bb wrote:

Why?


Because you're a clod.

Dave K8MN

wrote:

KØHB wrote:

wrote


(btw, when did the word "date" become a euphemism for "have sex

with"?)

In the Garden of Eden.


Really?

In these parts, "date" used to mean "go out with, having a certain
ulterior romantic motive as the hoped-for outcome". It did not mean any
sort of committed relationship, nor necessarily anything happening in
the Studebaker.

But somewhere in there the meaning got changed.....

It all started when Mothers would exhort their kids to finish their
fruit at meal time:

"Bobby, you be sure and eat your dates!"................

thu debbil made me say that! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:

N2EY wrote:


In article ,

(Steve

Robeson K4YZ) writes:


snip


Yeah...fixed by Mr. 15% Inflation Carter. Uh huh...I remember. He
enacted
a 17.5% one time parity raise for the Armed Forces, then taxed the
bee-jeebers out of us.


WHOA!


Let's look at exactly what happened in that time period!


First off, the govt. started deficit spending in the '60s to pay

for LBJ's

"Great Society", the Vietnam war, and the "space race". This

deficit spending

and other fiscal changes resulted in rising inflation and interest

rates.


Nixon and Ford tried to fight inflation with price and wage

controls. (Remember

"WIN buttons"?). Didn't work - all that it did was delay the

problem and make

it worse.


Isn't it amusing that the most left-wing socialist utterly failed
fiscal policy was implemented by *which party*?


Think about *why*. Then as now, raising taxes was political suicide.

I thought that party had the market on morals cornered. Morally, you do
what is right, even if it is political suicide.

And frankly, I don't think raising taxes is always going to do you in.
At the federal level, perhaps taxes have been cut for some, but my state
and local taxes have risen to where I am paying much more than before.
Ever have your mortgage escrow deduction go up several times in one year?


In 1973 we got the OPEC boycott, and when it ended gasoline prices
were doubled. Which affected *all* energy costs, and all businesses that
use energy, and fed inflation like - throwing gasoline on a fire.

Carter inherited that mess from his Republican predecessors - who
had inherited the elements that started the mess from their Democrat
predecessors.

All of whom were too busy fighting Commies and going to the moon to
notice that the Japanese and Europeans were quietly but steadily
getting ahead in their industrial capabilities.

Well, we were fighting things and going places when we were building
our manufacturing capabilities, so while I believe those examples you
cited were a drain of money, I do not believe that the money saved would
have gone into manufacturing infrastructure. It certainly would not have
in this day and age.

Investors (in the broad sense) today do not have much of a sense of
anything beyond the next quarter. They do not care if closing a plant
down here and moving it offshore has a bad effect on the nation, as they
can make more money.

Ask one about the idea of building new factories and hiring American
workers and making less money than if they were to do it the other way.
You'll be laughed at.

It is only the money.

And before people say "Well DUH!" and think I'm an idiot, lets look at
what elimination of our infrastructure will do to us.

Unless there are not going to be any more wars, there will come a time
when we will *need* that infrastructure and need it badly. At that
point, our only chance will be to try to build a new infrastructure and
build it damm quickly. Think about what will happen if most of our
imports are shut off.

At least some investors were able to make some extra profit.

I still say that investors need to show a little morality too.


Taxes were raised to keep the deficit from going even higher. At a
time of high interest rates, a high deficit can cause a runaway situation
because you need more and more money just to pay the interest on the loans.

You don't necessarily need high interest rates, Jim. They can
suppress the inflation for a little bit, but only a year or two.

What I meant was that if interest rates are high, much of the money
coming in as taxes goes right back out again to pay the interest on the
debt. Those taxes don't fund any government programs at all, they
simply make the loanholders richer and the taxpayers poorer.

I'm noticing inflation nipping at the edges of my purchases. Where I
get Breakfast at McD's they have raised the prices by 10 percent

I gave up the Golden Arches years ago.


this
week. My XYL's flooring suppliers have announced a 20 percent hike
effective 1/1/2005.


