Stop whining, America!

[Jay Honeck]

Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I
hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.

Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
flying less.

How can this be?

Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:

- Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
$86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.

- For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
gallon, which was set back in 1981.

- Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what
it cost way back in 1935.

- Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH
more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP has been
cut almost in half since 1973.

- Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
*declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.

- At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
the post-World War II norm.)

- Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.

- Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.

So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of these
facts brought to the fore? Is it a not-so-hidden agenda? An ax to grind?
Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless they've got something to
bitch about?

Personally, having been in the business, I think it's just this simple: Bad
news sells newspapers; good news sucks.

Get out and fly, people! Life is good!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[dave]

I asked the owner of one of the gas docks I go to about this summer's
business. It's off 50%. Many boats make airplanes look like gas misers
so maybe that has something to do with it. I know from talking to many
of the folks at my marina that they are definitely using their boats
less due to fuel prices.

Dave
68 7ECA




Jay Honeck wrote:
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I
> hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:
>
> - Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
> However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
> $86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.
>
> - For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
> gallon, which was set back in 1981.
>
> - Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what
> it cost way back in 1935.
>
> - Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH
> more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP has been
> cut almost in half since 1973.
>
> - Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
> *declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.
>
> - At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
> years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
> federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
> the post-World War II norm.)
>
> - Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
> year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.
>
> - Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
> adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.
>
> So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of these
> facts brought to the fore? Is it a not-so-hidden agenda? An ax to grind?
> Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless they've got something to
> bitch about?
>
> Personally, having been in the business, I think it's just this simple: Bad
> news sells newspapers; good news sucks.
>
> Get out and fly, people! Life is good!
>
> :-)

[Jay Honeck]

>I asked the owner of one of the gas docks I go to about this summer's
>business. It's off 50%. Many boats make airplanes look like gas misers so
>maybe that has something to do with it. I know from talking to many of the
>folks at my marina that they are definitely using their boats
> less due to fuel prices.

Well, feeding two 350 cubic inch Chevy engines (as our friends do with their
yacht on Lake Michigan), to go no where at 20 mph, might make any of us
choose to party at the dock instead -- high prices or no.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> Well, feeding two 350 cubic inch Chevy engines (as our friends do with their
> yacht on Lake Michigan), to go no where at 20 mph, might make any of us
> choose to party at the dock instead -- high prices or no.

Tell me again... how much do you pay for a hamburger?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Honeck]

>> Well, feeding two 350 cubic inch Chevy engines (as our friends do with
>> their yacht on Lake Michigan), to go no where at 20 mph, might make any
>> of us choose to party at the dock instead -- high prices or no.
>
> Tell me again... how much do you pay for a hamburger?

Point taken, but my hamburger is likely to be served in a different *state*,
possibly with relatives I might not see otherwise.

A boat -- especially an ocean-going yacht -- almost never leaves dock. But
when it does, you go very slowly, usually in seas that make our "turbulence"
seem pretty tame, don't get very far, and you had better have a high credit
limit on your Visa card, cuz re-filling those tanks ain't pretty.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> Point taken, but my hamburger is likely to be served in a different *state*,
> possibly with relatives I might not see otherwise.
>
> A boat -- especially an ocean-going yacht -- almost never leaves dock. But
> when it does, you go very slowly, usually in seas that make our "turbulence"
> seem pretty tame, don't get very far, and you had better have a high credit
> limit on your Visa card, cuz re-filling those tanks ain't pretty.

Well, I don't think the point was fully taken. I don't know about you
folks in Iowa, but for me going to a different state isn't all that
exciting, especially for a hamburger or a stack of pancakes. And I bet
those boat people are saying to each other "sure, but you get into one
of them flying things and you end up going so fast you can't see much,
and before you blink your eyes, you're there."

And if I wanted to entertain 12 people with my (club's) cherokee, I'd
have to have a high credit rating too, and I wouldn't get very far
either. It would be four trips, most of the time they couldn't talk to
each other, most of them couldn't talk to me most of the time, and (if
we actually went anywhere) we'd have to do it again afterwards.

Or I could entertain them with my aerobatics. I'd entertain you folks
too, in the Darwin writeup.

We won't even talk about if we wanted to to go a place that is served by
Signature. I don't have enough credit cards to cover that!

When the only tool you have is a hammer, =everything= looks like a nail.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> A boat -- especially an ocean-going yacht -- almost never leaves dock. But
> when it does, you go very slowly, usually in seas that make our "turbulence"
> seem pretty tame, don't get very far, and you had better have a high credit
> limit on your Visa card, cuz re-filling those tanks ain't pretty.
>

You know an awful lot about boats for a guy who lives in a place where
the biggest body of water most people ever see has a four legs and a
drain at the bottom ;)

What you're referring to is a motor yacht designed for bombing around
near coastal waters. Aside from the sportfishers that may go offshore,
these boats stay within sight of shore and have their range severely
limited by fuel needs. "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
boats have no business in serious weather.

If you want to see a true oceangoing yacht, look at something like the
Nordhavn 62'. These "expedition yachts" are becoming much more popular
and look more like commercial ships than speedboats. The N62 is
designed to run at 9 knots on a single 225HP diesel engine turning a
40" propeller at very low RPM. A typical 40' coastal stinkpotter will
run 2x450hp engines turning surface-penetrating props that look like
they came out of a blender. The Nordhavn doesn't go fast but with 2500
gallon tanks it can cross an ocean without stopping, and those big slow
diesels are built to run for weeks on end. 2MPG may sound awful but
keep in mind the boat weighs 80 tons (!). And it's bigger inside than
most condos:

http://www.nordhavn.com/62/interiorThumbs.php4

The key is speed. A boat runs most efficiently at "hull speed" which is
a function of length. If you want to push the hull faster than that,
fuel consumption goes up ridiculously, even worse than with airplanes.

-cwk.

[Dave Stadt]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> > A boat -- especially an ocean-going yacht -- almost never leaves dock.
But
> > when it does, you go very slowly, usually in seas that make our
"turbulence"
> > seem pretty tame, don't get very far, and you had better have a high
credit
> > limit on your Visa card, cuz re-filling those tanks ain't pretty.
> >
>
> You know an awful lot about boats for a guy who lives in a place where
> the biggest body of water most people ever see has a four legs and a
> drain at the bottom ;)

Jay loved in Wisconsin. Lake Michigan and all you know.

> What you're referring to is a motor yacht designed for bombing around
> near coastal waters. Aside from the sportfishers that may go offshore,
> these boats stay within sight of shore and have their range severely
> limited by fuel needs. "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
> in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
> boats have no business in serious weather.

Spend some time on the Great Lakes. They often make the ocean look like
childs play. Ted Turner got humbled and you would too.

> The key is speed. A boat runs most efficiently at "hull speed" which is
> a function of length. If you want to push the hull faster than that,
> fuel consumption goes up ridiculously, even worse than with airplanes.

Only true when talking about displacement hulls. Has nothing to do with
planing hulls which include the vast majority of power boats. Planing hulls
burn a tremendous amount of fuel untill they reach planing speed.

> -cwk.
>

[Denny]

I have burned 7.5 hours of flying fuel in the past week and I'm going
to burn another 3 hours later today... OPEC loves me...

denny

[Morgans]

> wrote

> What you're referring to is a motor yacht designed for bombing around
> near coastal waters. Aside from the sportfishers that may go offshore,
> these boats stay within sight of shore and have their range severely
> limited by fuel needs. "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
> in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
> boats have no business in serious weather.

You must not know much about the Great Lakes, that he is talking about.
People there go out of sight of land all of the time, and roughness is
another matter, also.

You know that wave height is a function of depth, right? Lake Erie in the
Western end averages less than 30 feet deep. 6 footers with a distance of
around 30 feet crest to crest is typical, with winds only at 10 to 15
knots. Get the wind up to 25 knots and 12 footers are not unusual, with the
same period. That's some steep waves! Lake Michigan is deeper, but it
still doesn't compare to the oceans, so waves are still pretty steep.

People go to cities and places that are far enough apart that they take some
time, and burn some serious fuel, because they try to go much faster than
hull speed. Like you said, that burns a lot of fuel, thus the big fill-ups.
They cut off the curves in the coast, and go off shore pretty far. Still,
it is rough. Not offshore, ocean-wise, but rough enough that it kills, most
every year.
--
Jim in NC; formerly the shore of Lake Erie

[Garner Miller]

In article om>,
> wrote:

> If you want to see a true oceangoing yacht, look at something like the
> Nordhavn 62'.

I want one!

I'm not sure having "The Perfect Storm" on the DVD player on that
interior shot was such a bright idea, though. <grin>

--
Garner R. Miller
ATP/CFII/MEI
Clifton Park, NY =USA=

[ls]

Actually, the situation is complicated. We're in a situation now that
we've not been in before vis-a-vis crude oil and it's getting harder and
harder to hide.

There're some internet resources that discuss this:

This guy Matthew Simmons is an energy advisor to the president as well
as (now) a leading researcher into the crude oil situation:

http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/

(it's no accident that our fearless leader GWB is suddenly pushing
hydrogen fuel cells and alternative energies - he's spoken with Simmons
on many occasions recently).

Another place to find some somewhat objective info is here:

http://www.peakoil.net/

In fact, if you just google for matthew simmons or "peak oil", you'll
find a lot of discussion about the current symptomology with respect to
high gas prices.

To summarize, we're a bit in the dark but for sure there's a pretty
audible ticking going on strongly resembling a clock on a timebomb.....


Personally, I've changed my future aviation plans to put fuel economy
much closer to the top of the priority list. My current plane, for
example, is limited in many ways, but also burns only about 3 gallons
per hour.
I don't think I'll ever get a plane that burns much more than that...

Just FWIW,

LS
N646F
Jay Honeck wrote:
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I
> hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:
>
> - Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
> However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
> $86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.
>
> - For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
> gallon, which was set back in 1981.
>
> - Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what
> it cost way back in 1935.
>
> - Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH
> more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP has been
> cut almost in half since 1973.
>
> - Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
> *declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.
>
> - At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
> years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
> federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
> the post-World War II norm.)
>
> - Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
> year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.
>
> - Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
> adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.
>
> So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of these
> facts brought to the fore? Is it a not-so-hidden agenda? An ax to grind?
> Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless they've got something to
> bitch about?
>
> Personally, having been in the business, I think it's just this simple: Bad
> news sells newspapers; good news sucks.
>
> Get out and fly, people! Life is good!
>
> :-)

[Jay Honeck]

> You know an awful lot about boats for a guy who lives in a place where
> the biggest body of water most people ever see has a four legs and a
> drain at the bottom ;)

35 years living on the shores of Lake Michigan (in Milwaukee, Racine and
Kenosha, WI) teaches you a thing or three about boating.

> "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
> in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
> boats have no business in serious weather.

"Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
green. When it gets rough on the Great Lakes, get off the water -- period.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay loved in Wisconsin.

Dang -- I *knew* there were hidden cameras around, somewhere!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Seth Masia]

Well, all that may be true, but rising fuel prices are now cutting into
corporate profits, which will affect the stock market. See the NYT piece
http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15072995&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=474107&rfi=6

I like your point about the fact that we're now using energy about twice as
efficiently as we did 30 years ago. Note that the economy hasn't suffered
as a result. Which raises the question, what the hell was the administration
talking about when it refused to promote further conservation measures on
the grounds that they'd hurt the economy? Could it be because this
administration is a parasite on oil industryn profits?

Hey, I'm as guilty as anyone. In addition to the airplane, I put fuel
through two (smallish) automobiles and a motorcycle. But this summer I've
been riding the bike a lot (40 mpg) and commuting on my bicycle (because I
can). And I put a solar hot water heater on the roof, which should cut my
electric bill by about 20%.

I am flying less, using the plane only for necessary trips and making my
hamburgers at home.

Seth
Comanche N8100R

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%kvPe.279433$x96.36565@attbi_s72...
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all
> I hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:
>
> - Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
> However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
> $86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.
>
> - For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
> gallon, which was set back in 1981.
>
> - Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is
> what it cost way back in 1935.
>
> - Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become
> MUCH more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP
> has been cut almost in half since 1973.
>
> - Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
> *declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.
>
> - At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
> years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
> federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
> the post-World War II norm.)
>
> - Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
> year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.
>
> - Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
> adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.
>
> So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of these
> facts brought to the fore? Is it a not-so-hidden agenda? An ax to grind?
> Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless they've got something to
> bitch about?
>
> Personally, having been in the business, I think it's just this simple:
> Bad news sells newspapers; good news sucks.
>
> Get out and fly, people! Life is good!
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Jay Honeck]

> I like your point about the fact that we're now using energy about twice
> as efficiently as we did 30 years ago. Note that the economy hasn't
> suffered as a result. Which raises the question, what the hell was the
> administration talking about when it refused to promote further
> conservation measures on the grounds that they'd hurt the economy? Could
> it be because this administration is a parasite on oil industryn profits?

Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental regulations
of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.

Remember when America used to actually *make* things? If you're under 35,
probably not.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental regulations
> of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.
>
> Remember when America used to actually *make* things?

And an equally serious argument can be made that we just pay Americans
far more than they are worth, and it's catching up to us, which is
what's really hurting the economy (and driving the jobs overseas).

Remember when we used to actually *fix* things?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[N93332]

"Seth Masia" wasted electrons writing in message:
> I am flying less, using the plane only for necessary trips and making my
> hamburgers at home.

