tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post711138622079133201..comments2024-03-18T17:09:55.964-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Economics under TrumpDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger103125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72335717675112794242017-03-04T11:46:00.902-08:002017-03-04T11:46:00.902-08:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54675718839111108402017-03-04T11:21:04.172-08:002017-03-04T11:21:04.172-08:00My point was about Racism, not Slavery.
Boy, you ...My point was about Racism, not Slavery.<br /><br />Boy, you work really hard at deliberately misrepresenting what other people say. Doesn't it get tiring?<br />Smurphsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17502688358782406182017-03-04T07:56:47.825-08:002017-03-04T07:56:47.825-08:00Let's assume that when David says "most p...<br />Let's assume that when David says "most people have jobs", he means that the current job trends are 'appropriate' (whatever that means). Now, note that this statement about work trend 'appropriateness' in no way invalidates my argument that "Industrialisation has uniformly eliminated more jobs than it has created". <br /><br />Inarguably, the elimination of an onerous employment requirement is a GOOD thing -- I like leisure & luxury as much as the next man -- but only up to a point. Past that point, when the dependency ratio increases much past 1 to 1, the efforts of the (shrinking) working class become unreciprocated & a confiscatory parasite class develops that does not contribute to the social collective.<br /><br />Hence 'Slavery' (as Smurphs suggests):<br /><br />Slavery has been variously defined as (1) "the involuntary subjection to another or others", (2) "the idea of complete ownership and control by a master", (3) "a state of subjugation or captivity often involving burdensome and degrading labour", (4) "compulsory service, often such as is required by law", and (5) "a condition wherein the fruits of one's labour are not one's own".<br /><br />Taxes (defined as "compulsory payments by companies or individuals to the state") are much loved by progressives and (also as a matter of definition) "100% taxation equals slavery". The big question then becomes how much of a SLAVE are you, percentage-wise? Who owns the fruits of your labour? And how many layabouts are you compelled to support at the command of your Progressive Corporate Master?<br /><br />And, finally, I'd like to point out that my 'Industrialisation as a Ponzi scheme' model is actually quite empiric, based on the 2015 events surrounding Doxycycline pricing. What happened was this: <br /><br />Doxycycline was a successful antibiotic and, thanks to capital investment, automation & industrialisation, its cost of production dropped so low (3 cents/tablet) that it's market value could no longer justify continued capital investment & manufacture. Plant after plant closed down, precipitated an artificial shortage, led to worldwide unavailability & caused its price to jump to more than $5/tablet in a matter of months.<br /><br />https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2015/09/24/cost-doxycycline-skyrockets<br /><br />First-world textile plants followed the same pattern. And, so does Industrial Agriculture, I'm afraid.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87652595243113547412017-03-04T07:41:07.448-08:002017-03-04T07:41:07.448-08:00@Kal Kallevig,
Yes, you're interpreting very ...@Kal Kallevig,<br /><br />Yes, you're interpreting very close to what I meant. To state it more simply:<br /><br />People need a certain level of stuff. If the stuff is freely available (depending on where you are, possibly water or certain types of fruit), then we're talking about a method of administering the commons in such a way to balance need against maintainability. If the stuff requires human labor and/or planning to produce (most food, most energy, most shelter) then the ones who actually make the stuff earn a right to the stuff, while others have to trade for it.<br /><br />Increasing automation reduces the need for human labor while not reducing the inherent need. Ideally, this is a good thing. If people aren't <b>required</b> for the production process, then they shouldn't be expected to do drudge work. But this is a major social change, which essentially puts more of the "stuff" that people need out of reach for the people who need it. To me, the question becomes one of incorporating the "stuff" that doesn't require human labor into the commons. To others, that "stuff" belongs to the owner class, and everyone else who is not economically valuable to that owner class is simply out of luck.<br /><br />The problem to be solved is not an economic one per se, but a societal one. What kind of society are we? The economic system will follow from that. And no, I don't have a detailed solution either.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-69871099990408612422017-03-04T07:14:05.724-08:002017-03-04T07:14:05.724-08:00David S:
You raise an interesting issue regarding...David S:<br /><i><br />You raise an interesting issue regarding your mother and transgeneder bathroom use, but I can't tell if you have considered all the permutations.<br /></i><br /><br />That's exactly my point. That before one declares a "simple solution" and tries to implement it by fiat, one should understand that there are all sorts of complications involved, many of them affecting the participants at a visceral level in ways they probably haven't consciously thought about for decades if ever.<br /><br />The debate doesn't even really seem to be about transgender people per se. Transgender people are almost hostage to the fear that if a man is allowed to <b>decide</b> that the ladies' room is his appropriate venue (and no one has the right to say otherwise), then depraved <b>heterosexual</b> men will take advantage of the situation and descend upon that most hallowed and forbidden no-man's land* by the thousands.<br /><br />* It's a line from "Batman"<br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91981921603424091992017-03-04T07:10:36.356-08:002017-03-04T07:10:36.356-08:00In engineering, I completed a project that began s...In engineering, I completed a project that began saving the company $400,000 a year. I don't seem to have a problem determining its value. True, I don't know if that system was retained when they moved production to Mexico 17 years later. Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63103603130599619592017-03-04T06:40:35.950-08:002017-03-04T06:40:35.950-08:00@LarryHart,
You raise an interesting issue regard...@LarryHart,<br /><br />You raise an interesting issue regarding your mother and transgeneder bathroom use, but I can't tell if you have considered all the permutations. Would she rather share a bathroom with a post-operation transgender male or a post-operation transgender female? Now consider a choice between pre-operative transgender male/female? And finally, between a gay cisfemale and a gay cismale? <br /><br />How do you think your father would answer to the same questions?<br /><br />I ask these questions to try to determine if the issue is external appearances, "plumbing", sharing a bathroom with someone who may be sexually attracted to your parent/someone your parent might be sexually attracted to.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br />David Snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35828966499279512662017-03-03T21:27:21.264-08:002017-03-03T21:27:21.264-08:00Alfred,
I don't know what LarryHart had in mi...Alfred,<br /><br />I don't know what LarryHart had in mind with his 40 expected hours comment. I thought he meant the way society is organized so unless you are "gainfully employed" or lucky enough to have inherited wealth you will live in poverty. And unless you leverage your way into a high pay profession, even with that gainful employment you will live at or near poverty. The machines have made many of the formerly good jobs disappear but we still distribute the fruits of the economy according to the old rules, and a whole lot of average type people are disadvantaged because of it.Kal Kallevignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-56208908678460796942017-03-03T20:14:58.638-08:002017-03-03T20:14:58.638-08:00Alfred Differ:
My wealth doesn’t have much of any...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />My wealth doesn’t have much of anything to do with the value I produce. My income does according to my employer, but I don’t believe it. That kind of argument died with big parts of the classical economic equilibrium theories.<br />...<br />The value appears only during the exchange. Afterwards, no one knows what the value of my product and my labor are. In the brief moment of the exchange, my employer and I do know. A<br /></i><br /><br />Ok, I'm guilty of careless semantics. It would have been closer to say that, if your income can be expressed as the <b>perceived</b> what you produce (more accurately, the perceived value of the production which can be said to be "yours"), then your wealth is the integral of your income over time, minus that which you trade away and/or consume.<br /><br />Smurphs:<br /><i><br />The Freedman Laws giving assistance and education to the recently emancipated slaves were widely portrayed as letting he Black Man live a life of ease and idleness on the backs of the poor, oppressed working White Man. (so, Larry, that meme has been around for A LOT longer than 40 years).<br /></i><br /><br />"40 years" referred to the approximate length of time that I've been old enough to notice such things.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-45538055871029052582017-03-03T16:02:12.276-08:002017-03-03T16:02:12.276-08:00@locumranch; Most people have jobs