Part of that is due to Florida, of all things. The destruction caused
by the hurricanes has caused prices of most building materials to rise.
I'm in the process of buying a new garden shed and some fencing, and
the supplier has had to tack on a surcharge because of the increased
prices of lumber.

No doubt lumber is involved, but she deals in carpeting, tile and
concrete board mostly. This is no surcharge, it is permanent price increase

People that think that we can support a virtually unlimited deficit
coupled with tax cuts *without* inflation are the same people that
thought that there was a new paradigm afoot in the stock market
during the late 90's.


Sort of. The old boom-bust cycle isn't a law of nature. But the fact
that you eventually have to live within your means *is*.


If you continue to spend more than you make, you eventually go
bankrupt. It's that simple. Despite all we do, all the adjustments,
all of it, we can not ignore a fundamental rule.


It's as true as gravity.

One way that it comes out is inflation. Money becomes worth less over
time, because it is being created without anything to back it. Or to
put it another way, money production exceeds real production.

It's gross national product. Any country has only so much. If they
print so much money that there is more money than GNP, then the money
automatically adjusts to the GNP. Sounds oversimplified, but it works.

And deficit spending is just that. We've avoided runaway inflation so
far, but as I noted, it has begun.

Oddly enough, inflation is ultimately the enemy of the rich and the
would-be rich. That's because it eats up investment.

bummer, that

I remember a time when you could have a very nice middleclass life on
$10,000/yr. Which meant that if someone could get about $200,000 in
investments yielding 5%, they'd be set. Today you need five to ten
times that amount for a comparable lifestyle. In many cases, people's
ability to save and invest is outstripped by inflation.

So they get into the mindset of borrow, enjoy and spend *now*, rather
than save for later.


And in 1979 we got another OPEC boycott and another doubling of
gasoline prices.


So don't blame Jimmy Carter without also blaming those who came

before him.

Blaming Carter for high inflation is simply so incorrect. Here is
another case of words and actions differing. Here you have an honest
and honorable man who was president at a difficult time in American
history, when we struggled to pay back those Moonshot and War expenses, and
yet he is ridiculed as a weak and ineffective president.

Absolutely true. Don't forget the "Great Society" funding, too.

So much for "Character counts" !!!

History will probably be much kinder to JC than so many of us are
now.

Consider the Middle East. Carter was able to get Israel and Egypt to
sign the Camp David accords, which have held for more than a quarter
century. An agreement between longtime enemies in a part of the world
where an agreement that lasts a week is a big deal. And even though the
agreement cost the Egyptian president his life, and cost Israel a lot
of territory, it has held up. Nobody before or since was able to get a
Middle East agreement like that.

But Carter is remembered by many for the Shah of Iran fiasco rather
than for the Camp David accords. btw, the main reason Carter allowed
the Shah to enter the USA (which event so angered the Iranians that
they took over the embassy in Tehran) was that Henry Kissinger advised
him to do it.

Okay, then how about remembering his successor for the Beirut fiasco.
BTW, remember what our get tough stance with those terrorists was?


And the fact remains that married couples who both work pay *more*
federal income taxes than if they weren't married. That "marriage penalty"
was partly fixed by Carter and then unfixed by Reagan. If the Republicans are
truly for
"family values", why is the penalty still there? It amounts to
serious money, not just a few dollars.

When actions and words differ, I rely on actions. Unfortunately, it
seems too many people rely on the words these days. Makes 'em very
easy to manipulate.


Yep.

Didja see my stuff about which states have the highest and lowest
divorce rates, and how that correlates to red vs. blue?

Talk versus action in action!

snip

Of course it's usually narcotics...You can always tell the real
abusers...They eat the narcs like M&M's, then wind up stopping the
intestinal tract. Then they develop a bowel obstrcution for which they ahve
to go to surgery. And of course surgery means more meds...See where this
goes...???


Round and round....

I think that maybe it is Darwinism in action. Too bad we have to
footthe bill.