What are 'necessary trips' via plane? The only 'necessary trip' flight I can
think of would be to its annual. I try to fly a bit more than that...

-Greg B.

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental regulations
> of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.
>

I don't think they are made to benefit the economy. By definition, one might
think. Economy isn't all there is...

> Remember when America used to actually *make* things?

Well, what do you expect in a country where the president publicly denounces
science and the scientific method? What does that do to science, which
ultimately is the very foundation of "making things"?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Michael]

> And I don't see anyone flying less.

I do. A friend of mine is selling his Baron, and it barely leaves the
hangar now. He can't afford the gas anymore. He's decided his Harley
is more bang for the buck at 40 mph.

Another friend of mine is selling his Bonanza. Same basic reason.

I'm seeing quite a few people flying less, and the gas price is a major
factor.

Michael

[JohnH]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the
> newspapers, all I hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing
> America.
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.

It was the major factor in my decision to sell my flying club share; I'm
out.

> So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of
> these facts brought to the fore? Is it a not-so-hidden agenda? An
> ax to grind? Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless
> they've got something to bitch about?

Fuel went up 50% in the past year with a well-connected-to-the-oil-companies
president at the helm, with these same companies making record profits. The
agenda is not-so-hidden, is it?

> Get out and fly, people! Life is good!

Definitely do it while you can. Fuel aside, GA is nearing it's end. Go
Bush! And take Cheney with you.

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:axEPe.281435$x96.54920@attbi_s72...
> > You know an awful lot about boats for a guy who lives in a place where
> > the biggest body of water most people ever see has a four legs and a
> > drain at the bottom ;)
>
> 35 years living on the shores of Lake Michigan (in Milwaukee, Racine and
> Kenosha, WI) teaches you a thing or three about boating.
>
> > "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
> > in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
> > boats have no business in serious weather.
>
> "Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
> green. When it gets rough on the Great Lakes, get off the water --
period.

BIG difference between fresh water and salt? Or _relatively_ shallow water?

Just curious...the closest I ever got to water was McHales Navy.

[[email protected]]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...

> > The key is speed. A boat runs most efficiently at "hull speed" which is
> > a function of length. If you want to push the hull faster than that,
> > fuel consumption goes up ridiculously, even worse than with airplanes.
>
> Only true when talking about displacement hulls. Has nothing to do with
> planing hulls which include the vast majority of power boats. Planing hulls
> burn a tremendous amount of fuel untill they reach planing speed.

A planing hull can still be driven more efficiently (in MPG terms) at
hull speed than at or above planing speed. It is true that a planing
hull is least efficient at the speeds above displacement but below
planing, but even up on the step you'll get lower MPG. Even on a boat
like a Cigarette which has a hull and drive system optimized for
nothing but go-fast, you'll get better mileage running at hull speed:

http://powerandmotoryacht.com/boattests/0603cigarette/index2.html

Likewise, hulls designed for planing are vary bad when you get serious
weather. The very characteristics which allow them to go so fast also
make them prone to pitchpoling and broaching.

-cwk.

[Dan Luke]

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental
> regulations of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.

It can if one ignores the economic benefits of a clean environment and
unrealistically magnifes the impact of environmental regulation.

China is now faced with the very serious public health and productivity costs
of ignoring environmental protection over recent decades of industrial
growth. The former Soviet block nations also provide many awful examples of
just letting things slide.

> Remember when America used to actually *make* things? If you're under
> 35, probably not.

Blaming the loss of America's industries on environmental protection is talk
radio bs. Cheap foreign labor is what's taking American factories away.
When Americans are willing to work for ten bucks a day, we'll get our
factories back. If that day comes, I hope I'm long gone.

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[Matt Barrow]

"Seth Masia" > wrote in message
...
> Well, all that may be true, but rising fuel prices are now cutting into
> corporate profits, which will affect the stock market. See the NYT piece
>
http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15072995&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=474107&rfi=6
>
> I like your point about the fact that we're now using energy about twice
as
> efficiently as we did 30 years ago. Note that the economy hasn't suffered
> as a result. Which raises the question, what the hell was the
administration
> talking about when it refused to promote further conservation measures on
> the grounds that they'd hurt the economy? Could it be because this
> administration is a parasite on oil industryn profits?

Probably because a whole slew of studies have shown conservation is only a
stop-gap at best.

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:bNEPe.283840$_o.83175@attbi_s71...
>
> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental
regulations
> of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.

Not environmental regs per se, but the pletoria of abysmally
stupid/bureaucratic ones. They not only tell you WHAT to do, but HOW to do
it.

It used to take companies something like 6 percent of employees to handle
government paperwork (and that included taxes); now it takes something like
30-45 (depending on the industry).

>
> Remember when America used to actually *make* things?

Yeah, before Japanese firms had 3 defects per hundred and US manufactureres
had 117.

>If you're under 35, probably not.

America has sure priced itself out of the world markets...and it's pathetic
QC records only worsens the situation.

[Matt Barrow]

"N93332" > wrote in message
...
> "Seth Masia" wasted electrons writing in message:
> > I am flying less, using the plane only for necessary trips and making my
> > hamburgers at home.
>
> What are 'necessary trips' via plane?

Business. Like, to places 450 miles away in which the nearest direct airline
served city is the one you live in.


Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[TaxSrv]

"Matt Barrow" wrote:
>
> It used to take companies something like 6 percent of employees to
handle
> government paperwork (and that included taxes); now it takes something
> like 30-45 (depending on the industry).

30-45%? Which industries, and says who?

Fred F.

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-26, Jay Honeck > wrote:
> "Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
> green. When it gets rough on the Great Lakes, get off the water -- period.

Probably no worse than the north Irish Sea (where we had two hurricane
force storms within a week last winter, and it's not that unusual
either).

I've been on the Ben my Chree (a bloody great big
car/truck/passenger/cargo ferry belonging to the Isle of Man Steam
Packet Company) when it was so rough that people weren't just going
green, they were being thrown out of their seats. The lights went out
once or twice, and the ship was slamming. I'm glad I wasn't on a fishing
vessel that day.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Dan Luke]

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

> "Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
> green.

Tee-hee! Don't be silly:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7793

[Matt Barrow]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" wrote:
>
> > Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental
> > regulations of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.
>
> It can if one ignores the economic benefits of a clean environment and
> unrealistically magnifes the impact of environmental regulation.

False alternative.
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/distract/fd.htm

[Matt Barrow]

"JohnH" > wrote in message
...
>
> Fuel went up 50% in the past year with a
well-connected-to-the-oil-companies
> president at the helm,

Gee..the prices went up WORLD WIDE! Is he president of the World?

> with these same companies making record profits. The
> agenda is not-so-hidden, is it?

But we fought Iraq for cheap oil!!!

Your apparent comprehension of world oil markets/prices reminds me of the
snippets my senile uncle sends me about not buying gas on certain days.

>
> > Get out and fly, people! Life is good!
>
> Definitely do it while you can. Fuel aside, GA is nearing it's end. Go
> Bush! And take Cheney with you.

Yeah, let's have Kerry or Gore, both of whom said we should be paying $5 a
gallon (and also said they would work to reduce oil costs when that barfed
on them.

Go ask your teachers is this is what you REALLY think.

[Don Tuite]

Boats that go places don't use their engines much.

ObOrganization: Seven Seas Cruising Association. Lots of
circumnavigators there.

Don

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-26, ls > wrote:
> (it's no accident that our fearless leader GWB is suddenly pushing
> hydrogen fuel cells and alternative energies - he's spoken with Simmons
> on many occasions recently).

Trouble with hydrogen as a fuel... the only economical way we have of
making it is using fossil fuels, so it is NOT a solution for peak oil.

Not without a major investment in nuclear powerplants (so hydrogen can
be obtained by electrolysis).

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Darrel Toepfer]

wrote:

> coastal stinkpotter

Blowboater...

Aquanauts, just like aviates just want to be doing it, doesn't much care
what its in... Sometimes...

[W P Dixon]

Yep that one was silly ;) I've never been in the Great Lakes but I sure have
been across the ocean. I have seen waves coming over the flight deck of a
carrier and destroyers spending more time under the water than on the
surface. The outside of a hurricane is a very interesting experience at sea.
I think you under estimate the power of the open sea and definitely under
estimate the ability of a professional sailor.
Those destroyer boys are sure a special breed. I tip my hat to them.
Sailing the seas was an adventure I'll never forget. Some of the most
beautiful sunsets and sunrises I've ever seen. Tranquil waters that looked
like the ship was sailing over glass,..and then all of a sudden the most
destructive , powerful force in nature sets it's eyes upon you and you are
looking down a valley of ocean like looking off a mountain top...the next
minute you are looking up at the ocean on either side of you like you are in
the valley looking up at the tops of mountains.
Sitting on the bow of that carrier with your legs hanging off the front
of the ship, playing guitar under a beautiful clear sky full of stars as far
as you can see, the sounds of the waves on the hull as she pushes her way
onward to the next port. Sometimes when you are there it is hard to believe
the awesome force and violence that the same ocean can give you on any other
day at any other time.
A great experience that I wish more people could share. Sailor green on
the Great Lakes? I don't think so. A newbie, sure ..but not a stout old
salt. We did have a boy from NYC that stayed green the entire time we were
out at sea...I mean the entire trip! I know he was miserable but it was
still pretty funny ;)

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" wrote:
>
>> "Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
>> green.
>
> Tee-hee! Don't be silly:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7793
>

[Skylune]

Now you folks are on my turf. I can take my Formula 27 PC with twin 350s
20-30 minutes out into the Peconic Bay off Long Island (Robins Island),
anchor, and spend the rest of the day kayaking, swimming, reading,
fishing, etc. A 105 gallon tank is painful to refuel, but I'm only on my
3rd partial fillup of the season (about $3.10 bucks a gallon for 91 octane
currently). Should be good till end of September. I'd estimate I spent
about $500-600 bucks on gas this year. I'll admit to not going out to
Block Island, up the Connecticut River (except earlier in the year), up to
the Island (Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket) because of the cost of fuel. But
I am using my boat as much as ever. You see, boats have anchors......

A boater can adjust to rising gas prices by not driving to far off places
like Nantucket (from LI). No one I know keeps their boats at the dock due
to gas -- minor expense relative to cost of the boat, maintenance, docking
fees, transient docking fees, etc.

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 08:25:31 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:

>But we fought Iraq for cheap oil!!!

I could have sworn our fearless leader, and his worthy staff kept
saying we had to invade to find Iraq's weapons of mass destruction,
and because Iraq was a terrorist nation.

Was he, what's that word I'm looking for, I don't know... oh yeh,
WRONG?

"We know they have weapons of mass destruction, and we know where they
ARE!!" Donald Rumsfeld.

“There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S.
taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and
on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring
between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three
years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own
reconstruction, and relatively soon.” Deputy Defense Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz: [Source: House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a
Supplemental War Regulation, 3/27/03]

Corky Scott

[Jay Honeck]

<SNIP>
> It was the major factor in my decision to sell my flying club share; I'm
> out.

<SNIP>
> Fuel went up 50% in the past year with a well-connected-to-the-oil-companies
> president at the helm, with these same companies making record profits. The
> agenda is not-so-hidden, is it?

<SNIP>
> Definitely do it while you can. Fuel aside, GA is nearing it's end. Go
> Bush! And take Cheney with you.

Wait a minute -- you whine like a stuck pig throughout your post, and
then have the poor taste to change the subject line to "Stop whining,
JAY!"???

The economy is grand, business is sky-high, the flying is awesome, the
plane is running great, and gas is still 1/3 of what our counterparts
in Europe are paying -- and you're complaining? Quit whining, and go
FLY.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Stubby]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "JohnH" > wrote in message>
> But we fought Iraq for cheap oil!!!
So why don't we have it? Hint: we purchase oil on the world market
like everybody else. OPEC sets the price.

[Doug]

Or get a Seaplane and do both. I have two boats, a right boat and a
left boat :-)

[Mark T. Dame]

W P Dixon wrote:

> Sitting on the bow of that carrier with your legs hanging off the
> front of the ship, playing guitar under a beautiful clear sky full of
> stars as far as you can see, the sounds of the waves on the hull as she
> pushes her way onward to the next port. Sometimes when you are there it
> is hard to believe the awesome force and violence that the same ocean
> can give you on any other day at any other time.

You're making me miss it... Nothing quite like being on a flattop in
the middle of the Pacific as far away from land as possible without
leaving the planet... It was the same feeling I get now on a long
cross-country flight on a calm moon-lit night.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame >
## VP, Product Development
## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/)
"SCSI is *not* magic. There are *fundamental* *technical* *reasons*
why you have to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain every now
and then."
-- John F. Woods )

[Eduardo K.]

In article . com>,
Michael > wrote:
>> And I don't see anyone flying less.
>
>I do. A friend of mine is selling his Baron, and it barely leaves the
>hangar now. He can't afford the gas anymore. He's decided his Harley
>is more bang for the buck at 40 mph.
>
>Another friend of mine is selling his Bonanza. Same basic reason.
>
>I'm seeing quite a few people flying less, and the gas price is a major
>factor.
>

In some more time cars will eb affected too by the gas prices. I just bought
a big car less than half bluebook because everybody is dumping cars
that get less than 30/35mpg. Top seller is the Toyota Yaris (cheaper
version of the Echo) at 40mpg and the Fiat Palio at 38mpg.

(down here is Chile, SouthAmerica, where gas has now reached 1.25 us dolars
a liter. US$5 a galon.)




