On Dec 8, 1:57*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 7, 5:08*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, *wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 8, 1:57*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 7, 5:08*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, *wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

On Dec 8, 4:33*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 1:57*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, *wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:33*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 1:57*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, *wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

On Dec 8, 6:50*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

"HeyBub" wrote:

mike wrote:
-snip-
If having a gun encourages you to do things you wouldn't consider
without a gun,
you're asking for trouble.
I see two possibilities.
1) you get shot with your own gun.
2) you end up in jail for shooting someone.
It's your word against 20 bikers.

I went thru a "carrying" phase until I decided that
it was a foolish.

I've used my weapon to ward of would-be robbers in the Home Depot parking
lot! Twice!


IFF you MUST venture into unsafe areas, like your delivery job
requires it, you might convince yourself it's worth the risk.
IF you CHOOSE to go there, you're being foolish.

Disaster doesn't always happen in unsafe areas. Why just today, two people
were shot at the University of Virgina campus, arguably the safest place on
the planet. By that I mean the campus has a RULE against firearms!

Go back to #1. That appears to be what happened. It saved the
kid from #2. So having a gun really worked out for him, eh? [and a
cop, Army vet & father of 5 besides]

When I heard this on the news last night your post was the first thing
I thought of. I hope this doesn't turn out that the kid was armed
by a concerned parent who thought it was a god idea for their child
to carry a gun on the dangerous campus.

I don't want any guns taken away-- especially the ones I own-- but
there are some folks who should *not* have guns. [And with all your
bravado you might be on my short list of those who should be
disarmed.]

Jim

On Dec 8, 4:45*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
I don't have any evidence that she's irrational. Maybe she's phobic. Maybe
she just doesn't like the smell of gasoline on her clothes. Maybe she is
afraid of being asked to sign a petition.

Phobias are by definition irrational.

You don't pour the gasoline on your clothes. You pump it into the car.
I've been putting gas in vehicles for 30+ years and not once have I
gotten a drop of gas on my clothes.

9 times out of 10 I can't even smell it on my hands, but gas stations
do offer gloves and wipes at the pump these days. Of course you could
always take responsibility for yourself and bring your own gloves if
it's that big a deal to you.

Whatever. Having a gun nearby may very well give her the confidence she
needs to function in a complex society.

It might, but probably won't.

I carry a gun everywhere I go. I now go into biker bars and order a glass of
milk, something I would never have done before.

Hey, that's fine with me.

On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 8, 6:50*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.





..

On Dec 9, 11:10Â*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 6:50Â*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.


I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. š¡ðŸš—ðŸ‘�

On 2011-12-10, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 9, 11:10*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 6:50*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.


I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. ???

What many people dislike about a free market is simply the fact that
other people may make different choices than they do.

Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-10, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 9, 11:10 am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 8, 6:50 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:
On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.
A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.
I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"
Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.
My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)
The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.
Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"
The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.
Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.
we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.
My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.
What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.
government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.
You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.
Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.

I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. ???

What many people dislike about a free market is simply the fact that
other people may make different choices than they do.



Which gives rise to socialism: Making everyone equal by
cutting heads off the tall ones.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

"worker bee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 08:30:16 -0800, Harry K wrote:

Neighborhood fueds never turn out well. Find out
who is doing it and charge him with harassment.

I wonder how to find out WHO called it in.

When I asked, they said it was anonymous.

Forget about getting a DA to file harrassment charges. In every case you've
described, the inspectors will probably say "it was a valid concern of the
tipster."

Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal box
that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from the
nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.

Then, find a batch of old keys somewhere (most people I know have dozens
lying around), write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with the
words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest part of
town you can find. Soon, your neighbor will have visit after visit of angry
people thinking they've been cheated out of their reward. They'll take care
of your revenge for you.

--
Bobby G.

On Dec 10, 9:19Â*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-10, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 9, 11:10Â*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 6:50Â*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.

I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. ???

What many people dislike about a free market is simply the fact that
other people may make different choices than they do.

This is true. œŒ

On 2011-12-10, dsi1 wrote:
On Dec 10, 9:19*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-10, dsi1 wrote:









On Dec 9, 11:10*am, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 6:50*pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-09, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-08, dsi1 wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, dsi1 wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.