That your resp...@locumranch; <i>Most people have jobs</i><br /><br />That your response to that is so strong should be taken as a measure of how far off your understanding is compared to what he intends. When someone uses four words like that, be suspicious that they are spoken in a context that is going unsaid. You’ve got to check your internal model of the person saying them to figure out what the context is, though, because we gist just as much in our speech as we do in our reading. In a nutshell, if a comment sounds outlandish, consider the possibility that your model is a poor representation of the person saying it. A better model would enable you to unpack the meaning intended by the speaker.<br /><br />In David’s case, consider the possibility that a partially unpacked version would go like this. “Most people who want a job have a job.” More unpacking would reveal that our general opposition to child labor, overlong work weeks, and working until you die offers up a version that goes like this. “Most adults who want a decent job have one.”<br /><br />It is terribly important to model a person if you are going to successfully unpack meaning in written statements. In a face-to-face setting, roughly half of our communication passes through body language. Of the remaining half, about two thirds of it passes through tone of voice. Very little passes through the actual words we chose, but what does is EXTREMELY compressed making use of a lifetime’s worth of learning in becoming fluent. <br /><br />David points out how mismatched your model of him is. It’s not just an attempt by him to weasel out of the consequences of your accusations. Here is a simple example of how far off you are.<br /><br /><i>Like David, I once hoped that we (or, at least some of us) could avoid this imminent collapse by escaping into Space…</i><br /><br />Nah. Not even close. Kinda the opposite for him. More than kinda. He’s pretty fierce about not giving up Earth. I DO know a number of people who think we’ll need to escape, but he isn’t one of them. Escape is a dumb idea anyway. There never was a window for it.<br /><br />Oh… While I’m at it… Your economic theory is a dud too. I learned an investment joke years ago, but can’t remember it well enough to tell it. I’m terrible with jokes that way. I DO remember the point of it, though. When doctors think it is a good idea to invest, it is time to sell them everything you have and revert to cash or even gold. If they think it is time to sell, buy up what they offer. All of it. They make excellent counter-indicators in the financial markets.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-83670960548594238282017-03-03T14:56:51.385-08:002017-03-03T14:56:51.385-08:00@LarryHart; My wealth doesn’t have much of anythin...@LarryHart; My wealth doesn’t have much of anything to do with the value I produce. My income does according to my employer, but I don’t believe it. That kind of argument died with big parts of the classical economic equilibrium theories.<br /><br />It’s all about what OTHERS think my stuff is worth (and then whether I agree) whether it is assets I claim to own or my labor. I’ve had my labor highly valued one year and not valued the next and that is how things go. What I produce isn’t the valued thing, though. Neither is my labor. The value appears only during the exchange. Afterwards, no one knows what the value of my product and my labor are. In the brief moment of the exchange, my employer and I do know. Afterwards, we conform to an illusion that the values linger. It is an illusion that I’m not inclined to convince my employer not to believe.<br /><br />Back in the late 80’s I was a part-time college teacher. Physics, astronomy, and that kind of stuff. I was also in grad school, so part-time was all I could risk doing. The teacher’s union and the district where I taught agreed that my contact hours should be valued in the mid-30’s per hour. After I had secured my degree, the agreed upon rate was in the low-50’s per hour. This was all baked into the contract which helped me make decent predictions. I was only working 3 hours a week at first and never went above 6 with them. Multiply that up and you’ll see it wasn’t much. However… it was enough for me to get what I really wanted. If anyone had told me I was too lazy to work, I would have raised an eyebrow at them, mentally lumped them in with stupid people, and then moved on. What a person wants matters. It would have been nice if someone had given me a wad of cash to get by, but it wasn’t so important to me that I sought it out or sought another kind of trade for it. When I got tired of being poor, though, I moved on and never doubted that I could.<br /><br />When someone spouts that nonsense about people too lazy to work, I poke back at them to see how confident they really are about their own income. Many people can’t face that kind of examination and they shut up and avoid me. It is a useful bit of defensive magic I encourage everyone to learn. Risk taking is scary stuff and if there is ANY connection between a person’s attitude and their wealth, my suspicion is that risk takers deviate the most from the average, thus the typical higher earner is probably one of them. Good luck teaching risk adverse people to take risks. It’s hard work.