We foot it in more ways than money, too.


snip


Personally, I am all for "all of the above". I would add a
whole sectionof the Sunday paper with a full color mug shots
of those convicted of bilking assistance programs because
that's stealing from you and I. Peer pressure and
a bit of humiliation go a long way towards modifying undesired
behaviour.

That's a bit hazardous. If someone was convicted of fraud but then
later won on appeal, they'd go after the paper and the agencies
in a big way for "distress" and "defamation".

Steve, does your mug shots include people who steal money from the
Social security program?

Well, do you support this, Jim? Guess whose faces we would see on that
sunday edition!


And someone willing to play the game might not be that humiliated.

It won't work. In this day and age, there are people willing to
humiliate themselves to get on programs such as Jackass, The Swan,
Survivor, (pick a theme) Jerry Springer, or any of the other
television shows that allow idiots to get their visage on TV.
There might be people lined up to do this.

I disagree about "The Swan" but agree about all the rest.


I recall that in some places there were anti-prostitution efforts
that focused on the *customers* rather than the *workers*,
so to speak. Pictures and names in the paper and all.
I dunno how well those programs fared.

This usually fails. Some of the people who frequent those
prostitutes have deeep pockets, and aren't in a position to be
affected by public shame.

You mean like that actor who used to "date" Elizabeth Hurley? (btw,
when did the word "date" become a euphemism for "have sex with"?)

There was a so-called Christian group semi-locally who were taking
pictures of license plates of people parked at adult book stores (do
they actually sell any books?) That usually goes on until they get
sued, and of course invariably someone is caught that ends up being an
embarrassment to the fundies.

Like that TV preacher?

Absolutely! Some of these people know they have certain tendencies, and
often try to control them by going into certain vocations, and then rail
on about whatever they may feel tempted to do. Then they get caught.


See also my post about divorce rates. Also where certain shows like the
much-criticized "Desperate Housewives" have the highest ratings).

I'm starting to form a new theory about the relation between the way
the country is going and these worthless programs........


This all relates to amateur radio in a very basic way:
The abuses mentioned by Steve and I are all the result of a mindset
that focuses on "rights" to the exclusion of *responsibilites*.
Many of us see proposed reductions in the standards of the ARS as
a form of that mindset.

Jim, that is a *major* stretch, almost as if I were to say that
*any* message here is on topic, as well as any reply I make because my
primary mode is PSK31, which involves typing, and all these messages are
typed! 8^)

I don't see it as a stretch at all.

You and Steve will never change each others minds about this
political stuff.

Maybe not, but neither will we allow mistakes by the other to go
uncorrected.

This sounds like you are agreeing with his all out offense against
LenOver21?


If nothing else, you two have brought out that neither party has
a lock on fiscal responsibility, ethics, honesty, big picture
thinking or any of the other qualities we (should) look for
in our leaders.


Agreed! But in some ways it's even simpler than that.

Consider the presidential elections since 1979...

In each case, did the candidate who demonstrated the most intelligence
win?

I say no - not in *any* case.

Clinton versus Dole? Regardless of Clinton's shortcomings, he has a
very powerful mind.

And despite some other posters ideas, I'm restricting this to the
presidents, not their spouses.

- Mike KB3EIA -

N2EY wrote:
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:


And not just "asthma" patients, but COPD'ers


I have to ask...

What's COPD stand for?


who smell of cigarette smoke,
"back pain" patients who exacerbated their "disabling" back pain while riding
their motorcycle or out drinking all night, or diabetics who present in DKA
who refuse to comply with their MD's plan-of-care.


OK, fine - but let's take that a step farther....

The consensus of opinion among all the MD's I've talked to says the following
as a general plan-of-ca

1) Do not use illegal drugs of any kind

2) Do not use tobacco of any kind

3) Get your weight down to at least where the charts say "average"

4) Eat a healthy diet

5) Use seatbelts, helmets, eye/hearing protection and all other protective
devices
where appropriate

How many people do all 5 consistently? How much public and private money is
spent because so many people don't?


