someone who buys most of his groceries at Safeway, Giant, or Walmart. A subsistence hunter hunts and relies on what he kills to put food on the table because he has no or few other ways to do it. You're just an animal killer...and an asshole, a liar, and a racist. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:36:31 -0500, T*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. The squirrels, sparrows and rats in your neighborhood must live in fear of all your little animal traps. Only the chipmunks. The rest of those that are caught are released. Apparently you don't know what a subsistence hunter is. It isn't someone who buys most of his groceries at Safeway, Giant, or Walmart. A subsistence hunter hunts and relies on what he kills to put food on the table because he has no or few other ways to do it. You're just an animal killer...and an asshole, a liar, and a racist. Nah, you're projecting again. Subsistence hunting is what I did as a kid 'cause we couldn't afford to put a lot of meat on the table. We didn't have an extremely wealthy and adventurous daddy like you did. Hell, when my dad took me fishing, we never got a fireboat welcome. |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:01:14 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. Didn't have a Guzzi when I was hunting. My mom would say, "Come help with dishes, John, we'll talk about motorcycles." This was when I was in seventh and eighth grades. Worked too. But I didn't get a bike 'til I was about 32s or so. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 1:12 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. If he is just collecting trophies I agree with you. The other side of this is controlling invasive species. I assume you are OK with shooting wild hogs and pythons. You certainly should be if protecting native species and habitat are important to you. Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:18:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? === Snow birds also? |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 1:18 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/18/2014 1:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. If he is just collecting trophies I agree with you. The other side of this is controlling invasive species. I assume you are OK with shooting wild hogs and pythons. You certainly should be if protecting native species and habitat are important to you. Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) Or Socialists... joking too.. about the joking... um... |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. Yeah, but nobody has to kill that.. it's born in the nice styropac containers and cellophane.. right? |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
|
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:51:25 -0500, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:18:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/2014 1:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. If he is just collecting trophies I agree with you. The other side of this is controlling invasive species. I assume you are OK with shooting wild hogs and pythons. You certainly should be if protecting native species and habitat are important to you. Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) If we did that, who would do all of the hard work? We would starve, nothing would be built and the grass would be over the house. And the Democrats would lose lots of votes! |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. TOAD, you don't hunt. What makes you think you know so much about the subject? -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life, but it does make you against baby killing. Other bull**** snipped. |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:46:36 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: http://i.imgur.com/aDfYtTA.jpg Another great picture from Tim. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 5:07 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote: You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. A pound of meat taken home from a hunt is a pound of meat that didn't come off a factory farm. That should be worth something to all of you global warming and pollution folks. That makes too much sense for them. |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:09:02 -0500, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. If he agreed with it, he'd have to agree to shooting mute swans. They're raising hell with the Chesapeake. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._muteswan.html Perhaps a few relocated pythons could help with our problem? I hear they're getting more and more used to cold weather. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 5:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:09:02 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. If he agreed with it, he'd have to agree to shooting mute swans. They're raising hell with the Chesapeake. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._muteswan.html Perhaps a few relocated pythons could help with our problem? I hear they're getting more and more used to cold weather. cough**** CANADA GEESEcough Just sayin'... |
Well ....
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:29:22 -0500, KC wrote:
On 11/18/2014 5:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:09:02 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. If he agreed with it, he'd have to agree to shooting mute swans. They're raising hell with the Chesapeake. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._muteswan.html Perhaps a few relocated pythons could help with our problem? I hear they're getting more and more used to cold weather. cough**** CANADA GEESEcough Just sayin'... ....yeah, those too. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 4:46 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 06:50:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 12:51 AM, wrote: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:22:10 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: If you mean the palins, they are not subsistence hunters. I have no idea who the "motor city mad man" is. I have no objection to, for example, tribesmen who hunt because it is the only way they can feed themselves and their families. You really should stop coming to conclusions based upon your wild-assed guesses. So someone who just hunts to supplement their income is evil? Do you feel the same about gardening? Personally I do not see much difference between shooting a deer and paying Giant food to kill a steer, butcher and wrap it for me. Both are going to be a dead mammal that we cook and eat. *My* point was that there is no morality in non-subsistence hunting. If a family with very little money can put food on the table or have something to sell or trade by hunting, then *that* is subsistence hunting. You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. TOAD, you don't hunt. What makes you think you know so much about the subject? I can read for comprehension. That gave me better choices than joining the army. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 5:07 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote: You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. A pound of meat taken home from a hunt is a pound of meat that didn't come off a factory farm. That should be worth something to all of you global warming and pollution folks. And has nothing to do with subsistence hunting. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
|
Well ....
