Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 17 Nov 2006 07:02 In article <MPG.1fc6fd7540cb3520989bba(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <ejhoi9$8qk_002(a)s938.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> In article <MPG.1fc5b8c43468d032989b90(a)news.individual.net>, >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >In article <ejf4nd$8qk_002(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> >> In article <MPG.1fc3bbe568ee60e1989b38(a)news.individual.net>, >> >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: <snip> >> >The machine shop where my dad worked had a pipe die set. They'd >> >let me use it (with supervision) for a project I was doing. After >> >I was all done the bastards showed me the power threader (similar >> >to what HomeDespot has now). ;-) >> >> I never saw a power threader operate. > >Get thee down to the HomeDespot and wait around. It's an amazing >beast. I don't think they even charge for it, Huh...I've been giving them quite a bit of money lately. I don't remember seeing nor hearing something like that. Although one does need a horse to get around that place. I'll try to find it next time I need to make a contribution to them. They were the only ones who had 1"x1"x42" A/C sponge stuff at this time of year. And they weren't charging $5/packet. >though the last >timeI used black pipe for anything other than clamps was, ><mumble>... <GRIN> Do I dare ask? > >> > Ah well, the die wasn't all that >> >hard to use. One just had to make sure it was square with the pipe >> >before one started cutting. >> >> The one that was hard to use moved in a ratchet manner and >> had only one handle. The easy one had two handles with the >> threading cutters in the middle. > >Hmm, the big one with the single handle was easier for me. One had >to make sure it was square though. Oh, yes. I still can remember what Dad would say when the thread was off a tad. > Getting it set up was a matter >of adjusting all the widgets on the die handle. I don't remember changing stuff like that. Maybe Dad that. > >> IIRC, it had a lot of "holes" >> you could pipes in to. But I don't remember how Dad chose >> which holes to use. > >Likely based on the size of the pipe. ;-) I thought about that. I'm not sure that was all it was. It seems like there was something else. I do remember seeing Dad try one hole then decide to use another one. > >> What was your project? > >I built a wind-powered land cruiser (think ice-boat with wheels). Kewl. >It was marginally successful. I really didn't have enough space to >use it. ...and it turned out to be quite heavy. Lotsa education >though. What state were you in? Did you have a hill to get a jumpstart? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 17 Nov 2006 07:15 In article <455B25BF.2BE7B527(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>>So, the insurance based model is broken is it not ? >> >>>> >> >>>> It is now since the HMOs have become the preferred payers. >> >>> >> >>>An NHS would cure that. >> >> >> >> No, it would not. What Hillary was planning was a worse case. >> > >> >Two distinct sentences yet you imply an A means B relationship. >> > >> >An NHS _would_ solve the problem you have with HMOs. Whatever Hillary was >> >planning is not relevant. >> >> It is relavant because that's what the US would end up with. > >That's your presumption. > >You probably have a point in that vested interests won't want to give up their >profits easily. Whilst that attitude is tolerated, little progress is indeed >likely to be made. > >Which is why an 'American NHS' would need stong leadership to push it through. You still do not understand how the US works. Would it be possible to push your UK approach through the EU and have all members accept it? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 17 Nov 2006 07:18 In article <6gH6h.25564$TV3.23860(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ejf56j$8qk_003(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <5hk6h.25029$TV3.4028(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>, >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:ejccrn$8ss_006(a)s858.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <BN06h.5439$IR4.708(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, >>>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:45586F70.5FF100EE(a)hotmail.com... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >Finding the right thing that's profitable isn't always that easy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is easy. People around here charge $50 for 15 minutes' worth >>>>>>> of housecleaning and they get it. >>>>>> >>>>>> They do ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm sure they wouldn't here. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>It's certainly not the norm in the US. It might be $50, (I've heard >>>>>smaller >>>>>number, in the $30 - $40 range) but it's not for 15 minutes >>>>>work--typically >>>>>it is for cleaning a whole house, which, including vacuuming, mopping, >>>>>cleaning the loo, is probably more like an hour or two. >>>> >>>> I have a 4-room house. If one is healthy, it takes 15 minutes to do >>>> the usual cleaning. >>> >>>Once again, we see extrapolation of barely relevant experience well beyond >>>the bounds of extrapolability. >>> >>>1) I'm sure that anybody that pays $50 to have their house cleaned has >>>more >>>than a 4 room house. >> >> And you would be wrong. There is a minimum charge around here. > >OK, let me put it another way. Nobody who owns a 4-room house is going to >pay $50 to get their house cleaned. Then you are wrong. I did. > > >>>2) I'm sure that anybody that pays $50 to have their house cleaned has >>>higher standards of cleanliness than 15 minutes to clean 4 rooms. >> >> You would be wrong. > >Evidence, please. I can't give it to you because you do not accept real events as facts. > > >>> I have a >>>8 room house, and it takes about 2 hours to clean it if I word very fast >>>(it >>>takes the Missus about 4 hours when she does it). When I've lived in 4 >>>room >>>houses in the past, it took about an hour. >> >> You must have had rugs in all of them to take that long to clean. > >No, nothing more than vacuuming. That takes about an hour to do the whole >house. Then there's mopping, dusting, and cleaning the bathrooms. That >takes about another hour. You work slow. <snip mule emulation> /BAH
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 07:33 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> >>>>>So, the insurance based model is broken is it not ? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> It is now since the HMOs have become the preferred payers. > >> >>> > >> >>>An NHS would cure that. > >> >> > >> >> No, it would not. What Hillary was planning was a worse case. > >> > > >> >Two distinct sentences yet you imply an A means B relationship. > >> > > >> >An NHS _would_ solve the problem you have with HMOs. Whatever Hillary was > >> >planning is not relevant. > >> > >> It is relavant because that's what the US would end up with. > > > >That's your presumption. > > > >You probably have a point in that vested interests won't want to give up > >their profits easily. Whilst that attitude is tolerated, little progress is > indeed > >likely to be made. > > > >Which is why an 'American NHS' would need stong leadership to push it > through. > > You still do not understand how the US works. Would it be > possible to push your UK approach through the EU and have > all members accept it? It's hardly needed since the member countries have decent arrangements of their own already. I recognise it may not be easy to deak with the issue in the USA but that's not a reason to not even try. The best place to start is by examining the idea seriously ! Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 17 Nov 2006 07:32
In article <455C7D99.31AFC7B2(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: >> >> >Our society is better than that, I think. >> >> My folks didn't ask those questions. When we were sick we >> went to the doctor. The Doc would take payment in chickens >> or produce or something. > >I don't think they take chickens anymore ! That's because doctoring is no longer a small business. /BAH |