I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. ???

What many people dislike about a free market is simply the fact that
other people may make different choices than they do.

This is true. ?

The numerous laws, regulations, and huge sums of money spent on
enforcement to control personal choices is more than enough proof of
it.

"Robert Green" wrote in message
...
"worker bee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 08:30:16 -0800, Harry K wrote:

Neighborhood fueds never turn out well. Find out
who is doing it and charge him with harassment.

I wonder how to find out WHO called it in.

When I asked, they said it was anonymous.

Forget about getting a DA to file harrassment charges. In every case
you've
described, the inspectors will probably say "it was a valid concern of the
tipster."

Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal
box
that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from the
nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.

Then, find a batch of old keys somewhere (most people I know have dozens
lying around), write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with
the
words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest part of
town you can find. Soon, your neighbor will have visit after visit of
angry
people thinking they've been cheated out of their reward. They'll take
care
of your revenge for you.


Use a printer to generate the label.
Wear gloves when you handle the labels and the keys

NO fingerprints, NO DNA

On 12/10/2011 1:49 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-10, wrote:
On Dec 10, 9:19 am, wrote:
On 2011-12-10, wrote:









On Dec 9, 11:10 am, wrote:
On 2011-12-09, wrote:

On Dec 8, 6:50 pm, wrote:
On 2011-12-09, wrote:

On Dec 8, 4:33 pm, wrote:
On 2011-12-09, wrote:

On Dec 8, 1:57 pm, wrote:
On 2011-12-08, wrote:

On Dec 7, 5:08 pm, wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:

On 12/6/2011 7:05 PM, Brent wrote:
On 2011-12-07, wrote:
You might want to rethink your logic. A lot of folks don't care
whether or not there are any advantages. The only advantage they can
see is the advantage of not having to change.

A minority so vanishingly small as to not be a factor.

I don't get your point. How can a lot of folks be "vanishingly small?"

Who are these people holding on to vastly out of date technology for
the sake of not changing? How many rotary phones do you see being used?
1970s or earlier cars as daily drivers? The people who just refuse to
change to superior technology because they just don't want to change
are few and far between.

My guess is most people in the automotive industry are scared to death
of the electric car and the changes it will bring. No transmission, no
radiator, an engine that's more like the one in your washing machine, no
exhaust, no cams, no heads, no speed/power tuning, etc. We'll still need
tires though. :-)

The discussion was regarding customers not manufacturers. Manufacturers
don't have a choice in free market conditions. They either adapt or
die. The premise, that I agree with, is that superior product doesn't
need to be forced on any one. If electrics were or become superior then
new companies would quickly displace old companies that refused to
change given free market conditions.

Let's not get sucked into this dopey topic and instead wait and see.
The winner gets to say "I told you so!"

The USA is not a free market. This is why companies seek government to
better their market position whatever it may be.

Boy, this is a tough, cynical crowd! You might be right but I haven't
been downbeaten enough to totally accept your outlook on how things
are in America.

we can't just sit it out and see what a free market will do when there
isn't one. It's like watching a cat to see what a dog would do.

My guess is that is in fact what will happen. Events will pretty much
play themselves out unfettered. There's not much we can do about it.

What will happen? regulations on gasoline powered cars become more and
more until they are more crappy than electrics? I don't see CAFE being
rolled back any time soon.

government will tax and make illegal what it doesn't like and
subsidize what it does like. Do that through enough rounds and
electrics will be the 'better' or only choice.

You're the one that said that we can't sit around. My point is that we
can and we will.

Try to comprehend the entire thing. We can't judge which is really the
superior product under free market conditions because we don't have
free market conditions. Government seems determined to make the
electric 'work' the same way it makes transit 'work'. It makes driving
more and more painful until transit is the path of least resistance. It
will do the same with regard to electric and gasoline power if it
remains determined to have electric cars.

I think you are right about this. OTOH, electric will work fine for me
although it's not really a viable option for a good number of
Americans. ???

What many people dislike about a free market is simply the fact that
other people may make different choices than they do.

This is true. ?

The numerous laws, regulations, and huge sums of money spent on
enforcement to control personal choices is more than enough proof of
it.