--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | "World domination, now"
http://e.nn.cl | Linus Torvalds

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Stadt wrote:

> Jay loved in Wisconsin. Lake Michigan and all you know.

Are you implying that he doesn't love in Iowa? Sorry to hear that, Jay!

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Thomas Borchert wrote:

> Jay,
>
>
>>Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental regulations
>>of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.
>>
>
>
> I don't think they are made to benefit the economy. By definition, one might
> think. Economy isn't all there is...
>
>
>>Remember when America used to actually *make* things?
>
>
> Well, what do you expect in a country where the president publicly denounces
> science and the scientific method? What does that do to science, which
> ultimately is the very foundation of "making things"?

The president has done no such thing and has actually funded science and
technology reaonsably well.

And man was making things long before the scientific method was formalized.


Matt

[Dave Stadt]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:axEPe.281435$x96.54920@attbi_s72...
> > > You know an awful lot about boats for a guy who lives in a place where
> > > the biggest body of water most people ever see has a four legs and a
> > > drain at the bottom ;)
> >
> > 35 years living on the shores of Lake Michigan (in Milwaukee, Racine and
> > Kenosha, WI) teaches you a thing or three about boating.
> >
> > > "Turbulence" out there is no worse than we get
> > > in the air and often less, especially in the summer. Most of these
> > > boats have no business in serious weather.
> >
> > "Turbulence" on Lake Michigan will turn the stoutest blue-water Navy man
> > green. When it gets rough on the Great Lakes, get off the water --
> period.
>
> BIG difference between fresh water and salt? Or _relatively_ shallow
water?

Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal, great
lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the trough
of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a trough
of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
verticle wall of water.

> Just curious...the closest I ever got to water was McHales Navy
>
>
>

[Dave Stadt]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Stadt wrote:
>
> > Jay loved in Wisconsin. Lake Michigan and all you know.
>
> Are you implying that he doesn't love in Iowa? Sorry to hear that, Jay!
>
> Matt

The statement does not exclude him from chasing Mary in Iowa same as he did
in Wisconsin. No implication on my part.

[Don Tuite]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 22:08:32 +0000 (UTC), Eduardo K.
> wrote:


>In some more time cars will eb affected too by the gas prices. I just bought
>a big car less than half bluebook because everybody is dumping cars
>that get less than 30/35mpg. Top seller is the Toyota Yaris (cheaper
>version of the Echo) at 40mpg and the Fiat Palio at 38mpg.
>
>(down here is Chile, SouthAmerica, where gas has now reached 1.25 us dolars
>a liter. US$5 a galon.)

Welcome back to the NG.

Don

[[email protected]]

On 26-Aug-2005, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Remember when America used to actually *make* things? If you're under
> 35,
> probably not.

Hi Jay,
I work at a factory that still "makes things", firetrucks in this case. And
the equipment that goes into them (engines, transmissions, lights, sirens,
seats, aluminum panels, etc) is pretty much all made in America. I rarely
see parts with "Made In XXXX" stickers. I thought you'd be pleased to know.
Scott Wilson

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

JH> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the
JH> environmental regulations of the last 30 years have seriously
JH> harmed our economy.

In your original post you said the US economy is on track to double in
18 years, now you're saying the economy has been seriously harmed.
Which way is it?

Perhaps you'd like to live in the former Soviet areas, which have
neither a good economy nor a good environment. Not me--I'm very
grateful for the environmental regulation, think we probably need
more, and don't think it will hurt our economy a bit.

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "MB" == Matt Barrow > writes:
MB> Gee..the prices went up WORLD WIDE! Is he president of the
MB> World?

He thinks he is.

[Morgans]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote

> > The key is speed. A boat runs most efficiently at "hull speed" which is
> > a function of length. If you want to push the hull faster than that,
> > fuel consumption goes up ridiculously, even worse than with airplanes.

True, and it is the rare stink-pot that goes at hull speed. <g> That is why
they have big engines; go fast and make noise, while burning lots of
hydrocarbons. ;-)
>
> Only true when talking about displacement hulls. Has nothing to do with
> planing hulls which include the vast majority of power boats. Planing
hulls
> burn a tremendous amount of fuel untill they reach planing speed.

With the type of Great Lakes cruiser, or ocean cruiser that we are talking
about, having two 350 V-8's, most are semi-planing displacement hulls. They
do get up on plane to a degree, but there is still a lot of displacement
going on.

Most run at around 55% power, so that still comes out to a lot of gas for
two 275 HP (or more) motors.

The saying goes, that if you have to ask how much gas they burn, you can't
afford owning them. Lots of truth, there.
--
Jim in NC

[Eduardo K.]

In article >,
Don Tuite > wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 22:08:32 +0000 (UTC), Eduardo K.
> wrote:
>
>
>>In some more time cars will eb affected too by the gas prices. I just bought
>>a big car less than half bluebook because everybody is dumping cars
>>that get less than 30/35mpg. Top seller is the Toyota Yaris (cheaper
>>version of the Echo) at 40mpg and the Fiat Palio at 38mpg.
>>
>>(down here is Chile, SouthAmerica, where gas has now reached 1.25 us dolars
>>a liter. US$5 a galon.)
>
>Welcome back to the NG.
>

thanks. i am always lurking :)

--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | "World domination, now"
http://e.nn.cl | Linus Torvalds

[[email protected]]

W P Dixon wrote:
> Yep that one was silly ;) I've never been in the Great Lakes but I sure have
> been across the ocean. I have seen waves coming over the flight deck of a
> carrier and destroyers spending more time under the water than on the
> surface. The outside of a hurricane is a very interesting experience at sea.
> I think you under estimate the power of the open sea and definitely under
> estimate the ability of a professional sailor.

There is a great book out there called "Fatal Storm" about the 1998
Sydney-Hobart yacht race, which was hit by a massive storm in a similar
fashion to the 1979 Fastnet race. There are a few great stories in it
of rescues made by other sailboats and one account of an oceangoing
tramp steamer pulling alongside a stricken 40' sailboat and winching
the crew right off the deck--in Beaufort 11 conditions. Puts the
Perfect Storm to shame, largely because there were survivors to tell
what really happened. Definitely not a book to take on your next
cruise.

-cwk.

[W P Dixon]

I only did the one cruise, which was plenty because of where we ended up.
But being at sea was really beautiful. Whenever I get down and out about
things I think of all I have done and accomplished , and thinking of the
times just looking out at the ocean and seeing nothing but ocean always
makes me smile. My favorite was the waterspouts ! That was just so cool!
Heck at times you could see 6 or 7 at a time. And my 21st birthday bash in
Cadiz, Spain was pretty good. Took the 10 days to cross the Atlantic to
recoup! HAHAHA
Heck my Dad is getting close to 70 and everytime I have ever been around
a beach with the old Navy vet he takes a deep breath and says "Home Again".

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Mark T. Dame" > wrote in message
...
>W P Dixon wrote:
>
>> Sitting on the bow of that carrier with your legs hanging off the
>> front of the ship, playing guitar under a beautiful clear sky full of
>> stars as far as you can see, the sounds of the waves on the hull as she
>> pushes her way onward to the next port. Sometimes when you are there it
>> is hard to believe the awesome force and violence that the same ocean can
>> give you on any other day at any other time.
>
> You're making me miss it... Nothing quite like being on a flattop in the
> middle of the Pacific as far away from land as possible without leaving
> the planet... It was the same feeling I get now on a long cross-country
> flight on a calm moon-lit night.
>
>
> -m
> --
> ## Mark T. Dame >
> ## VP, Product Development
> ## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/)
> "SCSI is *not* magic. There are *fundamental* *technical* *reasons*
> why you have to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain every now
> and then."
> -- John F. Woods )

[john smith]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> The statement does not exclude him from chasing Mary in Iowa same as he did
> in Wisconsin. No implication on my part.

Why do you say it was Mary he was chasing?

[john smith]

wrote:
> Hi Jay,
> I work at a factory that still "makes things", firetrucks in this case. And
> the equipment that goes into them (engines, transmissions, lights, sirens,
> seats, aluminum panels, etc) is pretty much all made in America. I rarely
> see parts with "Made In XXXX" stickers. I thought you'd be pleased to know.
> Scott Wilson

In my newspaper this morning, the water cooler company that had been in
business for 80 years is closing its doors.
EBCO/Oasis has had its products and patents copied by the Chinese and
undersold to the point that they have been driven out of business.

[George Patterson]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Dave Stadt wrote:
>
> > Jay loved in Wisconsin. Lake Michigan and all you know.
>
> Are you implying that he doesn't love in Iowa? Sorry to hear that, Jay!

Well, he got married. From the "Devil's Dictionary" -
Love: n.; a form of temporary insanity curable either by marraige or by removal
of the victim from the circumstances under which he contracted the affliction.
It is sometimes fatal, but more often to the physician than to the patient."

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Jay Honeck]

> Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
> great
> lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
> trough
> of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a trough
> of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
> verticle wall of water.

Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729 foot)
lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by the waves
of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/ fore more info.

The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many awesome
storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost unbelievable
violence, frequency and intensity.

And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry, crossing
"Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at the
tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm. The
waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the bottom
of Lake Michigan in that area.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

>> The statement does not exclude him from chasing Mary in Iowa same as he
>> did
>> in Wisconsin. No implication on my part.
>
> Why do you say it was Mary he was chasing?

Hey, *I'm* not the guy bringing cute little French girl pilots to Oshkosh...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Morgans]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote

> BIG difference between fresh water and salt? Or _relatively_ shallow
water?
>
> Just curious...the closest I ever got to water was McHales Navy.

The shallow water of the Great Lakes is the major factor, but the strength
of the sudden squalls also makes it wicked.

It is hard to explain how steep the waves get in Lake Erie. I have no
direct experience on Lake Michigan, or on the Eastern end of Erie. As I
said in another post, the depth of West Erie is less than 30 feet. I think
28 sticks in my mind.

To try an explain how steep a 12 foot wave is, let me relate a tale of mine,
on the lake.

I was with my Dad, and other family members on a fine day, with relatively
calm waves of 2 to 4 feet. The sky darkened up ahead, and we turned on the
weather radio. A storm warning was up for a fast moving squall line, moving
fast towards us. We were way out of sight of land; about 12 miles, which
might have been 100, as far as getting out of the way of the storm was
concerned.

We prepared the boat by reefing the main sail (reducing the surface area of
it, by almost half), and taking down the jib. (front sail) The wind came
up, and it was so strong that we could not control the boat, so we took the
main down. Our next option was starting the motor to try to keep at 45
degrees to the waves; reducing the chance of being turned over, and reducing
the strength of the waves from hitting them head on. Soon the wind was
blowing around 50 to 60 MPH, and the waves had gone from 4 feet to 12 feet
or more, all in the time span of 20 minutes. On the ocean, a sudden squall
would have made the boat harder to handle because of the wind, but the waves
would not have increased nearly that quickly; taking hours instead of
minutes. Depth is the factor, again.

Here is what I was leading up to, to help you understand.

The waves were so steep, that while we were on top of the wave, the
propeller was OUT of the water. The faces of the waves had to have been
more than 45 degrees, as we went up and down them. The top of one wave to
next was very close together, with the front and the back of the boat
touching the last wave and the next one, all at the same time.

Soon, we were not able to control the direction of the boat in relation to
the waves, since the prop was out of the water for so long. The only thing
we had left was to throw the anchor out and hope it held, and tie it to the
bow. (front) It held, and we rode out the storm for another 30 minutes, and
then the waves started to get smaller, and another 30 minutes we were on our
way. I feared for my life, that day.

Now, for all of you sailors out there, we did very little right, that day.
It was the first year, (we didn't know nearly enough) and we were still
learning, and not well equipped for such storms. We got a storm jib (very
small) and another set of reefs for the main, (to make it smaller, yet) and
purchased a sea anchor. That is a unit that looks somewhat like a wind
sock, and provides a way to let the boat drag through the water, and pull on
the boat to keep it pointed in the direction that you need.

The ocean wind makes big waves, but if you are in deep water, the angle of
the faces of the waves are maybe 15 or 20 degrees. (until you get to the
perfect storm type of waves <g>) Compare that to more than 45 degrees for
Lake Erie. A 25 foot boat seems big, but unless sailed correctly, is no
match for those conditions.

I hope this helps you understand a little bit more of how quickly it gets
fierce on the Great Lakes. It has killed many experienced sailors, and in
much bigger boats, and even ships.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"W P Dixon" > wrote

> Sailor green on
> the Great Lakes? I don't think so. A newbie, sure ..but not a stout old
> salt.

Don't be so sure. I would not take anything away from your tales of the
ocean's violence, but the Great Lakes are rough in a totally different way.
They will get your attention.

I'm sure there are some out there that have seen the worst of both. Some
have died, not believing the Great Lakes could be more than they could
handle, even though they were experienced open ocean sailors.
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Honeck]

> JH> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the
> JH> environmental regulations of the last 30 years have seriously
> JH> harmed our economy.
>
> In your original post you said the US economy is on track to double in
> 18 years, now you're saying the economy has been seriously harmed.
> Which way is it?

Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well -- but away from
manufacturing.

Why are we no longer able to compete in the manufacturing arena? High cost
of production -- far higher than our competitors.

What goes into the high cost of production? Labor costs, of course, and
infrastructure costs. We won't belabor the labor costs (ooo, sorry), but
our infrastructure costs are SO far out of line with our competitors (and
common sense) that I'm amazed ANYTHING is made in this country anymore.
EVERYTHING is regulated -- everything.