On 11/18/14 5:29 PM, KC wrote:
On 11/18/2014 5:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:09:02 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. If he agreed with it, he'd have to agree to shooting mute swans. They're raising hell with the Chesapeake. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n..._muteswan.html Perhaps a few relocated pythons could help with our problem? I hear they're getting more and more used to cold weather. cough**** CANADA GEESEcough Just sayin'... You probably have. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 1:12 PM, wrote: You don't seem to understand the point. Maybe I do. If the hunter is eating the game, it is subsistence hunting. Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. A pound of meat taken home from a hunt is a pound of meat that didn't come off a factory farm. That should be worth something to all of you global warming and pollution folks. And probably much healthier eating. |
Well ....
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:01:14 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. My preference ;-) Thick pork chop, better. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 5:16 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:44:24 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:51:25 -0500, wrote: Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) If we did that, who would do all of the hard work? We would starve, nothing would be built and the grass would be over the house. And the Democrats would lose lots of votes! I think the democrats are overestimating the number of immigrants they are going to pick up. These people may start out as democrats but once they get their businesses going, they will be republicans and immigrants are the ones most likely to actually start a small business ... at least that is what we see here. The biggest factor is usually oppressive regulations that actually favor the same large corporations the democrats say they are against. A company like Walmart can afford a compliance division and a staff to sort through all of this red tape. Jose and Julio's little fruit store doesn't stand a chance. Nonsense. Jose and Julio's are unlikely to start out anywhere near the scale of a Walmart. Much more likely as a sole proprietorship or simple "S" or "C" corporation. Very simple and inexpensive process to file. Jose and Julio will most likely rent or buy a small, existing facility to conduct their business in. Local codes and rules apply for an occupancy permit but certainly not a major deal. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 6:17 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:01:14 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. My preference ;-) Thick pork chop, better. I go along with that. Not overcooked though. Too often chops are overcooked and dried out. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 7:12 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:49:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 5:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. No, just not playing your change the subject game. You are talking about hunting. Hog hunting is hunting, in fact a very popular type of hunting here. That is not changing the subject at all. For that matter white tail deer are reaching unsustainable populations all over the country. I bet you think shooting them is wrong too. Is dying from starvation and disease better than simply being shot? I suppose we could round them up and kill them in a slaughterhouse. You think that is OK for other mammals we eat.. I was discussing subsistence hunting. You know, the sort of hunting people engage in when they cannot afford to shop at the market or live out in the wilderness with no markets nearby. I have no objections to subsistence hunting. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 7:39 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 18:45:42 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/2014 5:16 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:44:24 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:51:25 -0500, wrote: Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) If we did that, who would do all of the hard work? We would starve, nothing would be built and the grass would be over the house. And the Democrats would lose lots of votes! I think the democrats are overestimating the number of immigrants they are going to pick up. These people may start out as democrats but once they get their businesses going, they will be republicans and immigrants are the ones most likely to actually start a small business ... at least that is what we see here. The biggest factor is usually oppressive regulations that actually favor the same large corporations the democrats say they are against. A company like Walmart can afford a compliance division and a staff to sort through all of this red tape. Jose and Julio's little fruit store doesn't stand a chance. Nonsense. Jose and Julio's are unlikely to start out anywhere