That wasn't a question. It was a declarative sentence. If you see a
question mark, it's because I've been sticking emoji characters after my
posts which comes out funny on some readers. Sorry about that.

On 12/10/2011 3:47 PM, Robert Green wrote:
"worker wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Dec 2011 08:30:16 -0800, Harry K wrote:

Neighborhood fueds never turn out well. Find out
who is doing it and charge him with harassment.

I wonder how to find out WHO called it in.

When I asked, they said it was anonymous.

Forget about getting a DA to file harrassment charges. In every case you've
described, the inspectors will probably say "it was a valid concern of the
tipster."

Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal box
that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from the
nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.

Then, find a batch of old keys somewhere (most people I know have dozens
lying around), write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with the
words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest part of
town you can find. Soon, your neighbor will have visit after visit of angry
people thinking they've been cheated out of their reward. They'll take care
of your revenge for you.

--
Bobby G.


At one time before I grew up some more and was even more intolerant of
walking sphincters, I would make my own bumper stickers with foul words
damning law enforcement or insulting to the prevalent minority in the
area. These bumper stickers would be applied to the vehicle belonging
to said mobile personal annoyance for entertainment purposes. Of course,
a less expensive and expedient weapon is duct tape used to cover their
automobile tag which earns them a possible felony stop by the local
constabulary especially if an anonymous tip is called in about a mugger
driving a vehicle matching the description of the car belonging to your
target. ^_^

TDD

On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 16:47:19 -0500, Robert Green wrote:
Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal
box that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from
the nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.

That brought a smile to my face. And the hint about the nuclear police
reminded me of what Commander Rochefort did to the Japanese at AF
Midway.

write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with
the words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest
part of town you can find.

Another smile!

"worker bee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 16:47:19 -0500, Robert Green wrote:
Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal
box that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from
the nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.

That brought a smile to my face. And the hint about the nuclear police
reminded me of what Commander Rochefort did to the Japanese at AF
Midway.

Jasper Holmes was the real hero of that operation. Rochefort knew that the
Japanese were going to attack *somewhere* (but not where) from decrypting
IJN (Imp. Jap. Navy) radio traffic (an impressive feat - Rochefort was a
real ace). Holmes had the idea to put out an uncoded broadcast that Midway
was running out of water. Sure enough, soon they decrypted an IJN
transmission that said "AF short of water" and they knew the attack was
aimed at Midway.

The Battle of Midway should be renamed the Battle of Miracles because there
were at least five different times when God or whoever's in charge smiled on
us and gave us breaks (like decoding the term AF) that turned the tide of
battle. Three IJN carriers were sunk because a pilot got a glimpse of a
destroyer moving at flank speed so he followed, assuming it was returning to
the fleet. He was right and minutes later the pride of the IJN flat-top
fleet was heading for the bottom of the sea.

write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with
the words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest
part of town you can find.

Another smile!

Drop 'em off in the parking lot of the local county jail. I don't even think
the "key trick" is against the law, per se. Still, as one poster suggested,
I wouldn't use anything easily traceable in making up the tags. You could
even get creative and use an etcher to write "Safe" or "Gun Locker" or "Pot
Grow Room" on the keys to make their return more likely. You're sure to
attract a vengeful sort of person that way. It's a good way to get revenge
without ever having to approach the target's property or car. These days,
with everyone having a nanny-cam or CCTV, you never know who's watching. Of
course, these suggestions are purely for entertainment purposes and I would
*never* suggest anyone take revenge on a low-life neighbor who's making your
life hell. (-"

I often wonder if the drops we've seen in the last ten years in various
crime rates hasn't been, in part, attributable to people knowing they're
being watched. Of course, it doesn't seem to bother "flash mobsters" but
from the looks of it, they're mostly just stupid kids acting the way stupid
kids do.

I seem to remember doing dumb stuff when I was young but that's the benefit
of a failing memory. You forget the stupid and bad stuff as well as the
important stuff. I can still remember my family's telephone number from the
1950's (Cloverdale-6-4033) but have trouble with new ones. Perhaps that's
speed dial's fault. (-:

--
Bobby G.