And this stupid over-regulation has invaded every facet of business, going
far beyond environmental laws or the manufacturing realm. Here are just a
few examples I must deal with locally:

- If I remodel the hotel TOO extensively, I will have to comply with the
Federal ADA laws -- something we are grandfathered under, because the hotel
is 26 years old. This would mean going out of business.
- If I paint stripes in my four parking lots, I must put "x" number of
handicapped parking spots right up near the doors, rather than allowing my
arriving guests the convenient spots for loading/unloading. Therefore, I
don't paint stripes in my lots.
- If I were to add a new parking lot, I would have to comply with new laws
that stipulate that I plant "x" number for trees for every paved parking
spot. So I get by with my current parking lots.
- If I were to change the signage out front of the hotel too dramatically
(say, by adding an airplane to the sign?), it would come under more recent
regulations that prohibit a 3-story sign in front of a business. So, I
make-do with my 20-year-old sign.
- City ordinance prohibited us from putting a "Grand Opening" sign out front
of the hotel when we bought the place 3 years ago. That's right -- the
local bureaucrats have wound their tendrils so tightly around the throats of
businesspeople that even something as innocent as a "Grand Opening" sign is
forbidden by law.

Now, can you imagine what it would take to build an oil refinery??? We
can't even change our sign without ****ing off some scuzz-ball bureaucrat!

Our country is screwed up far worse than the average guy on the street can
imagine.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

There is a somewhat famous picture of a J30 (IIRC) that launched off the
back side of a wave off Michigan City at the south end of Lake Michigan.
The boat was totally out of the water with the sails still pulling. Kinda
reminded one of the Morrow Bay incident picture.


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote
>
> > BIG difference between fresh water and salt? Or _relatively_ shallow
> water?
> >
> > Just curious...the closest I ever got to water was McHales Navy.
>
> The shallow water of the Great Lakes is the major factor, but the strength
> of the sudden squalls also makes it wicked.

> It is hard to explain how steep the waves get in Lake Erie. I have no
> direct experience on Lake Michigan, or on the Eastern end of Erie. As I
> said in another post, the depth of West Erie is less than 30 feet. I
think
> 28 sticks in my mind.
>
>

[W P Dixon]

Dying isn't what the man said, he said get green. Big difference. An
experienced sailor can die in Cherokee Lake making a mistake. But he will be
a hell of alot less likely to make that mistake than your normal run of the
mill, put the bass boat in the water type. I am not disputing storms in the
Great Lakes at all, just disputing the strenght as compared to the sea's
fury.
Just some wave info on the Great Lakes,

Rogue waves are not exclusively an ocean phenomena. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has recorded rogue wave patterns occurring
frequently on the Great Lakes. Storm wave patterns on Lake Superior in the
winter occasionally reach 26 feet and could create a rogue wave over 57 feet
based on NOAA's observations. One of the theories behind the tragic sinking
of the famous freighter Edmund Fitzgerald is that she was downed by a rogue
wave during a major storm on Lake Superior back in November 1975. No one
will know for sure as everyone perished. from an article in Boat/US
Magazine

From the same article about waves in the ocean that just poof there it is ,
not even a storm....

Imagine cruising on a perfect sailing day and suddenly staring at a 35- to
40-foot wave that comes out of nowhere. "I remember as a boy cruising off of
Cape Hatteras in a calm sea, seeing a rogue wave come out of nowhere,"
remembers Bob Adriance--editor of Seaworthy, the BoatU.S. Marine Insurance
news-journal. "Fortunately we were able to turn and negotiate a wave that
was higher than my dad's 34-foot cruiser."

That's just a normal happening, that isn't even saying the heights of
storm waves, though the article does go on to mention some very impressive
numbers. And mostly admits the ocean is so vast it may be possible that the
bigget waves have never been recorded. 80 foot is not uncommon.

Not doubting storms can be bad in the Great Lakes but a well seasoned
sailor is not going to get green. He is used to running around a ship making
sure aircraft are chained to the deck in these storms at sea. He is a
professional, doesn't mean for an instant he can't die..things happen. But
let's be realistic about a green sailor. There is a big difference in the
wording.



Patrick

student SPL

aircraft structural mech



"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote
>
>> Sailor green on
>> the Great Lakes? I don't think so. A newbie, sure ..but not a stout old
>> salt.
>
> Don't be so sure. I would not take anything away from your tales of the
> ocean's violence, but the Great Lakes are rough in a totally different
> way.
> They will get your attention.
>
> I'm sure there are some out there that have seen the worst of both. Some
> have died, not believing the Great Lakes could be more than they could
> handle, even though they were experienced open ocean sailors.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[Seth Masia]

I was an executive for a manufacturing company that used a ton of resins to
make products of fiberglass. We met very stringent environmental regs.
That's not what sent the jobs overseas: What sent the jobs overseas was
Chinese labor working for 50 cents an hour, six days a week. That's why we
no longer make things: because Americans want weekends and a living wage.
And I gotta say that if Americans were willing to work for that kind of
money, no one over here would ever have been able to afford our product, and
our factory would never have got started in the first place.

Seth

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the environmental
>> regulations of the last 30 years have seriously harmed our economy.
>>
>> Remember when America used to actually *make* things?
>
> And an equally serious argument can be made that we just pay Americans far
> more than they are worth, and it's catching up to us, which is what's
> really hurting the economy (and driving the jobs overseas).
>
> Remember when we used to actually *fix* things?
>
> Jose
> --
> Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
> except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no
> universe.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Seth Masia]

So "stop whining America" turns into "whining about zoning laws." Cool.

Seth

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:fiRPe.282953$x96.223118@attbi_s72...
>> JH> Well, a very serious argument can be made that the
>> JH> environmental regulations of the last 30 years have seriously
>> JH> harmed our economy.
>>
>> In your original post you said the US economy is on track to double in
>> 18 years, now you're saying the economy has been seriously harmed.
>> Which way is it?
>
> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well -- but away from
> manufacturing.
>
> Why are we no longer able to compete in the manufacturing arena? High
> cost of production -- far higher than our competitors.
>
> What goes into the high cost of production? Labor costs, of course, and
> infrastructure costs. We won't belabor the labor costs (ooo, sorry), but
> our infrastructure costs are SO far out of line with our competitors (and
> common sense) that I'm amazed ANYTHING is made in this country anymore.
> EVERYTHING is regulated -- everything.
>
> And this stupid over-regulation has invaded every facet of business, going
> far beyond environmental laws or the manufacturing realm. Here are just
> a few examples I must deal with locally:
>
> - If I remodel the hotel TOO extensively, I will have to comply with the
> Federal ADA laws -- something we are grandfathered under, because the
> hotel is 26 years old. This would mean going out of business.
> - If I paint stripes in my four parking lots, I must put "x" number of
> handicapped parking spots right up near the doors, rather than allowing my
> arriving guests the convenient spots for loading/unloading. Therefore, I
> don't paint stripes in my lots.
> - If I were to add a new parking lot, I would have to comply with new laws
> that stipulate that I plant "x" number for trees for every paved parking
> spot. So I get by with my current parking lots.
> - If I were to change the signage out front of the hotel too dramatically
> (say, by adding an airplane to the sign?), it would come under more recent
> regulations that prohibit a 3-story sign in front of a business. So, I
> make-do with my 20-year-old sign.
> - City ordinance prohibited us from putting a "Grand Opening" sign out
> front of the hotel when we bought the place 3 years ago. That's right --
> the local bureaucrats have wound their tendrils so tightly around the
> throats of businesspeople that even something as innocent as a "Grand
> Opening" sign is forbidden by law.
>
> Now, can you imagine what it would take to build an oil refinery??? We
> can't even change our sign without ****ing off some scuzz-ball bureaucrat!
>
> Our country is screwed up far worse than the average guy on the street can
> imagine.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Skywise]

"Seth Masia" > wrote in
:

<Snipola>
> through two (smallish) automobiles and a motorcycle. But this summer
> I've been riding the bike a lot (40 mpg) and commuting on my bicycle
<Snipola>

Just out of curiosity, what kind of M/C and how do you ride it? That
is, how hard are you on the throttle?

Driving hard on my '86 Harley Sportster my long term average mileage
is around 40mpg. That's with high speed freeway driving and hard
acceleration off the stop lights. When I was a younger rider and
didn't drive so hard* my mileage was closer to 60mpg. Record was
88mpg while sightseeing in the mountains at 40mph.

*(ie hadn't learned to be afraid of other cars yet, which is why
I drive so hard now)

The reason I ask is because other motorcyclists I've talked to about
mileage always seemed to think 40mpg was really good, whereas I've
always thought it was lousy, but recognize it as due to my heavy
hand on the throttle.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism

Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[ls]

Dylan Smith wrote:
> On 2005-08-26, ls > wrote:
>
>>(it's no accident that our fearless leader GWB is suddenly pushing
>>hydrogen fuel cells and alternative energies - he's spoken with Simmons
>>on many occasions recently).
>
>
> Trouble with hydrogen as a fuel... the only economical way we have of
> making it is using fossil fuels, so it is NOT a solution for peak oil.
>
> Not without a major investment in nuclear powerplants (so hydrogen can
> be obtained by electrolysis).

Agreed...

In fact, all of the currently available alternatives are unworkable for
all practical purposes, at least at the current time.

To make a quite long story short, the only alternative we have at the
current time is conservation - and we know what that means vis-a-vis the
oil-consuming economies....

Also, for what it's worth, I saw a very complete presentation on the
peak oil issue by a senator on CSPAN not long ago. The senate was
virtually empty at the time, but at least it appears there's some
awareness of the problem creeping even into congress now....

As I said, in light of all this, my ownership plans have certainly
changed dramatically in the last year or so. And I've also noticed the
local RV's do a lot more sitting on the ramp all of a sudden...

LS
N646F

[Martin Hotze]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:56:19 -0700, Bob Fry wrote:

> MB> Gee..the prices went up WORLD WIDE! Is he president of the
> MB> World?
>
>He thinks he is.

yes, but only because his god has said him so.

#m

--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed,
most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we
come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein

[Matt Barrow]

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> A great experience that I wish more people could share. Sailor green
on
> the Great Lakes? I don't think so. A newbie, sure ..but not a stout old
> salt.

Edmund Fitzgerald (certainly not an isolated case).

[Martin Hotze]

On 26 Aug 2005 12:24:44 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

>The economy is grand,

huh?

> business is sky-high,

really? where?

> the flying is awesome, the

true!

>plane is running great, and gas is still 1/3 of what our counterparts
>in Europe are paying -- and you're complaining? Quit whining, and go
>FLY.

and most of the price difference is tax. but you also have to calculate
what our government indirectly pays for us using our tax money and what you
have to pay on your own using your own money.

#m

--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed,
most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we
come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein

[Matt Barrow]

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...

> One of the theories behind the tragic sinking
> of the famous freighter Edmund Fitzgerald is that she was downed by a
rogue
> wave during a major storm on Lake Superior back in November 1975. No one
> will know for sure as everyone perished. from an article in Boat/US
> Magazine
>
> From the same article about waves in the ocean that just poof there it is
,
> not even a storm....
>
> Imagine cruising on a perfect sailing day and suddenly staring at a 35- to
> 40-foot wave that comes out of nowhere. "I remember as a boy cruising off
of
> Cape Hatteras in a calm sea, seeing a rogue wave come out of nowhere,"

This hardly describes the wave(s) that destroyed the Fitzgerald.

IIRC, it was 100 knot winds over shallow water. Imagine a nosedive into the
lakebed 200 feet below (for a 700 foot ship).

[Dave Stadt]

Wave height is only one factor. Distance between waves is even more
important. I'll take a 50 foot ocean wave over a 25 foot Great Lakes wave
any day.

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> Dying isn't what the man said, he said get green. Big difference. An
> experienced sailor can die in Cherokee Lake making a mistake. But he will
be
> a hell of alot less likely to make that mistake than your normal run of
the
> mill, put the bass boat in the water type. I am not disputing storms in
the
> Great Lakes at all, just disputing the strenght as compared to the sea's
> fury.
> Just some wave info on the Great Lakes,
>
> Rogue waves are not exclusively an ocean phenomena. The National Oceanic
and
> Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has recorded rogue wave patterns
occurring
> frequently on the Great Lakes. Storm wave patterns on Lake Superior in the
> winter occasionally reach 26 feet and could create a rogue wave over 57
feet
> based on NOAA's observations. One of the theories behind the tragic
sinking
> of the famous freighter Edmund Fitzgerald is that she was downed by a
rogue
> wave during a major storm on Lake Superior back in November 1975. No one
> will know for sure as everyone perished. from an article in Boat/US
> Magazine
>

[john smith]

Hey Marty,
Are you staying high and dry?

[Jay Honeck]

>>The economy is grand,
>
> huh?

Compared to what my parents lived through, our economy is the epitome of
efficiency and success.

>> business is sky-high,
>
> really? where?

Here!

>>plane is running great, and gas is still 1/3 of what our counterparts
>>in Europe are paying

> and most of the price difference is tax. but you also have to calculate
> what our government indirectly pays for us using our tax money and what
> you
> have to pay on your own using your own money.