<br />Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63419776580426745202017-03-03T14:33:22.518-08:002017-03-03T14:33:22.518-08:00Kaczinski was a tragic asshole. He discovered all ...Kaczinski was a tragic asshole. He discovered all the things at risk to be removed by modern life; the comforts and human rewards from any functioning community. Then he removed himself from that, choosing no community, and so became insane.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82366195779695138012017-03-03T14:28:58.582-08:002017-03-03T14:28:58.582-08:00I think I have plenty of liberal cred here. I jus...I think I have plenty of liberal cred here. I just don't think it's wise to expect or demand people of earlier generations to simply accept that the underpinnings of the world are not as they have thought them to be for many decades without working to convince them that a different perspective is warranted and necessary. If we just treat them as old farts whom time has passed by and whose feelings are inconsequential, then we get the 2016 election.<br /><br />I hate to keep dragging Mom (who is alive and well, btw) into this, but the fact is that she'd be fine sharing a ladies' room with a trangender woman who truly self-identifies as a woman. She'd be less fine with a roomful of mixed company in hearing (and smelling) distance of what goes on inside the stalls. To her, and to millions of her generation in all 50 states, the "obvious" solution is worse than the problem it attempts to solve.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-89339660379316437992017-03-03T12:33:21.710-08:002017-03-03T12:33:21.710-08:00Counterfactualism is the cult’s core religious ten...Counterfactualism is the cult’s core religious tenet. Locum’s shriek that industrialism is a disaster reminds me unabomber Kaczynski’s book (I am currently reading) that ignores the grinding misery of almost all of our ancestors, compared to today, when 80% of human children get the basic “stuff” they need, and even the poor, in Africa, can leverage their own efforts to improve their lives, using the miracle of cell phones.<br /><br />“Like David, I once hoped that we (or, at least some of us) could avoid this imminent collapse by escaping into Space…” You know nothing of my wants or hopes. It’s not that we haven’t barked at each other for years. Just rest assured. Your image of me is almost entirely a concoction of your own sick needs. Almost never have you portrayed anything even remotely what I have said, let alone think.<br /><br />LarryHart has it right. Women need a refuge where men can’t barge and noise-about. And yes, there are moments when the opposite can be true.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58379246277684911232017-03-03T11:21:24.252-08:002017-03-03T11:21:24.252-08:00raito:
And you will run into LarryHart's mom ...raito:<br /><i><br />And you will run into LarryHart's mom who can't/won't adjust. Should she have to or not? That's part of the quesiton. If if so, should we always have to remain the same ebcause someone a generation ago couldn't move forward? (I don't have global answers, jsut questions here)<br /></i><br /><br />Funny you should put it that way, very shortly after I watched Charlton Heston portraying Mark Antony in a movie of Shakespeare's "Julius Ceasar". The similarity of phrase is chilling. "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him!"<br /><br />Seriously, though, my mom as an individual would adjust moreso than most. My point was that we are talking about ladies of a certain age all over the country. You can try to convince them, or try to ignore their concerns, but they do vote, and it wouldn't surprise me if a large percentage voted for Trump on this issue alone. Not that they mean transgendered people any harm in their hearts, but that the insistence on treating ladies' rooms as indistinguishable from men's rooms strikes them as contrary to all reason and common sense, just as almost anything President Snow advocates strikes us. It makes us look like the crazy people who call a donkey a horse.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-12404493162279163152017-03-03T08:55:21.976-08:002017-03-03T08:55:21.976-08:00Alfred Differ,
