On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 21:21:25 -0500, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 20:56:49 GMT, "Bernd" wrote:

One could infer that, or maybe look at it like he says:
He doesn't trust the future in an uncertain market and
is switching to a sure thing. One doesn't necessarily
have to go bust to see trends and act accordingly.
I respect him enough not to jump too far beyond what he
says.

How did people survive before health care, retirement and other
benefits, like back in the 1900's?

Bernd


Simple answer.... many didn't. It was not an uncommon practice for
children not to be named before they were 3-4 years old... Many
deceased siblings found their names given to a surviving child. For
example, John Smith IV died and his unnamed younger brother was given
his name...

Very true. Often the parents would give them a nickname..but not
offically name them until they were a number of years old. Infant
mortality was very high as was death by birthing complications. The
picture of the stalwart yoemans wife squatting in the hay, dropping
the kid and then going back to work in the field was somewhat true,
but often enough she and the infant were buried 3 days later and he
was looking for a new wife to take care of the rest of the children.

When a bad tooth would and could kill you, life tended to be brutal,
miserable and short.

Gunner
"I mean, when's the last time you heard of a college where the Young
Republicans staged a "Sit In" to close down the Humanities building?
On the flip side, how many sit in's were staged to close the ROTC building back in the '60's?
Liberals stage protests, do civil disobedience, etc.
Conservatives talk politely and try to work out a solution to problems
through discourse until they believe that talking won't work... they they go home and open the gun cabinets.
Pray things never get to the point where the conservatives decide that
"civil disobedience" is the next step, because that's a very short route to "voting from the rooftops"
Jeffrey Swartz, Misc.Survivalism