I already pay taxes on everything -- including the air I'm breathing. The
last thing we need is more taxes.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> - If I remodel the hotel TOO extensively, I will have to comply with the
> Federal ADA laws -- something we are grandfathered under, because the hotel
> is 26 years old. This would mean going out of business.
> - If I paint stripes in my four parking lots, I must put "x" number of
> handicapped parking spots right up near the doors, rather than allowing my
> arriving guests the convenient spots for loading/unloading. Therefore, I
> don't paint stripes in my lots.

I don't disagree at all with these laws (except I think x is too high in
most places I've seen).

> - If I were to add a new parking lot, I would have to comply with new laws
> that stipulate that I plant "x" number for trees for every paved parking
> spot. So I get by with my current parking lots.

I very much support this law. There's too much pavement already. Even
in places where there's a lot of land, it's too late too quickly. BTDT

> - If I were to change the signage out front of the hotel too dramatically
> (say, by adding an airplane to the sign?), it would come under more recent
> regulations that prohibit a 3-story sign in front of a business. So, I
> make-do with my 20-year-old sign.

This is also a good law. As a person who has to look at those three
story signs, I'd much rather look at three story trees, or sky. Of
course it's "different" when it's =your= business, but like the
internet, there are two hunrded million people out there, and every one
of them has a special message, just for you.

> - City ordinance prohibited us from putting a "Grand Opening" sign out front
> of the hotel when we bought the place 3 years ago. That's right -- the
> local bureaucrats have wound their tendrils so tightly around the throats of
> businesspeople that even something as innocent as a "Grand Opening" sign is
> forbidden by law.

Maybe they were bitten by the oriental rug dealers, who have a Grand
Opening every week. Were that the case, I'd support that law too.

I've been to places that do not have such onerous regulations. The
result is that electrical connections are made by twisting wires
together and letting them hang loosely. Bottled water is made in the
street by filling an old bottle with a hose, and sealing it with a tape
machine. The neighbor can build a six story luxury apartment building
right up to the property line and the street, next to your one story
house, and the other neighbor can live in a shack with open garbage
pits. The street is filled with cars with boom boxes that would power
Milwaukee for a week just from the friction of the air molecules.

There are plusses and minuses on both sides, but just because =you= have
a business you want to promote or alter doesn't mean that the rest of
the world should have to put up with the side effects.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Martin Hotze]

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:22:19 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:

>I already pay taxes on everything -- including the air I'm breathing.

what'S the name of this tax? The Iowa breathing tax? 'Breath less, save
money!' :-)

> The last thing we need is more taxes.

what you might need are oecological [sp?] taxes: higher taxes on (fuel)
inefficient houses/cars/whatever and benefits for insulation, fuel
efficient cars, car sharing, etc. - then, when you use all the benefits you
should come out ahead - money wise, at least it should be cost-neutral.
those who don't improve their houses etc. will pay more.
but this should then also be true for the whole country; this is one idea
of the Kyoto treaty, IMHO. it might not be perfect, but it is a start.

and saving energy is also an economic argument: you aren't that dependent
on energy. if you have to spent less on heating/cooling at your hotel
because of a new insulation, then you won't have many problems on keeping
your rates constant. But you will have to increase your room rates when
your costs for heating/cooling rises 20 or 30%.

#m

--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed,
most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we
come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein

[Blueskies]

Post this as OT like it is...


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:%kvPe.279433$x96.36565@attbi_s72...
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is
> killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:
>
> - Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price. However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars,
> oil would have to top $86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.
>
> - For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per gallon, which was set back in 1981.
>
> - Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what it cost way back in 1935.
>
> - Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH more energy efficient. Total energy
> consumption per dollar of GDP has been cut almost in half since 1973.
>
> - Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has *declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite
> "record" prices.
>
> - At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18 years. (This is why, BTW, that even after
> President Bush's tax cuts, federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below the post-World
> War II norm.)
>
> - Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.
>
> - Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without adding jobs, we have added over 4 million
> new jobs since July 2003.
>
> So why is everything doom and gloom in the media? Why are none of these facts brought to the fore? Is it a
> not-so-hidden agenda? An ax to grind? Or is it that Americans are just not happy unless they've got something to
> bitch about?
>
> Personally, having been in the business, I think it's just this simple: Bad news sells newspapers; good news sucks.
>
> Get out and fly, people! Life is good!
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

JH> Compared to what my parents lived through, our economy is the
JH> epitome of efficiency and success.

Perhaps our parents were investing in infrastructure, and we're simply
using it. Thus the apparent efficiency.

Our parents in the 1950s and '60s invested in the Interstate Highway
System, basic electronics research and funding, a great higher
educational system, water and sewage systems, and an expensive
military. Most of this was paid for with taxes and we got good return
on investment because that tax money was used to pay for
something--basic infrastructure--which would improve the general
economy.

Now our neocon society whines about taxes while spending gobs of money
on such life necessities as pet food, Indian and Nevada gambling,
expensive home theatre setups, huge SUVs and huge homes, etc and so
forth. But we object to funding new transportation systems, new
energy systems, and other infrastructure which would pay off for our
children.

But, what to expect from a group--religous neocons--that think it's OK
to asassinate democratically elected national leaders, that
"intelligent design" is an intelligent concept, that changes their
reason for invading and occupying other countries multiple times when
the evidence doesn't support their previous reasons?

A lot of Americans have an uneasy sense that we're running on fumes.

[Darrel Toepfer]

john smith wrote:

> In my newspaper this morning, the water cooler company that had been in
> business for 80 years is closing its doors.
> EBCO/Oasis has had its products and patents copied by the Chinese and
> undersold to the point that they have been driven out of business.

Don't those things run on tap water, anybody have water good enough to
still use those?

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I
> hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:

Limbecile jibberish at its best!

>
> - Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
> However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
> $86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.

BFD, in 2001 it was $10/barrel and LA Ca. Arco price was 89 CENTS/Ga.

>
> - For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
> gallon, which was set back in 1981.
>
> - Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what
> it cost way back in 1935.
>
> - Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH
> more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP has been
> cut almost in half since 1973.
>
> - Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
> *declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.

NO EXCUSE FOR A 50 PERCENT INCREASE IN 6 MONTHS!

>
> - At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
> years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
> federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
> the post-World War II norm.)

Sky Dreaming at its best, the Iowa Meth harvest must have started.

>
> - Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
> year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.
>
> - Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
> adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.

After LOSING how many since 2000 ??????? What kind of new jobs are
these, bartenders?
The liberal BANKRUPTCY laws expire in Oct. file early on the Inn,
Jayster.


JG

[Jay Honeck]

> A lot of Americans have an uneasy sense that we're running on fumes.

It's kind of funny that we come to the same conclusion for entirely
different reasons.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> and saving energy is also an economic argument: you aren't that dependent
> on energy.

Not! Our largest expense every month is for electricity and gas.
During our recent heat wave, I paid over $4000 to air condition our
three 3-story buildings -- for the single month of July.

It's usually around $3K per month. And that has gone up 30% since we
bought the place in 2002. (And we have NOT raised rates since we
opened.)


> if you have to spent less on heating/cooling at your hotel
> because of a new insulation, then you won't have many problems on keeping
> your rates constant. But you will have to increase your room rates when
> your costs for heating/cooling rises 20 or 30%.

Sadly, the energy companies have seen fit to continually raise rates,
even before the recent run-up of oil prices, and we (as a nation)
continue to ignore the relatively cheap energy alternatives.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Don't those things run on tap water, anybody have water good enough to
> still use those?

When we moved here, tap water in Iowa City was drawn from the river,
and was nearly undrinkable.

Now, after spending $18 million and 5 years digging deep wells, it is
marvelous.

Of course, I'm now paying TRIPLE what I paid for water in Racine, WI
(which had the best, award-winning tap water in the country) -- but,
hey, at least we don't have to waste money on bottled water.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Martin Hotze]

On 27 Aug 2005 11:03:59 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

>> and saving energy is also an economic argument: you aren't that dependent
>> on energy.
>
>Not! Our largest expense every month is for electricity and gas.

I meant: after saving energy (with using better insulation, for example),
THEN you aren't that dependent on energy any longer.

>During our recent heat wave, I paid over $4000 to air condition our
>three 3-story buildings -- for the single month of July.

hmm. don't you think it's time to insulate the building and look for
windows that are state of the art - technology-wise?

>It's usually around $3K per month. And that has gone up 30% since we
>bought the place in 2002. (And we have NOT raised rates since we
>opened.)

so you are eating all the losses (inflation not calculated)


>> if you have to spent less on heating/cooling at your hotel
>> because of a new insulation, then you won't have many problems on keeping
>> your rates constant. But you will have to increase your room rates when
>> your costs for heating/cooling rises 20 or 30%.
>
>Sadly, the energy companies have seen fit to continually raise rates,
>even before the recent run-up of oil prices, and we (as a nation)
>continue to ignore the relatively cheap energy alternatives.

... but this is not really news, is it?

#m
--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed,
most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we
come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein

[Mike Rapoport]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:P0RPe.282907$x96.117848@attbi_s72...
>> Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
>> great
>> lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
>> trough
>> of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a
>> trough
>> of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
>> verticle wall of water.
>
> Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729
> foot) lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by
> the waves of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/
> fore more info.
>
> The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many
> awesome storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost
> unbelievable violence, frequency and intensity.
>
> And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry, crossing
> "Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at the
> tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm. The
> waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the
> bottom of Lake Michigan in that area.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

Mike
MU-2

[Matt Whiting]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:P0RPe.282907$x96.117848@attbi_s72...
>
>>>Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
>>>great
>>>lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
>>>trough
>>>of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a
>>>trough
>>>of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
>>>verticle wall of water.
>>
>>Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729
>>foot) lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by
>>the waves of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/
>>fore more info.
>>
>>The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many
>>awesome storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost
>>unbelievable violence, frequency and intensity.
>>
>>And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry, crossing
>>"Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at the
>>tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm. The
>>waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the
>>bottom of Lake Michigan in that area.
>>--
>>Jay Honeck
>>Iowa City, IA
>>Pathfinder N56993
>>www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>"Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
> The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

That isn't what I've heard. There was a show on a few years ago that
analyzed the EF wreck in some detail, I think it was the Discovery
channel, but I'm not 100% sure. They basically concluded that the cause
couldn't be fixed with certainty. There most likely scenario was that
the ship took on water due to loose hold covers and that went under when
hit with a large wave. However, as I recall, the ship wreck was found
in two pieces on the bottom and they weren't sure that the above
scenario could cause that. I don't think that running aground was a
scenario at all given the track of the ship.

Matt

[sfb]

The official verdict of the Coast Guard and NTSB is she floundered due
to heavy damage from waves in 500 feet of water.
http://www.boatnerd.com/fitz/

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
news:Ho4Qe.2389>
> The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>

[Matt Barrow]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> >
> > The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.
>
> That isn't what I've heard. There was a show on a few years ago that
> analyzed the EF wreck in some detail, I think it was the Discovery
> channel, but I'm not 100% sure. They basically concluded that the cause
> couldn't be fixed with certainty. There most likely scenario was that
> the ship took on water due to loose hold covers and that went under when
> hit with a large wave. However, as I recall, the ship wreck was found
> in two pieces on the bottom and they weren't sure that the above
> scenario could cause that. I don't think that running aground was a
> scenario at all given the track of the ship.
>

I saw that one

[Dave Stadt]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:P0RPe.282907$x96.117848@attbi_s72...
> >> Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
> >> great
> >> lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
> >> trough
> >> of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a
> >> trough
> >> of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
> >> verticle wall of water.
> >
> > Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729
> > foot) lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by
> > the waves of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/
> > fore more info.
> >
> > The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many
> > awesome storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost
> > unbelievable violence, frequency and intensity.
> >
> > And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry,
crossing
> > "Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at
the
> > tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm.
The
> > waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the
> > bottom of Lake Michigan in that area.
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.
>
> Mike
> MU-2

Nonsense...nobody knows for sure what sank the Fitz. The best guess is the
bow filled with water and she dove to the bottom. What caused her to fill
by the bow is unknown. The grounding story has been disproven due to the
supposed shoal being a chart error. The shoal she supposedly hit simply
does not exist.

[George Patterson]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

No, she foundered in a storm. She was 17 miles from shore and lies in 530' of water.

http://www.boatnerd.com/fitz

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Matt Barrow]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> >
> > The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.
>
> That isn't what I've heard. There was a show on a few years ago that
> analyzed the EF wreck in some detail, I think it was the Discovery
> channel, but I'm not 100% sure. They basically concluded that the cause
> couldn't be fixed with certainty. There most likely scenario was that
> the ship took on water due to loose hold covers and that went under when
> hit with a large wave. However, as I recall, the ship wreck was found
> in two pieces on the bottom and they weren't sure that the above
> scenario could cause that. I don't think that running aground was a
> scenario at all given the track of the ship.

I saw that one...it was the History Channel.

The best theory I saw presented was where it nosed down into a through and
the bow struck bottom, then another wave snapped it in half.

[George Patterson]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well --

Not in the NY-NJ area it hasn't.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Mike Rapoport]

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:
>
> Perhaps our parents were investing in infrastructure, and we're simply
> using it. Thus the apparent efficiency.
>
> Our parents in the 1950s and '60s invested in the Interstate Highway
> System, basic electronics research and funding, a great higher
> educational system, water and sewage systems, and an expensive
> military. Most of this was paid for with taxes and we got good return
> on investment because that tax money was used to pay for
> something--basic infrastructure--which would improve the general
> economy.


Interesting viewpoint!