near the scale of a Walmart. Much more likely as a sole proprietorship or simple "S" or "C" corporation. Very simple and inexpensive process to file. Jose and Julio will most likely rent or buy a small, existing facility to conduct their business in. Local codes and rules apply for an occupancy permit but certainly not a major deal. You are just talking about their business license (what they call a business tax receipt in Florida ... fact) It does not actually allow you to do anything but have a business address and pay taxes on it. If you are just selling fresh fruit your store needs to meet a number of health department regulations, you need to have documentation about where ther fruit actually came from (a lot of fruit can't even come into Florida) and it has to be clearly labeled by country of origin. Your stand also needs to meet fire codes, egress codes, building codes and have an assortment of signs and placards, perhaps even sprinklers. If you actually have the gaul to try to sell any kind of prepared food you have not even scratched the surface of the rules you are dealing with. When you hire someone to work behind the counter there is another bureaucracy that kicks in (IRS, OSHA, the Labor department several kinds of insurance) All that and you might even have a DEA SWAT team come in and dump out all of your fruit boxes looking for dope. You really should talk to my buddy Ammet who runs the little stand at the end of my street. He will tell you about things I forgot. Ahh...libertarianism...no regs because tainted food makes you strong. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 7:12 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:49:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 5:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. No, just not playing your change the subject game. You are talking about hunting. Hog hunting is hunting, in fact a very popular type of hunting here. That is not changing the subject at all. For that matter white tail deer are reaching unsustainable populations all over the country. I bet you think shooting them is wrong too. Is dying from starvation and disease better than simply being shot? I suppose we could round them up and kill them in a slaughterhouse. You think that is OK for other mammals we eat.. Almost hit a deer on my street today, and we are in a development with 1/2 acre lots average... he was coming out of the woods side though. Big fat one, no antlers, not a hunter so I don't know what that is but I did think how much nice meat would have been on it. |
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 6:47 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/18/2014 6:17 PM, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:01:14 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. My preference ;-) Thick pork chop, better. I go along with that. Not overcooked though. Too often chops are overcooked and dried out. Just did one of my old fall backs the other night. I take a pork loin (say 8" long) and a good filet knife and I slice it in a spiral like a jelly roll to the center and lay it out on the cutting board so I have a flat rectangle. Sprinkle on a bit of salt and pepper then I lay a layer of cheese down, followed by a layer of browned crumbled sausage (about a half pound), and then a layer of spinach leaves. Then I roll the thing back up into a roast (like I said, it looks like a jelly roll) and tie it up with cotton butchers string and put it in the oven uncovered in a glass pan at 350 degrees.. I forget how long, I just watch the meat thermometer.. Sometimes I lay bacon strips over the top, but others I rub salt and pepper and bread crumbs then sprinkle with balsamic vinegar before I put it in the oven... Sorry, just thought I would pass that along. Also, I have used broccoli instead of spinach, all is good... go heavy on the greens, it's a great stick to your ribs meal.... |
Well ....
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/18/14 7:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:49:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 5:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. No, just not playing your change the subject game. You are talking about hunting. Hog hunting is hunting, in fact a very popular type of hunting here. That is not changing the subject at all. For that matter white tail deer are reaching unsustainable populations all over the country. I bet you think shooting them is wrong too. Is dying from starvation and disease better than simply being shot? I suppose we could round them up and kill them in a slaughterhouse. You think that is OK for other mammals we eat.. I was discussing subsistence hunting. You know, the sort of hunting people engage in when they cannot afford to shop at the market or live out in the wilderness with no markets nearby. I have no objections to subsistence hunting. Lots of those First Nation people are subsistence hunters, but can afford to go the market. Traditional and probaly healthier. |
Well ....