Yes, they'd complain. Part of ...Alfred Differ,<br /><br />Yes, they'd complain. Part of the inefficiency is, as has been said, keeping the same number of drains for each gender. But another is making the extra capacity the same for both. F+x and M+X results in 2X over capacity to make sure there's never a shortage. With unisex, X is probably sufficient. Maybe 1.5X.<br /><br />And you will run into LarryHart's mom who can't/won't adjust. Should she have to or not? That's part of the quesiton. If if so, should we always have to remain the same ebcause someone a generation ago couldn't move forward? (I don't have global answers, jsut questions here)<br /><br />There were several times in the dim past when my mother bypassed the line at the women's to take my sister into the empty men's.<br /><br />LarryHart,<br /><br />Thanks for bringing up Franken. I've been listeing to the Sessions flap for a day now, and what I find most interesting is that it seems like people are willfully missing what was asked, and that the answer didn't answer the question.. I'm most disappointed that no one seems upset that the question Franken asked was never actually answered.<br /><br />First off, Franken really proved that he's got a brain. What he asked was, "What would you do if you knew abut this?" Pretty clever, attempting to get an answer about the future (which could then be used if the answer wasn't what was then done), and possibly having the information about the calls so that he could call out that the non-answer was false.<br /><br />Secondly, any explanation that Sessions didn't understand the question should be enough to immediately remove him, because he's stupid. I don't have a law degree, and I'm not a Senator, and I understood the question. And I could have answered the question, either with his non-answer, or an actual answer, in a way that wouldn't have caused trouble. Either actually answer, 'Depends on the mertis of the case', or non-answer, 'Sure I had calls, they were about current business, not campaign business'.<br /><br />Thirdly, answering a question of "What would you do if you knew?" with "I don't know that it happened" is not answering the question. But everyone seems to be ignoring that.raitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-74141349085322278212017-03-03T08:19:24.785-08:002017-03-03T08:19:24.785-08:00http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labo...http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate<br />Hit "max" for the full labor participation stats chart. It illustrates the bullshit thrown at us is wrong.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-65125926742529313162017-03-03T06:43:04.311-08:002017-03-03T06:43:04.311-08:00 Smurphs, the autobiography is also worth your ti... Smurphs, the autobiography is also worth your time, and the price is right... I rather liked the point where Grant expresses regret for not being able to do more for poor whites in the south, whose economic opportunities were blighted by the plantations.Tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35116627798303304802017-03-03T05:41:08.896-08:002017-03-03T05:41:08.896-08:00@Smurphs,
What has changed since 1868 (aside from...@Smurphs,<br /><br />What has changed since 1868 (aside from which party is on which side) is that it was a <b>losing</b> slogan back then.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84815922553938726862017-03-03T05:27:00.879-08:002017-03-03T05:27:00.879-08:00Apropos of nothing, but I am currently reading the...Apropos of nothing, but I am currently reading the latest biography of U.S. Grant, and happen to be at the Presidential election of 1868. The Freedman Laws giving assistance and education to the recently emancipated slaves were widely portrayed as letting he Black Man live a life of ease and idleness on the backs of the poor, oppressed working White Man. (so, Larry, that meme has been around for A LOT longer than 40 years).<br /><br />Also, interesting, the official campaign slogan of the Democratic Convention in 1868 was "This is a White Mans' Country; Let The White Men Rule."<br /><br />The more things change, ...<br />Smurphsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70423519916356518462017-03-03T05:02:59.190-08:002017-03-03T05:02:59.190-08:00Duncan Cairncross:
Changing to a Single big room ...Duncan Cairncross:<br /><i><br />Changing to a Single big room with sinks and Stalls plus another room with urinals would fix everything with no additional embarrassment AND either less lines or lower total and operational costs.<br /></i><br /><br />Spoken like a lifelong bachelor. :)<br /><br />I think you misunderstand just how viscerally uncomfortable some people, especially people my mother's age, are just being in the <b>presence</b> of the gender opposite and a bathroom at the same time.<br /><br />Then, there's the issue that Asimov's "Caves of Steel" made clear. Men tend to do their business and get out, hopefully without acknowledging the presence of any other human being (of whatever gender). Women tend to socialize in the restroom. The styles are incompatible. In fact, that might make a better criterion than birth certificate for a law that determines which bathrooms a gender-ambiguous person is entitled to use.<br /><br />I kid, yes, but (borrowing from Al Franken) I'm kidding on the square.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25178126427110450502017-03-02T22:56:01.406-08:002017-03-02T22:56:01.406-08:00Good points made by all.