Mike
MU-2

[Montblack]

("Dave Stadt" wrote)
> Wave height is only one factor. Distance between waves is even more
> important. I'll take a 50 foot ocean wave over a 25 foot Great Lakes wave
> any day.


Plus there's something about water density - Superior's fresh water vs.
ocean salt water - and how that factors into the makeup of the waves.

I've been hunting online for the video of an ore ship on Superior, its bow
twisting and bending in a rough Great Lakes storm. I love Lake Superior, big
ships and waves ...I was awestruck by the sight I saw on that video.

We rent a cabin "on" Superior every year...

Fun site:
http://www.duluthshippingnews.com/
If you like the big boats you can spend hours lost in the links :-)


Montblack

[W P Dixon]

Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was building
liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire thing welded
up tight, versus riveted. He built them a heck of alot faster, but a few
sank because they could not flex. It wasn't really considered something to
change because we needed the transport ships bad and they were not expected
to last a long time during the war, because they were sitting ducks in the
water. Just one of those useless tidbits of info! ;)
Watching a video of a helicopter main rotor twist and bend, as well as a
commercial jets wings flexing is pretty cool too! ;)
Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Dave Stadt" wrote)
>> Wave height is only one factor. Distance between waves is even more
>> important. I'll take a 50 foot ocean wave over a 25 foot Great Lakes
>> wave
>> any day.
>
>
> Plus there's something about water density - Superior's fresh water vs.
> ocean salt water - and how that factors into the makeup of the waves.
>
> I've been hunting online for the video of an ore ship on Superior, its bow
> twisting and bending in a rough Great Lakes storm. I love Lake Superior,
> big ships and waves ...I was awestruck by the sight I saw on that video.
>
> We rent a cabin "on" Superior every year...
>
> Fun site:
> http://www.duluthshippingnews.com/
> If you like the big boats you can spend hours lost in the links :-)
>
>
> Montblack

[Chris]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%kvPe.279433$x96.36565@attbi_s72...
> Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all
> I hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.
>
> Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
> flying less.
>
> How can this be?
>
> Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:
>
Well having safely got back from Oshkosh ( the sunburn was a bit extreme) I
had the please yesterday of paying only $5.40 a gallon for avgas in the UK.

admittedly it was on the Island of Jersey (EGJJ) and the tax regime is more
liberal, which is a damn sight better than the normal $8.64 but flying 200nm
to get it is not the answer.

Chris

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-28, W P Dixon > wrote:
> Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was building
> liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire thing welded

I went on the Jerimah O'Brien (a Liberty ship) a few weeks ago in San
Fransisco. I thought it was a static museum ship until I went on board
and discovered they still sail it. The engine room was very impressive.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-28, Chris > wrote:
> ...only $5.40 a gallon for avgas in the UK.
>
> admittedly it was on the Island of Jersey (EGJJ)

For heaven's sake don't let the locals know you said Jersey was part of
the UK! The Channel Islands isn't part of the UK, even though it's
British territory.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Matt Whiting]

W P Dixon wrote:
> Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was
> building liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire
> thing welded up tight, versus riveted. He built them a heck of alot
> faster, but a few sank because they could not flex.

Except that your explanation above isn't even close to correct. Do a
quick search, that reason for the failure of the liberty ships is easy
to find. It had to do with poor welds and substandard steel and the
fact that welds won't stop the propogation of cracks the way that rivet
holes will. ALL structures flex under load, doesn't matter if they are
riveted, welded, nailed, screwed or glued. A structure can't support a
load until it deflects to at least some degree.


Matt

[Mike Weller]

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:24:41 +0200, Martin Hotze
> wrote:


>I meant: after saving energy (with using better insulation, for example),
>THEN you aren't that dependent on energy any longer.
>

When I built my house, I went to the extra expense of getting it TVA
certified (Tennessee Valley Authorithy). They had a program where I
could get sort of a rebate for the extra cost. The rationale for that
was that they would need less generating capacity if new homes were
insulated and other stuff.

Well, our local power distributer here has changed my electric meter 3
times because they couldn't believe that I was using so little
electricity.

Now, they've calibrated the meter to put me equal to the neighbors.

Mike Weller

[Chris]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-08-28, Chris > wrote:
>> ...only $5.40 a gallon for avgas in the UK.
>>
>> admittedly it was on the Island of Jersey (EGJJ)
>
> For heaven's sake don't let the locals know you said Jersey was part of
> the UK! The Channel Islands isn't part of the UK, even though it's
> British territory.
>

I know but try explaining that to Americans.

[Jose]

> Now, they've calibrated the meter to put me equal to the neighbors.

In other words, they cheated? Why not calibrate your payments?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[ls]

George Patterson wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>
>> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well --
>
>
> Not in the NY-NJ area it hasn't.

I must have missed it here in our area too (central TX) because, last I
checked, the local economy was anything but red hot. For example, a
little over a year ago I applied for a job answering phones for Sears -
they had had _1700_ applicants for that one job at that time. That was
basically the story for every job I applied for.

Regarding the cost of our infrastructure, it's not a simple equation.
One of the reasons labor is so expensive in the US is because it's so
well protected. You have to pay a minimum wage, you have to provide a
minimal level of safety in your work environment, you can't hire 15 year
old children, nor make them work 14 hour days for 5 dollars, you have to
follow various rules as far as time off and benifits and so on.

In fact, the history of labor in the US is long and bloody - those
protections aren't just onerous inconveniences for the rich, but
hard-won protections for the people and their families.

Now it should be clear why "globalization" is so seductive for US
businesses - other economies such as China and India don't have the same
protections in place for their labor pools. In fact, they're just ripe
for the picking as well as cheap, cheap, cheap.

When you can hire and use a foreign laborer for 1/10 of the cost of an
American equivalent to do the same job, well, there goes your
high-fallootin' principles against exploitation of cheap labor.

Don't ask me why I know all this.....

In sum, there's a LOT wrong with our current situation - it's
complicated and will be very difficult and painful to fix...

LS
N646F

> George Patterson
> Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
> use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Matt Barrow]

"ls" > wrote in message
...
> George Patterson wrote:
> > Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well --
> >
> >
> > Not in the NY-NJ area it hasn't.
>
> I must have missed it here in our area too (central TX) because, last I
> checked, the local economy was anything but red hot. For example, a
> little over a year ago I applied for a job answering phones for Sears -
> they had had _1700_ applicants for that one job at that time. That was
> basically the story for every job I applied for.
>
> Regarding the cost of our infrastructure, it's not a simple equation.
> One of the reasons labor is so expensive in the US is because it's so
> well protected. You have to pay a minimum wage, you have to provide a
> minimal level of safety in your work environment,

Safety procedures are actually quite cheap, and done right can make things
MORE efficient.

For example, OSHA require we fabricate our work scaffolds in a certain
manner and using certain materials and parts. My CS (Construction
Supervisor) can make a MUCH better scaffold )moe rigid, more stable) out of
material lying around the job site. It costs a few hundred dollars in time
and material. OSHA's, takes days and costs about $10,000.

Ever hear the story of the fish processing plant in Alaska that was shut
down because it's water discharge was not done my EPA guidelines even
through it's discharge was like six times cleaner than the EPA rules?

> you can't hire 15 year
> old children, nor make them work 14 hour days for 5 dollars, you have to
> follow various rules as far as time off and benifits and so on.

Gee, I'd like to find some 15 year old Civil Engineers. They must be state
certified (that's MY requirement, not the states).

> In fact, the history of labor in the US is long and bloody - those
> protections aren't just onerous inconveniences for the rich, but
> hard-won protections for the people and their families.

ANd then they took those protections to such idiotic extremes, such as
requiring five people on shift to do the work that two could handle easily.

Ever go by a road construction site and see a whole crew just standing
around leaning in shovels and just shooting the breeze?

> Now it should be clear why "globalization" is so seductive for US
> businesses - other economies such as China and India don't have the same
> protections in place for their labor pools. In fact, they're just ripe
> for the picking as well as cheap, cheap, cheap.

And their efficiencies...the same efficiencies that got the US it's big
boost in the 1800's.


> When you can hire and use a foreign laborer for 1/10 of the cost of an
> American equivalent to do the same job, well, there goes your
> high-fallootin' principles against exploitation of cheap labor.
>
> Don't ask me why I know all this.....

It's quite evident how you know this: it's the same bilge the public
"education" system has been cramming up kids asses for a couple generations.

>
> In sum, there's a LOT wrong with our current situation - it's
> complicated and will be very difficult and painful to fix...

....as long as we need/demand government bureaucracy to fix it.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC. (Owner)
Montrose, CO

[Matt Barrow]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:
> >
> > Perhaps our parents were investing in infrastructure, and we're simply
> > using it. Thus the apparent efficiency.
> >
> > Our parents in the 1950s and '60s invested in the Interstate Highway
> > System, basic electronics research and funding, a great higher
> > educational system,

That creates functional illiterates.

> > water and sewage systems,

See the story about the Alaska fish processers.

> > and an expensive
> > military. Most of this was paid for with taxes and we got good return
> > on investment because that tax money was used to pay for
> > something--basic infrastructure--which would improve the general
> > economy.
>
> Interesting viewpoint!

For milch cows.

[Gary Drescher]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
> Ever hear the story of the fish processing plant in Alaska that was shut
> down because it's water discharge was not done my EPA guidelines even
> through it's discharge was like six times cleaner than the EPA rules?

No, I've not heard that story. Do you have a reference for it?

--Gary

[ls]

Matt Barrow wrote:

> Safety procedures are actually quite cheap, and done right can make things
> MORE efficient.
>
> For example, OSHA require we fabricate our work scaffolds in a certain
> manner and using certain materials and parts. My CS (Construction
> Supervisor) can make a MUCH better scaffold )moe rigid, more stable) out of
> material lying around the job site. It costs a few hundred dollars in time
> and material. OSHA's, takes days and costs about $10,000.
>
> Ever hear the story of the fish processing plant in Alaska that was shut
> down because it's water discharge was not done my EPA guidelines even
> through it's discharge was like six times cleaner than the EPA rules?

Of course, but what if there were no OSHA and no laws governing
occupational safety and health? How strong would the incentive be then
to implement _any_ safety procedures whatsoever? No need to answer out
loud, just think about it. Hint: US history provides a good answer to
this question.

> Gee, I'd like to find some 15 year old Civil Engineers.

I'm sure you would.....

> They must be state
> certified (that's MY requirement, not the states).

> ANd then they took those protections to such idiotic extremes, such as
> requiring five people on shift to do the work that two could handle easily.
>
> Ever go by a road construction site and see a whole crew just standing
> around leaning in shovels and just shooting the breeze?

Sorry - merely pointing out abuses of the rules doesn't make a case for
eliminating them.

> And their efficiencies...the same efficiencies that got the US it's big
> boost in the 1800's.

Heh. You obviously have never worked for an outsourcer....

> It's quite evident how you know this: it's the same bilge the public
> "education" system has been cramming up kids asses for a couple generations.

Nope. Try again.....

> ...as long as we need/demand government bureaucracy to fix it.

Sorry, again, merely pointing out abuses doesn't make your case against
bereaucracy (though it's certainly undeniable that such things do happen).

There are well-known and well-worn reasons that we need governments,
regardless of the abuses of its power that you're pointing out.

All of this is in the history and philosophy books....

LS
N646F

>

[[email protected]]

Morgans wrote:

> Now, for all of you sailors out there, we did very little right, that day.
> It was the first year, (we didn't know nearly enough) and we were still
> learning, and not well equipped for such storms. We got a storm jib (very
> small) and another set of reefs for the main, (to make it smaller, yet) and
> purchased a sea anchor. That is a unit that looks somewhat like a wind
> sock, and provides a way to let the boat drag through the water, and pull on
> the boat to keep it pointed in the direction that you need.

Every experienced sailor has been there at one time or another. One
thing that's good to know is how to heave-to. You basically set the
headsail on an opposing tack and lash the tiller hard to windward, and
the boat *should* just sort of hang right there. Depending on wind
direction this may give you a better option than dragging on a drogue,
especially if you've got a lee shore nearby.

http://www.sailonline.com/seamanship/Heaving_to_man.html

The "should" part of this is that not all boats heave-to equally well
depending on the keel and rig design, so it's good to practice before
it's a real emergency.

-cwk.

[Morgans]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote

> It's quite evident how you know this: it's the same bilge the public
> "education" system has been cramming up kids asses for a couple
generations.

Unfortunately, we are cramming what they (state and federal dept. of ed.)
says we have to cram. Our hands are tied.
--
Jim in NC

[Darrel Toepfer]

Jose wrote:

>> Now, they've calibrated the meter to put me equal to the neighbors.
>
> In other words, they cheated? Why not calibrate your payments?

Add another meter in the line to compare the readings...

[Morgans]

> wrote

>One
> thing that's good to know is how to heave-to. You basically set the
> headsail on an opposing tack and lash the tiller hard to windward, and
> the boat *should* just sort of hang right there.

Learned that one the next year. :-)

Ours was shoal draft, swing board. It would be at near knock-down in the
conditions that day, I'll bet.

Dragging warfs might have worked that day.
--
Jim in NC

[Mike Rapoport]

"ls" > wrote in message
...
> George Patterson wrote:
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well --
>>
>>
>> Not in the NY-NJ area it hasn't.
>
> I must have missed it here in our area too (central TX) because, last I
> checked, the local economy was anything but red hot. For example, a little
> over a year ago I applied for a job answering phones for Sears - they had
> had _1700_ applicants for that one job at that time. That was basically
> the story for every job I applied for.
>
> Regarding the cost of our infrastructure, it's not a simple equation. One
> of the reasons labor is so expensive in the US is because it's so well
> protected. You have to pay a minimum wage, you have to provide a minimal
> level of safety in your work environment

It is cheaper to prevent an accident than to deal with the aftermath.