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/18/14 7:39 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 18:45:42 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/2014 5:16 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:44:24 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:51:25 -0500, wrote: Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) If we did that, who would do all of the hard work? We would starve, nothing would be built and the grass would be over the house. And the Democrats would lose lots of votes! I think the democrats are overestimating the number of immigrants they are going to pick up. These people may start out as democrats but once they get their businesses going, they will be republicans and immigrants are the ones most likely to actually start a small business ... at least that is what we see here. The biggest factor is usually oppressive regulations that actually favor the same large corporations the democrats say they are against. A company like Walmart can afford a compliance division and a staff to sort through all of this red tape. Jose and Julio's little fruit store doesn't stand a chance. Nonsense. Jose and Julio's are unlikely to start out anywhere near the scale of a Walmart. Much more likely as a sole proprietorship or simple "S" or "C" corporation. Very simple and inexpensive process to file. Jose and Julio will most likely rent or buy a small, existing facility to conduct their business in. Local codes and rules apply for an occupancy permit but certainly not a major deal. You are just talking about their business license (what they call a business tax receipt in Florida ... fact) It does not actually allow you to do anything but have a business address and pay taxes on it. If you are just selling fresh fruit your store needs to meet a number of health department regulations, you need to have documentation about where ther fruit actually came from (a lot of fruit can't even come into Florida) and it has to be clearly labeled by country of origin. Your stand also needs to meet fire codes, egress codes, building codes and have an assortment of signs and placards, perhaps even sprinklers. If you actually have the gaul to try to sell any kind of prepared food you have not even scratched the surface of the rules you are dealing with. When you hire someone to work behind the counter there is another bureaucracy that kicks in (IRS, OSHA, the Labor department several kinds of insurance) All that and you might even have a DEA SWAT team come in and dump out all of your fruit boxes looking for dope. You really should talk to my buddy Ammet who runs the little stand at the end of my street. He will tell you about things I forgot. Ahh...libertarianism...no regs because tainted food makes you strong. Change focus again. |
Well ....
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/18/2014 6:17 PM, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:01:14 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/14 11:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote: When I kill an animal or bird, TOAD, I eat it for dinner that night or the next. If I didn't eat it for dinner, I'd be hungry that night. Therefore I'm a subsistence hunter. Or, you could hop on the 'guzi and run down to the supermarket to buy a nice, thick steak. My preference ;-) Thick pork chop, better. I go along with that. Not overcooked though. Too often chops are overcooked and dried out. Pork loin chop, fried with onions and peppers, and russet potatoes. Mucho tastee. Maybe not an often meal for health. |
Well ....
On 11/18/14 8:14 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:30:04 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 7:12 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:49:08 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/18/14 5:09 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:41:35 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: Not by the normal definition of subsistence hunting. BTW I noticed that you ducked the question about taking invasive exotics. No, just not playing your change the subject game. You are talking about hunting. Hog hunting is hunting, in fact a very popular type of hunting here. That is not changing the subject at all. For that matter white tail deer are reaching unsustainable populations all over the country. I bet you think shooting them is wrong too. Is dying from starvation and disease better than simply being shot? I suppose we could round them up and kill them in a slaughterhouse. You think that is OK for other mammals we eat.. I was discussing subsistence hunting. You know, the sort of hunting people engage in when they cannot afford to shop at the market or live out in the wilderness with no markets nearby. I have no objections to subsistence hunting. I was just trying to figure out where you do draw the line. "Subsistence hunting" sounds like a cop out to me. Do you really care about the animals or is it just a way to slam a few Rec Boats posters again? A true subsistence hunter will have far less respect for the resource than a sport hunter. Little things like bag limits, closed seasons and protected species would not affect anyone who thought it was shoot or starve. I'm not drawing lines. I'm merely stating I have no objections to subsistence hunting as it is generally described. -- Just because you are opposed to abortion doesn’t make you pro-life. Your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, not a child clothed, not a child able to see the doctor. That’s not pro-life…that’s pro-birth. |
Well ....
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:27:12 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: I'm not drawing lines. I'm merely stating I have no objections to subsistence hunting as it is generally described. It does sound like you are saying homeless people could corner a fawn in your neighborhood, beat it to death with baseball bats and that would be OK if they were hungry enough. You are trying much too hard. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
Well ....
|
Well ....