It is apparent, however,...<br /><br />Good points made by all.<br /><br />It is apparent, however, that Eric has never cared for horses. I have. And I can promise you that are they are much much MORE inefficient, wasteful, time consuming, labour-dependent & potentially expensive contraptions than any Steam Locomotive or Automobile, despite the fact that 'no assembly is required'. Also, it's quaint for Eric to remember 'transistors' & the people their production once employed, yet it's still quite sad that he has forgotten the pressman, the newsie & the practically extinct textile worker.<br /><br />Then, DavidB descends into cognitive dissonance & tells an 'alternafact' WHOPPER of a lie by claiming that "most people have jobs". What utter malarkey!! The West's 'Dependency Ratio' indicates that LESS than 50% of our total population has gainful employment; and, worldwide, the Potential Support Ratio (comparing workers to dependents) is headed straight down to toilet-town. Remember child labour, piecework, the 80+ hour workweek, no retirement age & the reason why farmers traditionally had large families?? Time was when everyone worked, but no longer.<br /><br />The Guardian article was likewise a laugh-riot as it compared the numerical job count (or, even worse, the occupation-specific percentage change) to the percent employed of the population total. <br /><br />Perhaps the truth is too HORRIBLE for most people to admit, even though it's been an open secret in Science Fiction since 'The Shape of Things to Come', 1933, by HG Wells:<br /><br />Industrialisation is a runaway train of a Ponzi Scheme, always requiring expansion (more resources, more factories, more markets & more consumers) in order to justify its existence & stabilise (and/or increase) job counts . It cannot be stopped (or even slowed beyond a certain point) elsewise the whole system will collapse under its own weight like Krispy Kreme Donuts, the Dot.com Bubble or the unpublished academic. <br /><br />This Industrial Ponzi scheme is also the cause of every great war since the Civil War, this need for ever more expansion, resources, factories, markets & consumers ELSE economic collapse, a cycle that repeats every 40 to 60 years or so (Civil War, WW1, WW2, the Middle East, etc), most recently delayed only by the zealous overconsumption performed by the heroic, self-sacrificial & increasingly obese Americafat Fat Fatty consumer.<br /><br />Like David, I once hoped that we (or, at least some of us) could avoid this imminent collapse by escaping into Space, yet now I fear that this window has passed, so much so that the confiscation & redistribution of capital will only speed our socioeconomic collapse.<br /><br />Infinite productivity is NOT a thing: Remember this when you dream of being fully-supported by the machinery of your (cough cough) 'Capital Investments'.<br /><br /><br />Best<br />_____<br />@Duncan: When our whole socioeconomic future is circling the drain, then toilet etiquette becomes our most pressing social concern.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44382878002048411132017-03-02T22:17:53.723-08:002017-03-02T22:17:53.723-08:00This whole bathroom thing is just silly
The curre...This whole bathroom thing is just silly<br /><br />The current practice is<br /><br />One big room with sinks and a urinal - also containing some stalls with WC's<br />Another big room with sinks - also containing some stalls with WC's<br /><br />This gives lots of problems as the normal practice is to have the same number of stalls - so there can be lines in the ladies<br /><br />Changing to a Single big room with sinks and Stalls plus another room with urinals would fix everything with no additional embarrassment AND either less lines or lower total and operational costs<br /><br />This will require people to "put things away" before leaving the urinals or stalls - but that is one of the things that we should be training them to do when at school!duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-52822632649754444672017-03-02T20:14:45.449-08:002017-03-02T20:14:45.449-08:00The idea that liberals desire to design and implem... The idea that liberals desire to design and implement mandatory social systems and their critics want not to, seems suspicious. First off, it shows a lack of humbling understanding of what we've been fortunate to learn from the examination of fractals, chaotic attractors, and butterfly effects. Second, history shows that Axis powers and the Russian communists gave agonizing demonstrations of how inept and cruel the attempts are. Nowadays such stuff comes solely from the corporate world, and their employees. Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35619179646170480642017-03-02T20:05:27.716-08:002017-03-02T20:05:27.716-08:00https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/02/mi...https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/02/mike-pence-personal-email-hacked-aol-governor<br /><br />What a surprise. As governor, Mike Pence used personal e-mail for public business, and <b>was</b> hacked.<br /><br />Seems as if Hillary was persecuted for a practice that is pretty much business as usual for everyone, Republican and Democrat. And it's not an outrage unless she's the one doing it. Even though she uzed the only web server on earth which was <b>not</b> hacked.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.com