, you can't hire 15 year
> old children, nor make them work 14 hour days for 5 dollars,

This is bad?

you have to follow various rules as far as time off and benifits and so on.
>
> Now it should be clear why "globalization" is so seductive for US
> businesses - other economies such as China and India don't have the same
> protections in place for their labor pools. In fact, they're just ripe for
> the picking as well as cheap, cheap, cheap.
>
> When you can hire and use a foreign laborer for 1/10 of the cost of an
> American equivalent to do the same job, well, there goes your
> high-fallootin' principles against exploitation of cheap labor.
>

If US based companies hired workers for 10X the wages of their (foriegn)
competitors, do you think that anyone would buy their products? What would
happen to the jobs then?

Mike
MU-2

[[email protected]]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > One of the theories behind the tragic sinking
> > of the famous freighter Edmund Fitzgerald is that she was downed by a
> rogue
> > wave during a major storm on Lake Superior back in November 1975. No one
> > will know for sure as everyone perished. from an article in Boat/US
> > Magazine
> >
> > From the same article about waves in the ocean that just poof there it is
> ,
> > not even a storm....
> >
> > Imagine cruising on a perfect sailing day and suddenly staring at a 35- to
> > 40-foot wave that comes out of nowhere. "I remember as a boy cruising off
> of
> > Cape Hatteras in a calm sea, seeing a rogue wave come out of nowhere,"
>
> This hardly describes the wave(s) that destroyed the Fitzgerald.
>
> IIRC, it was 100 knot winds over shallow water. Imagine a nosedive into the
> lakebed 200 feet below (for a 700 foot ship).

Windspeed and water depth are not the only variables. You also have to
consider the "fetch" or the distance the wind is blowing over the water
behind that wave, building up its energy. More fetch=taller waves.

Also, as windspeeds approach 100kts, they will actually begin to blow
the peaks of the waves over, and you will get breaking seas in the
middle of the North Atlantic.

The Great Lakes are plenty big enough and located in enough of a wind
tunnel to generate plenty of deadly-serious weather. That being said,
the difference to open-ocean sailing is one of choice. In the Lakes you
are likely to have better warning of a storm's approach, and more
likely to be able to find safe harbor before it hits. If you do end up
in distress, help is possibly much nearer. Out in the middle of the
ocean, you may have no choice, and the nearest help may be another
vessel just as far up ---- creek as you. But once you're in the stuff,
being one mile offshore can be just as bad as one thousand. No
knowledgeable oceangoing mariner would look down on the experience of a
Great Laker.

-cwk.

[W P Dixon]

That's cool,
I'd love to go on one! Not a welded one if one exist! ;) My Grandpa and
Aunt both built Liberty ships in Brunswick , GA during the war. He was
alittle to old to go fight, and I guess the US did not want my Aunt to whip
the enemy single handed...she was a fiesty lass! HAHA

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-08-28, W P Dixon > wrote:
>> Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was
>> building
>> liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire thing
>> welded
>
> I went on the Jerimah O'Brien (a Liberty ship) a few weeks ago in San
> Fransisco. I thought it was a static museum ship until I went on board
> and discovered they still sail it. The engine room was very impressive.
>
> --
> Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
> Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
> Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
> "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[W P Dixon]

And nor am I,
I am wondering why the Great Laker that isn't a sailor is passing a
judgement on Ocean sailors. I said in the thread numerous times I do not
question the power of the body of water. I do question hard core salts being
green in it.

Patrick

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > One of the theories behind the tragic sinking
>> > of the famous freighter Edmund Fitzgerald is that she was downed by a
>> rogue
>> > wave during a major storm on Lake Superior back in November 1975. No
>> > one
>> > will know for sure as everyone perished. from an article in Boat/US
>> > Magazine
>> >
>> > From the same article about waves in the ocean that just poof there it
>> > is
>> ,
>> > not even a storm....
>> >
>> > Imagine cruising on a perfect sailing day and suddenly staring at a 35-
>> > to
>> > 40-foot wave that comes out of nowhere. "I remember as a boy cruising
>> > off
>> of
>> > Cape Hatteras in a calm sea, seeing a rogue wave come out of nowhere,"
>>
>> This hardly describes the wave(s) that destroyed the Fitzgerald.
>>
>> IIRC, it was 100 knot winds over shallow water. Imagine a nosedive into
>> the
>> lakebed 200 feet below (for a 700 foot ship).
>
> Windspeed and water depth are not the only variables. You also have to
> consider the "fetch" or the distance the wind is blowing over the water
> behind that wave, building up its energy. More fetch=taller waves.
>
> Also, as windspeeds approach 100kts, they will actually begin to blow
> the peaks of the waves over, and you will get breaking seas in the
> middle of the North Atlantic.
>
> The Great Lakes are plenty big enough and located in enough of a wind
> tunnel to generate plenty of deadly-serious weather. That being said,
> the difference to open-ocean sailing is one of choice. In the Lakes you
> are likely to have better warning of a storm's approach, and more
> likely to be able to find safe harbor before it hits. If you do end up
> in distress, help is possibly much nearer. Out in the middle of the
> ocean, you may have no choice, and the nearest help may be another
> vessel just as far up ---- creek as you. But once you're in the stuff,
> being one mile offshore can be just as bad as one thousand. No
> knowledgeable oceangoing mariner would look down on the experience of a
> Great Laker.
>
> -cwk.
>

[Jay Honeck]

> For heaven's sake don't let the locals know you said Jersey was part of
> the UK! The Channel Islands isn't part of the UK, even though it's
> British territory.

???

How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?

I didn't know one could opt out of that, and still be British?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Noel]

In article t>,
"Mike Rapoport" > wrote:

> It is cheaper to prevent an accident than to deal with the aftermath.

not always.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

[JohnH]

> Not! Our largest expense every month is for electricity and gas.
> During our recent heat wave, I paid over $4000 to air condition our
> three 3-story buildings -- for the single month of July.

Is that violins I hear? ;)

> It's usually around $3K per month. And that has gone up 30% since we
> bought the place in 2002. (And we have NOT raised rates since we
> opened.)

> Sadly, the energy companies have seen fit to continually raise rates,
> even before the recent run-up of oil prices, and we (as a nation)
> continue to ignore the relatively cheap energy alternatives.

I suggest you go fly instead of whine ;)

[Eduardo K.]

In article >,
Bob Noel > wrote:
>In article t>,
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote:
>
>> It is cheaper to prevent an accident than to deal with the aftermath.
>
>not always.
>

ask ford :)


--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
http://www.carfun.cl | Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.

[John Clear]

In article >,
Dylan Smith > wrote:
>On 2005-08-28, W P Dixon > wrote:
>> Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was building
>> liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire thing welded
>
>I went on the Jerimah O'Brien (a Liberty ship) a few weeks ago in San
>Fransisco. I thought it was a static museum ship until I went on board
>and discovered they still sail it. The engine room was very impressive.

Aerial photos of the Jerimah O'Brien under steam:

http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-05-22-05/ (start at #1260)

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[W P Dixon]

Great!,
thanks for the pics link! I enjoyed going to the O'Brien website and
reading about it. If I ever go to San Fran I would go see her before doing
anything else!

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"John Clear" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Dylan Smith > wrote:
>>On 2005-08-28, W P Dixon > wrote:
>>> Ships are designed to flex. Remember back in WWII when Kaiser was
>>> building
>>> liberty ships, it was a problem because Kaiser had the entire thing
>>> welded
>>
>>I went on the Jerimah O'Brien (a Liberty ship) a few weeks ago in San
>>Fransisco. I thought it was a static museum ship until I went on board
>>and discovered they still sail it. The engine room was very impressive.
>
> Aerial photos of the Jerimah O'Brien under steam:
>
> http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-05-22-05/ (start at #1260)
>
> John
> --
> John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/
>

[ls]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> It is cheaper to prevent an accident than to deal with the aftermath.

It is _now_, but it didn't used to be and for good (relevant) reasons.


> , you can't hire 15 year
>
>>old children, nor make them work 14 hour days for 5 dollars,
>
>
> This is bad?

Yes.


> If US based companies hired workers for 10X the wages of their (foriegn)
> competitors, do you think that anyone would buy their products? What would
> happen to the jobs then?

Looks like you put your finger right on it.........

LS
N646F


> Mike
> MU-2
>
>

[Dave Stadt]

"ls" > wrote in message
...
> George Patterson wrote:
> > Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Both, of course. Our economy has grown strongly and well --
> >
> >
> > Not in the NY-NJ area it hasn't.
>
> I must have missed it here in our area too (central TX) because, last I
> checked, the local economy was anything but red hot. For example, a
> little over a year ago I applied for a job answering phones for Sears -
> they had had _1700_ applicants for that one job at that time. That was
> basically the story for every job I applied for.
>
> Regarding the cost of our infrastructure, it's not a simple equation.
> One of the reasons labor is so expensive in the US is because it's so
> well protected. You have to pay a minimum wage, you have to provide a
> minimal level of safety in your work environment, you can't hire 15 year
> old children, nor make them work 14 hour days for 5 dollars, you have to
> follow various rules as far as time off and benifits and so on.
>
> In fact, the history of labor in the US is long and bloody - those
> protections aren't just onerous inconveniences for the rich, but
> hard-won protections for the people and their families.
>
> Now it should be clear why "globalization" is so seductive for US
> businesses - other economies such as China and India don't have the same
> protections in place for their labor pools. In fact, they're just ripe
> for the picking as well as cheap, cheap, cheap.
>
> When you can hire and use a foreign laborer for 1/10 of the cost of an
> American equivalent to do the same job, well, there goes your
> high-fallootin' principles against exploitation of cheap labor.
>
> Don't ask me why I know all this.....
>
> In sum, there's a LOT wrong with our current situation - it's
> complicated and will be very difficult and painful to fix...

It will never get fixed due to the fact the government is in charge of the
fixing. Only thing that is for sure is that it will get much worse.

[Jay Beckman]

"Stubby" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "JohnH" > wrote in message> But we fought Iraq for
>> cheap oil!!!

> So why don't we have it? Hint: we purchase oil on the world market like
> everybody else. OPEC sets the price.

Bravo for pointing this out...

If our actions in the Middle East are only about "cheap oil", why didn't we
completely take over Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq after the first Gulf War
.... declare ourselves the "owners" of the Middle East and just take it all
without buying any?

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Arizona Cloudbusters
Chandler, AZ

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Eduardo K. > wrote:

> >> It is cheaper to prevent an accident than to deal with the aftermath.
> >
> >not always.
>
> ask ford :)

Think airbag.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-28, Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> For heaven's sake don't let the locals know you said Jersey was part of
>> the UK! The Channel Islands isn't part of the UK, even though it's
>> British territory.
>
> How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?

The United Kingdom consists of four countries: England, Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland - and nothing else. Great Britain is the island
containing England Wales and Scotland.

British territories include The Falklands, Diego Garcia, Gibraltar, the
Channel Islands (Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney et al.), the Isle of Man,
British Virgin Islands etc. They are self governed (for example, here in
the Isle of Man we have our own parliament, known as the House Of Keys,
which has been in existence for over 1000 years), make their own laws,
raise their own taxes, print their own currency (which is usually kept
on a par with the British pound). My passport is an Isle of Man
passport, not a UK passport (it is still a British passport though, but
it occasionally gets a comment from the US immigration officers - "don't
see many of them").

In the case of the Isle of Man, the Queen of England is not the Queen of
the Isle of Man, she is merely the Lord of Mann (although the picture of
the Queen on our money is MUCH more flattering than it is on the UK
money - she doesn't have a double chin on our money for a start. Don't
confuse her with the Lady of Mann which is a passenger ship operated by
the IOMSPC, and probably the best ship for crossing the north Irish Sea
during a winter storm).

ObAviation: Components for Martin-Baker ejection seats are made here.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-29, W P Dixon > wrote:
> Great!,
> thanks for the pics link! I enjoyed going to the O'Brien website and
> reading about it. If I ever go to San Fran I would go see her before doing
> anything else!

There's also a world war II submarine moored there. That's worth
visiting too.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Stefan]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?

If you don't even know such basics of your best friend, then no wonder
that you have no clue when it comes to understand your ennemies.

Stefan

[Jay Honeck]

>> How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?
>
> If you don't even know such basics of your best friend, then no wonder
> that you have no clue when it comes to understand your ennemies.

Sorry, I didn't realize that you British ran things as stupidly as we
Americans. I guess I thought better of you.

I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British territory
but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-29, Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>> How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?
>>
>> If you don't even know such basics of your best friend, then no wonder
>> that you have no clue when it comes to understand your ennemies.
>
> Sorry, I didn't realize that you British ran things as stupidly as we
> Americans. I guess I thought better of you.

Stefan's not British!

> I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British territory
> but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?

If you're self-governing, would *you* want to give this up and impose
direct rule from London? Once a territory is self-governing, they rarely
want to give up that privilege. There's a small group of people who want
complete independence of the Isle of Man as a sovereign nation too.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[sfb]

How long have you thought that Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands
are part of the US?