On 11/18/2014 7:39 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 18:45:42 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/18/2014 5:16 PM, wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:44:24 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:51:25 -0500, wrote: Does that mean we should be shooting illegal immigrants? (just a joke, relax) If we did that, who would do all of the hard work? We would starve, nothing would be built and the grass would be over the house. And the Democrats would lose lots of votes! I think the democrats are overestimating the number of immigrants they are going to pick up. These people may start out as democrats but once they get their businesses going, they will be republicans and immigrants are the ones most likely to actually start a small business ... at least that is what we see here. The biggest factor is usually oppressive regulations that actually favor the same large corporations the democrats say they are against. A company like Walmart can afford a compliance division and a staff to sort through all of this red tape. Jose and Julio's little fruit store doesn't stand a chance. Nonsense. Jose and Julio's are unlikely to start out anywhere near the scale of a Walmart. Much more likely as a sole proprietorship or simple "S" or "C" corporation. Very simple and inexpensive process to file. Jose and Julio will most likely rent or buy a small, existing facility to conduct their business in. Local codes and rules apply for an occupancy permit but certainly not a major deal. You are just talking about their business license (what they call a business tax receipt in Florida ... fact) It does not actually allow you to do anything but have a business address and pay taxes on it. If you are just selling fresh fruit your store needs to meet a number of health department regulations, you need to have documentation about where ther fruit actually came from (a lot of fruit can't even come into Florida) and it has to be clearly labeled by country of origin. Your stand also needs to meet fire codes, egress codes, building codes and have an assortment of signs and placards, perhaps even sprinklers. If you actually have the gaul to try to sell any kind of prepared food you have not even scratched the surface of the rules you are dealing with. When you hire someone to work behind the counter there is another bureaucracy that kicks in (IRS, OSHA, the Labor department several kinds of insurance) All that and you might even have a DEA SWAT team come in and dump out all of your fruit boxes looking for dope. You really should talk to my buddy Ammet who runs the little stand at the end of my street. He will tell you about things I forgot. Sounds like you live in a nanny state. :-) I've been through the process several times. The first was for an engineering/metal fab company that ultimately employed over 70 people in a 40,000 sq.ft. facility. Took all of 2 or 3 days to purchase and install the required fire extinguishers, update the exit signs, build an area to house the various high pressure gas cylinders (argon, nitrogen, oxygen, propane etc.) All requirements were outlined for us by a courtesy visit by the fire department and building inspector. They came back a week later, did the sign off inspection and we were open for business. 24 years later it's still in business under different ownership and management. While operating that business I also bought a small breakfast and lunch shop that was going to close. It was in the park that my business was located and was a popular place for people to have breakfast and get lunches. The woman who owned it was retiring, so I bought it and hired the former employees who had worked there to run it. I became very familiar with the food handling requirements, inspections and licenses. None were an issue to speak of and a license was granted in less than a week. Biggest issue was keeping the grease traps clean. Interesting experience but not my bag. I ended up selling it to the employees on a simple time payment schedule that they could afford. Then, years later, when I decided to open the guitar shop/performance venue, I went through the process again. There was a bit of a controversy because we had seating and a stage for live performances as well as the retail area for guitar and amp sales. A question arose as to our status being "retail" or "place of assembly". The codes are different. After discussions between the fire department and the building inspector that took all of about 3 minutes, the issue was resolved and we were issued an occupancy permit. Point is, it wasn't a very involved process in any of the three cases. No "red tape" to speak of other than going to the respective town hall, filling out the applications and equipping the buildings with whatever was required by the fire department primarily. Biggest issue was with the electrical inspectors for the guitar shop. They tend to have their own ideas on what they like to see. I had done a lot of new wiring myself for the stage, stage lights, etc. without bothering with a permit, so I was a little apprehensive when he arrived for the occupancy permit inspection. He checked everything out and asked who did the new wiring. I told him "Me", expecting all hell to break loose but he said it was all fine. I've learned that everyone needs to feel they did their job so when he insisted that the exit lights be changed to the newer, LED types and the electrical room have a sign on the door saying. "Electrical Room", I was happy to accomodate him. That was easy enough. |
Well ....
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com