Robert Green wrote the following:
"worker bee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 16:47:19 -0500, Robert Green wrote:
Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal
box that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from
the nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.
That brought a smile to my face. And the hint about the nuclear police
reminded me of what Commander Rochefort did to the Japanese at AF
Midway.

Jasper Holmes was the real hero of that operation. Rochefort knew that the
Japanese were going to attack *somewhere* (but not where) from decrypting
IJN (Imp. Jap. Navy) radio traffic (an impressive feat - Rochefort was a
real ace). Holmes had the idea to put out an uncoded broadcast that Midway
was running out of water. Sure enough, soon they decrypted an IJN
transmission that said "AF short of water" and they knew the attack was
aimed at Midway.

The Battle of Midway should be renamed the Battle of Miracles because there
were at least five different times when God or whoever's in charge smiled on
us and gave us breaks (like decoding the term AF) that turned the tide of
battle.



Apparently, god didn't like American torpedo bombers.


Three IJN carriers were sunk because a pilot got a glimpse of a
destroyer moving at flank speed so he followed, assuming it was returning to
the fleet. He was right and minutes later the pride of the IJN flat-top
fleet was heading for the bottom of the sea.

write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with
the words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest
part of town you can find.
Another smile!

Drop 'em off in the parking lot of the local county jail. I don't even think
the "key trick" is against the law, per se. Still, as one poster suggested,
I wouldn't use anything easily traceable in making up the tags. You could
even get creative and use an etcher to write "Safe" or "Gun Locker" or "Pot
Grow Room" on the keys to make their return more likely. You're sure to
attract a vengeful sort of person that way. It's a good way to get revenge
without ever having to approach the target's property or car. These days,
with everyone having a nanny-cam or CCTV, you never know who's watching. Of
course, these suggestions are purely for entertainment purposes and I would
*never* suggest anyone take revenge on a low-life neighbor who's making your
life hell. (-"

I often wonder if the drops we've seen in the last ten years in various
crime rates hasn't been, in part, attributable to people knowing they're
being watched. Of course, it doesn't seem to bother "flash mobsters" but
from the looks of it, they're mostly just stupid kids acting the way stupid
kids do.

I seem to remember doing dumb stuff when I was young but that's the benefit
of a failing memory. You forget the stupid and bad stuff as well as the
important stuff. I can still remember my family's telephone number from the
1950's (Cloverdale-6-4033) but have trouble with new ones. Perhaps that's
speed dial's fault. (-:

--
Bobby G.




--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Robert Green wrote the following:
"worker bee" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 16:47:19 -0500, Robert Green wrote:
Get something like a "danger - Radiation!" sign and attach it to a metal
box that only your suspect neighbor can see. If you get a visit from
the nuclear police, you pretty much know who called them.
That brought a smile to my face. And the hint about the nuclear police
reminded me of what Commander Rochefort did to the Japanese at AF
Midway.

Jasper Holmes was the real hero of that operation. Rochefort knew that the
Japanese were going to attack *somewhere* (but not where) from decrypting
IJN (Imp. Jap. Navy) radio traffic (an impressive feat - Rochefort was a
real ace). Holmes had the idea to put out an uncoded broadcast that Midway
was running out of water. Sure enough, soon they decrypted an IJN
transmission that said "AF short of water" and they knew the attack was
aimed at Midway.

The Battle of Midway should be renamed the Battle of Miracles because there
were at least five different times when God or whoever's in charge smiled on
us and gave us breaks (like decoding the term AF) that turned the tide of
battle.



Apparently, god didn't like American torpedo bombers.


Three IJN carriers were sunk because a pilot got a glimpse of a
destroyer moving at flank speed so he followed, assuming it was returning to
the fleet. He was right and minutes later the pride of the IJN flat-top
fleet was heading for the bottom of the sea.

write you pesky neighbor's address only on a key tag with
the words "$75 reward if returned" and distribute them in the baddest
part of town you can find.
Another smile!