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:b2EQe.74122$084.37584@attbi_s22...
>>> How can it be British territory and not part of the United Kingdom?
>>
>> If you don't even know such basics of your best friend, then no
>> wonder that you have no clue when it comes to understand your
>> ennemies.
>
> Sorry, I didn't realize that you British ran things as stupidly as we
> Americans. I guess I thought better of you.
>
> I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British
> territory but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[john smith]

> On 2005-08-29, Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British territory
>>but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?

Dylan Smith wrote:
> If you're self-governing, would *you* want to give this up and impose
> direct rule from London? Once a territory is self-governing, they rarely
> want to give up that privilege. There's a small group of people who want
> complete independence of the Isle of Man as a sovereign nation too.

Jay, think Puerto Rico.
Territory, best of two worlds.
Gets US funding without being able to vote.
Some US laws apply, some don't.
No federal income tax, but high "state" income tax.

[Scott Migaldi]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British territory
> but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?

Ask Puerto Rico why it likes being a US terroritory but not a United
State and you might have your answer


--
--------------------
Scott F. Migaldi
CP-ASEL-IA
N8116B

PADI MI-150972
Join the PADI Instructor Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/

--------------------

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-08-29, Martin Hotze > wrote:
> tradition, for sure.

Especially when you consider places like the Isle of Man have had an
independent parliament for about four times longer than the US has
existed!

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Earl Grieda]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
news:12xQe.137178$E95.110673@fed1read01...
> "Stubby" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Matt Barrow wrote:
> >> "JohnH" > wrote in message> But we fought Iraq for
> >> cheap oil!!!
>
> > So why don't we have it? Hint: we purchase oil on the world market
like
> > everybody else. OPEC sets the price.
>
> Bravo for pointing this out...
>
> If our actions in the Middle East are only about "cheap oil", why didn't
we
> completely take over Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq after the first Gulf
War
> ... declare ourselves the "owners" of the Middle East and just take it all
> without buying any?
>

Before the war was started what I was hearing was that it was about the oil.
Not in the sense of cheap oil for the consumer, but to make life better for
the oil companies. Obviously, that theory was wrong since oil is basically
free now, and the oil companies are filing for bankruptcy.

[Montblack]

("Dylan Smith" wrote)
[snip]
> If you're self-governing, would *you* want to give this up and impose
> direct rule from London? Once a territory is self-governing, they rarely
> want to give up that privilege. There's a small group of people who want
> complete independence of the Isle of Man as a sovereign nation too.


Yeah, Texas gets that itch every once in a while. <g>

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/

http://www.bchm.org/wrr/war/p3bcw.html

Hard to be just another state when you started out as a nation - The
Republic of Texas.


Montblack

[john smith]

Paul,
How was the MN state fair this year?
Aviation activity there???

[N93332]

"john smith" > wrote in message
.. .
> Paul,
> How was the MN state fair this year?
> Aviation activity there???

That's aviation 'on-a-stick'...

[Montblack]

("john smith" wrote)
> Paul,
> How was the MN state fair this year?
> Aviation activity there???


I've been out of the loop this fair season - been re-couping at home from
some surgery ...I'll be back up to 90% next, next week. Hey, jets don't even
run at 90% ...or do they? :-)

Meant to call this week and see if Golden Wings Museum sent a plane over to
the MNDot - Aeronautics and Aviation Dept tent this year.

MNDot site doesn't mention any plane I'm familiar with, so looks like I'll
be buying a ticket this year - if I go. MN State Fair runs through Labor Day
....and I just know it's a much, much better fair than that glorified corn
feed they had down in Iowa a week ago! <g>

http://wcco.com/specialreports/local_story_238095829.html
From the lame-o link:
In 1901, then-Vice President Teddy Roosevelt stood on a platform at the
Grandstand and at our fair, he is believed to have first uttered his famous
line, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." [Sept 2, 1901 ...Four days later
he was President]

Nine years later, in 1910, the first airplane flight in Minnesota history
took place at the fairgrounds.

[Me again. What did they do? Ship the plane in on the train, then assemble
it on the grounds???]


Montblack

[RST Engineering]

As was the California Republic (which our state flag has as the motto to
this day).


Jim


"Montblack" > wrote in message
...

> Hard to be just another state when you started out as a nation - The
> Republic of Texas.

[Montblack]

("RST Engineering" wrote)
> As was the California Republic (which our state flag has as the motto to
> this day).

>> Hard to be just another state when you started out as a nation - The
>> Republic of Texas.


California is from a different planet/ solar system/ alternate universe :-)


Montblack

[Skywise]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in news:11h7sdu1mfp8f26
@corp.supernews.com:

> As was the California Republic (which our state flag has as the motto to
> this day).
<Snipola>

How about "The Peoples Republik Of Kalifornia"?

We've already got the red star on the flag!

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism

Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in news:11h7sdu1mfp8f26
> @corp.supernews.com:
>
>> As was the California Republic (which our state flag has as the motto to
>> this day).
> <Snipola>
>
> How about "The Peoples Republik Of Kalifornia"?
>
> We've already got the red star on the flag!
>

And a Bear

[Matt Barrow]

"Earl Grieda" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Before the war was started what I was hearing was that it was about the
oil.
> Not in the sense of cheap oil for the consumer, but to make life better
for
> the oil companies. Obviously, that theory was wrong since oil is
basically
> free now, and the oil companies are filing for bankruptcy.
>

Nice 180 there, Earl. It's amazing you can see the monitor with your head so
far up your ass (or at least the MSM's ass).

[Jay Beckman]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wr.giacona@coxDOTnet> wrote in message
news:3cZQe.6667$7f5.2130@okepread01...
>
> "Skywise" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in news:11h7sdu1mfp8f26
>> @corp.supernews.com:
>>
>>> As was the California Republic (which our state flag has as the motto to
>>> this day).
>> <Snipola>
>>
>> How about "The Peoples Republik Of Kalifornia"?
>>
>> We've already got the red star on the flag!
>>
>
> And a Bear


Which was supposed to be a Pear...

http://www.snopes.com/lost/bearflag.asp

;O)

Jay B

[Chris]

"Scott Migaldi" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British
>> territory but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?
>
The Channel Islands have the queen as their head and arrived within the
sovereigns domain in 1066 when William, Duke of Normandy took the English
throne. The islands were part of the Normandy estate. That's long gone but
the Islands are still under the Crown and have a curious mix of a very
localised French and English,

The islands were the only part of the British Isles occupied by the Germans
during the war and were ordered to surrender to protect the lives of the
islanders.
The Germans built some enormous defensive formations on the islands with
slave labour from Eastern Europe (most of whom did not survive),which are
still there.

Jersey is now it is a major financial centre with low income tax but it is
impossible to get permanent residency unless one is very rich or born on the
island.

Interestingly the island also gave its name to New Jersey. A former governor
of Jersey ( Sir George Carteret) was given a large chunk of what was New
Netherlands and he named it New Jersey.


Sir George Carteret (1615 1680) came of old French stock on the Channel
island of Jersey, which he held for King Charles I as the last Stuart
stronghold to surrender to Cromwell. He was a distinguished naval officer,
though rather careless in business and without much education. He died just
too soon to receive the patent of nobility the king had intended for him.
Carteret and Lord Berkeley were for a while Lords Proprietors of New Jersey,
which he named for his home island.

[Morgans]

"Montblack" > wrote

> I've been out of the loop this fair season - been re-couping at home from
> some surgery ...I'll be back up to 90% next, next week.

Sorry to hear that. When, and what kind of surgery?

BTDT,GTTS.
--
Jim in NC

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
>> I've been out of the loop this fair season - been re-couping at home from
>> some surgery ...I'll be back up to 90% next, next week.
>
> Sorry to hear that. When, and what kind of surgery?


Two weeks after OSH (scheduled in May.) Four-day hospital stay, then home.
Feet are up as I type this :-)

17 staples. Many daily walks around neighborhood - some up to 3 miles.
Dropped 25#'s so far since Monday, August 15th.

Basically, incision under belly button, a foot of intestine snipped out,
both sides sewn (stapled!) back together, bladder repaired. Vicodin.

From WebMD

http://my.webmd.com/hw/brain_nervous_system/hw251746.asp
Diverticulitis ...hit the Next arrow for more info. Oh boy.

http://my.webmd.com/hw/digestive_problems/hw252327.asp
Partial colectomy for diverticular disease - in addition ...an abnormal
opening (fistula) that has formed between the large intestine and an
adjacent organ, most commonly the bladder


So, no colostomy bag, but I do need a bladder/catheter (**** bag) for two
weeks while the bladder heals. - I carry it around in my red flour sack book
bag (I used it at OSH for free brochures, scanners, camera, and water
bottles) ...catheter comes out in 14.75 hours!!


Montblack
"Do you have a message for your mother?"
"Yes, tell her... I feel fine."

[Morgans]

"Montblack" > wrote

> Two weeks after OSH (scheduled in May.) Four-day hospital stay, then home.
> Feet are up as I type this :-)

Best wishes for you, and fast recovery!

Sounds like you have been through it! I don't know why, but I saw back
surgery in there. I have no idea why!

I've been through the abdominal surgery, too. I had a gall bladder surgery
go bad, and had a liter of bile pumped out of my gut. An incision from
belly button to breast bone, and I carried around a little bile bulb for a
few weeks. My belly is not a pretty sight!

Well, like I said, I hope all goes well with your recovery.
--
Jim in NC

[john smith]

Paul, best wishes for a speedy recovery.
I've missed you wit and sarcasm the last few weeks.

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
[snip ...ouch]
> Best wishes for you, and fast recovery!


Thanks.

So far, so good...


Montblack

[Montblack]

("john smith")
[snip]
> Paul, best wishes for a speedy recovery.


Thanks.

Paul and Speedy in the same sentence?? <hehehe>

'Feet up' in the recliner while typing theses days - computer got moved
downstairs, into the living room ...I'm 'soaking' it for all it's worth.
More Jell-O please. <g>


Montblack
"Feeling good, Louis!"

[Dan Luke]

"Montblack" wrote:

> Basically, incision under belly button, a foot of intestine snipped
> out, both sides sewn (stapled!) back together, bladder repaired.
> Vicodin.
>

Ouch!

Best wishes for a full and speedy recovery.

--
Dan

[David CL Francis]

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 at 13:26:31 in message
<b2EQe.74122$084.37584@attbi_s22>, Jay Honeck >
wrote:
>Sorry, I didn't realize that you British ran things as stupidly as we
>Americans. I guess I thought better of you.
>
>I'm almost afraid to ask WHY these places would want to be British territory
>but NOT part of the United Kingdom? Tradition, I presume?

The Channel Islands were given the choice of their allegiance being
either France or England many years ago. Probably around 900 years ago!
They chose England and kept their local systems but owe allegiance to
the Crown. Their original governments were very close to democracy even
that long ago. The islands are convenient havens for many international
companies.

They are still not full members of the EU and can set their own taxes.

Quote from Encyclopaedia Britannica:

French Îles Normandes, or Anglo-normandes, archipelago in the English
Channel, west of the Cotentin peninsula of France, at the entrance to
the Gulf of Saint-Malo, 80 miles (130 km) south of the English coast.
The islands are dependencies of the British crown (and not strictly part
of the United Kingdom), having been so attached since the Norman
Conquest of 1066, when they formed part of the duchy of Normandy. They
comprise four main islands, Jersey, Guernsey, Alderney, and Sark
(qq.v.), with lesser islets and a labyrinth of rocks and reefs. The
total land area is 75 square miles (194 square km). They are
administered according to local laws and customs, being grouped into two
distinct bailiwicks of Guernsey and Jersey, with differing
constitutions. Alderney, Sark, Herm, Jethou, Lihou, and Brecqhouare
Guernsey's dependencies, and the Ecrehous rocks and Les Minquiers are
Jersey's. The last two were the source of long-standing dispute between
England and France until 1953,when the International Court of Justice
confirmed British sovereignty. In the late 20th century, the dispute
revived, as sovereignty of these islands determines allocation of rights
to economic development (specifically, petroleum) of the continental
shelf.

Fine scenery, flowering vegetation, and a mild maritime climate have
made the Channel Islands popular resort areas. The islands, the only
British territory to endure German occupation during World War II, are
famous for their breeds of cattle and for the export of fruit, flowers,
tomatoes, and early potatoes. They enjoy tax sovereignty, and their
exports are protected by British tariff barriers. English and French are
commonly spoken (though use of the latter is declining), and a
Norman-French patois survives. St. Helier, on Jersey, and St. Peter
Port (qq.v.), on Guernsey, are the islands' main population centres.
Pop. (1990 est.) 143,683.



--
David CL Francis

[Montblack]

("Dan Luke" wrote)
> Ouch!
>
> Best wishes for a full and speedy recovery.


I saw on TV all of those desperate N.O. hospital patients needing care and
got extremely choked up!

I had wonderful care, around the clock, for 4 days - they are lined up in
dirty, hot and humid parking ramps hoping for a fresh IV bag.

Big picture, I'm doing fine -- send your best wishes to those that truly
need them, and add mine to yours if you would. Thanks Dan.


Montblack

[Darrel Toepfer]

Montblack wrote:

> "Feeling good, Louis!"

"Looking good, Billy Ray!"
Trading Places (1983)
http://imdb.com/title/tt0086465

> "Do you have a message for your mother?"
> "Yes, tell her... I feel fine."

Spock said the above, question was asked by his dad...
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
http://imdb.com/title/tt0092007

Live long and prosper Montblack...