People who have bonafide needs should get the care they need. Those who
have needs but refuse to do what is necessary to "get fixed" yet demand that
"we" do "something" to get them better need to be given the boot and a
referal to a funeral home director with pre-paid plans.


The problem is, how do you differentiate those groups when they show up in the
ER?

Here is one for ya Jim:

People who engage in risky behavior, such as rock climbing, bungee
jumping, contact sports, mountain climbing, skateboarding, and other
dangerous activity are doing so with knowledge of their potential
injury/death. Why should society have to foot the bill when one of these
idiots gets injured and can no longer support themselves. They made a
presumably sober decision to do this.

note that this is a little tongue in cheek, but I do have a bit of a
moral issue with this.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Kindly stop reading my messages. Thank you.

N2EY says, "Think about *why*. Then as now, raising taxes was political
suicide."

Yep, Clinton committed suicide. He even made it retroactive to before
he took office. Nobody noticed and they reelected a corpse.
Jim is just sooooo full of ..it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm saddened that Jim has so much to share, and so much of it is wrong.

Oh. I forgot to call you a jerkwad.

BOL. bb

Hey, Len. Happy New Year.

I think it's been about a decade since I joined you on RRAP. I think
Jim/KH2D was exiting at that point, and I never did see his stuff on
RRAP. I guess time flies when your fighting bad guys. I thought
things were actually turing around lately, but the closet libs decided
it was time to exit the closets after the election. I guess MoveOn dot
Org gave them the strength to belittle their fellow man. Rich people
know more than everyone else. In your face and all that.

Anyway, I've responded to several of the Mike/Jim postings of late, and
I'm really saddened that we have such sorry-assed citizens. Jim sorely
wants to compare America to a falling Roman Empire, and with all of the
help that he can muster, it just might come true. I'd like to kick his
liberal behind, but I'd end up getting butt-f***ed by his constituents
at the county workhouse when it was all over with. I sure wish he'd
invite them over to his house for a New Year's Eve party so they could
get all of the hedonism out of their systems.

Oh, well. What can you expect from people who have absolutley
***nothing*** invested in America? Yellow magnet ribbons on their
trunks??? Yep, they support the troops. Hi, hi!!! Yellow magnets!!!

Support America when it really didn't matter. Oooh Ahh and all that.
Wonder how many gallons of desalinated IO water they've drank in their
lifetimes?

Oh, never mind. Kelly is gonna jump in here with all his military
experince. Har de har, har.

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
N2EY wrote:

In article t,
"K=D8HB"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Then they can engage in whatever wild passionate
sex they see fit to, as long as it's legal.

What sort of sex should not be legal (presuming employed
non-asthmatic
consenting adults in the privacy of their own Studebaker)?

Pretty much anything, I would think.

Oh wait, I think my answer was kind of ambiguous there.

I say there are very few if any sex-related things that responsible
consenting adults want to do that should not be legal. (note the word
"responsible"...)

However, I can well understand the outrage of those who have to
pay
and pay for
the consequences of others' irresponsible behavior.

Do you have some insider knowledge of irresponsible behavior on the
part
of sexually active asthma sufferers?

Nope!
73 de Jim, N2EY

Jim simply has no knowledge of anything.

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article , "KØHB"
writes:

Should there be bold caution labels affixed to all inhalers warning that
"ONLY
TAME AND PLATONIC SEX IS ALLOWED WHILE USING THIS PRODUCT"?

Hans,

Isn't "PLATONIC SEX" an oxymoron? Like "tight slacks", "jumbo shrimp",
"nondairy creamer", etc.?

Freudian slip? Picking phrases such as "tight slacks" and "jumbo
shrimp" and "nondairy creamer?" in the same sentence? :-)

Tsk. You guys are looking for love in the wrong places...

Let me know the Part 97 paragraph equating "sex" with amateur
radio... :-)