Drop 'em off in the parking lot of the local county jail. I don't even think
the "key trick" is against the law, per se. Still, as one poster suggested,
I wouldn't use anything easily traceable in making up the tags. You could
even get creative and use an etcher to write "Safe" or "Gun Locker" or "Pot
Grow Room" on the keys to make their return more likely. You're sure to
attract a vengeful sort of person that way. It's a good way to get revenge
without ever having to approach the target's property or car. These days,
with everyone having a nanny-cam or CCTV, you never know who's watching. Of
course, these suggestions are purely for entertainment purposes and I would
*never* suggest anyone take revenge on a low-life neighbor who's making your
life hell. (-"

I often wonder if the drops we've seen in the last ten years in various
crime rates hasn't been, in part, attributable to people knowing they're
being watched. Of course, it doesn't seem to bother "flash mobsters" but
from the looks of it, they're mostly just stupid kids acting the way stupid
kids do.

I seem to remember doing dumb stuff when I was young but that's the benefit
of a failing memory. You forget the stupid and bad stuff as well as the
important stuff. I can still remember my family's telephone number from the
1950's (Cloverdale-6-4033) but have trouble with new ones. Perhaps that's
speed dial's fault. (-:

--
Bobby G.




--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:39:25 -0500, willshak
wrote:



Apparently, god didn't like American torpedo bombers.


Didn't much care for American torpedoes either.
Don't remember the details now, but way too many duds.
Read that in S.E. Morrison extracts and elsewhere.

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:39:25 -0500, willshak
wrote:

Apparently, god didn't like American torpedo bombers.

Didn't much care for American torpedoes either.
Don't remember the details now, but way too many duds.
Read that in S.E. Morrison extracts and elsewhere.\

Quite true. One of the more realistic sub sims that I've played even
accounted for the large percentage of duds that mostly Pacific sub
commanders had to put up with early in the war. The worst thing you could
hear on the hydrophone after letting loose a fish or two was the horrible
dull bell-like clang of a dud torpedo hitting the hull of an enemy ship and
failing to explode. In many of those cases the clang was soon followed by a
torrent of depth charges which didn't have much of dud problem at all and
sank a number of US subs because of the duds. Part of the problem is that
commanders of the sunken subs usually didn't have time to report the duds -
they were too busy to try to stay alive and that helped mask the problem for
a while.

http://www.ww2pacific.com/torpedo.html

Running depth. (a.) Warheads were heavier than test heads. The wartime
torpedo ran with a head down trim. The shore establishment eventually
acknowledged a four foot error in running depths. Fleet tests in Australia
found an 11 foot depth error. It was not until Aug'42 that a compromise of
10' was agreed and a trim repair kit was issued to the fleet later in that
year.

Running depth. (b.) The depth sensor was designed for a slower running
torpedo. The pressure gradient over the torpedo surface at higher speeds
gave the wrong feedback. The sensor was later relocated to a neutral
position.

The magnetic exploder was designed in the northern latitudes and did not
work as well at the equator. The British and Germans had already disabled
their magnetic exploders before the USN ordered theirs disabled 24June43.
ComSubSWPac had participated in the development of the magnetic exploder,
knew the principle was sound, and resisted disablement until Dec'43.

The conventional contact exploder was designed for the earlier, slower, 33
knot, Mk 13 torpedo. The newer, faster, 46 knot, Mk 14 torpedo had higher
inertial impacts that would cause the firing pin to miss the exploder cap.


As a former Navy guy Vic, you're probably well aware that the above
explanations fit very well with how the USN runs things. It takes a very
large spanner to the head to get them to admit a problem, let alone fix it.

(As for God not liking American torpedo bombers - it's true that they had
very dismal success overall, and many pilots and planes were lost, but he
appeared to like the four Japanese aircraft carriers even less. Eventually
American planes were able to make decisive and deadly hits against the
Japanese carriers. One pilot, as noted before, spotted the all-important
destroyer wake that led him to the carrier groups. In another instance, a
pilot realized the entire group of fighters was attacking a single (the
closest) carrier so he broke off that attack and with another plane
accompanying him sought out the other IJN carriers and killed them.

I've heard the rear seat fliers (facing backwards) tell of the horrifying
minute or so where the pilot would dive on the Japanese ships and all they
could see were the Zeroes flying overhead as they plunged quickly downward
with the back seater facing against the direction of travel. I don't even
like to sit in train seats facing backwards . . ..

--
Bobby G.