From: Brian M. Scott on
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 20:25:49 +1300, PaulJK
<paul.kriha(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in
<news:hmiebh$u3$1(a)news.eternal-september.org> in
sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english:

> Brian M. Scott wrote:

>> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:23:39 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <grammatim(a)verizon.net> wrote in
>> <news:5e098d02-5018-444d-b31f-d21303931f38(a)t20g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>
>> sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english:

[...]

>>> "State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state'

>> Horsefeathers.

>>> because it is serving a different, much more salient
>>> function not only in the US, but also in (at least)
>>> Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany.

>> Not really: the usual term is <(Bundes)land>, though the
>> L�nder can also be termed Glied- or Teilstaaten. Better
>> examples would be Australia and India.

> Perhaps, Australia is not a perfect example either.

Very likely not, but at least it really *does* have states!
(That's all that I actually meant.)

[...]

Brian
From: Peter T. Daniels on
On Mar 2, 9:56 am, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...(a)hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes:
> > On Mar 1, 11:28 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenb...(a)hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> >> California punts on the question, just giving the date (except,
> >> interestingly, for Thanksgiving):
>
> >> Cal. Gov. Code 19853. (a) All state employees shall be
> >> entitled to the following holidays: January 1, the third Monday
> >> in January, the third Monday in February, March 31, the last
> >> Monday in May, July 4, the first Monday in September, November
> >> 11, Thanksgiving Day, the day after Thanksgiving, December 25,
> >> the day chosen by an employee pursuant to Section 19854, and
> >> every day appointed by the Governor of this state for a public
> >> fast, thanksgiving, or holiday.
>
> >> but the Department of Personnel Administration apparently calls it
> >> "Presidents Birthday".
>
> >>http://www.dpa.ca.gov/personnel-policies/holidays.htm
>
> > So only people born on the third Monday in February can be President
> > of California?
>
> > What happened on March 31?
>
> C sar Ch vez was born.
>
> > Why couldn't they say "the fourth Thursday and Friday of November"?
>
> What makes you think they couldn't?  A better question would be "Why
> didn't they?"

What makes you think that "Why couldn't they?" isn't a perfectly
normal way to ask that question?
From: Skitt on
PaulJK wrote:

[snip]
> BTW, when I was growing up in my old family's home we had
> a room thermometer with a C scale on one side and R scale
> on the other. When I asked my mum what was the R scale
> for, she said: "Oh, they are some Reomírs, don't worry
> about them."

Same for me (in Latvia) about the scales, and yes, it was Reomīrs.
--
Skitt (AmE)

From: Transfer Principle on
On Mar 1, 9:42 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote:
> > but the Department of Personnel Administration apparently calls it
> > "Presidents Birthday".
> >    http://www.dpa.ca.gov/personnel-policies/holidays.htm
> So only people born on the third Monday in February can be President
> of California?

In yet another attempt to bring this thread back on the
original topic (the Usher calendar reform proposal):

Yes, the only official name of the mid-February federal
holiday is Washington's Birthday. As was pointed out
earlier in the thread, Washington's Birthday can never
fall on his actual birthday (which was February 22nd
Gregorian, though when Washington was born Britain and
its colonies were still on the Julian calendar).

Many school districts take off two Mondays in February,
one each for Lincoln and Washington. (They can afford
to do this since the school year consists of only 180
days, not ~250 work days like most businesses.) Usually,
the first one is called "Lincoln's Birthday," while the
second is called "Presidents' Day." This year, however,
a certain local school district decided to take off
February 15th and 22nd, calling the former "Presidents'
Day" and the latter "Washington's Birthday" -- since it
falls on the actual date of his birthday.

Notice that in the Usher reform plan, the federal
holiday would fall in the February 16th-22nd range,
rather than the current 15th-21st range. Thus the
Usher Washington's Birthday can actually fall on
Washington's birthday, unlike the current holiday.

Moving from California to Louisiana, it was pointed
out that many Louisianans take Shrove Tuesday (i.e.,
Mardi Gras) off. But this is awkward since after the
weekend of Saturday and Sunday, there's a single day
of work on Monday before the Tuesday holiday. In the
Usher plan, Mardi Gras, being 47 days before the
Usher Easter (April 5th-11th), would fall in the
February 17th-23rd range -- in other words, it's
always one day after Usher Wasington's Birthday. So
Louisianans would always have a full four-day weekend
under the Usher plan (Sat-Sun-Washington-Mardi Gras).

> What happened on March 31?

I believe someone else already answered this by saying
that it's the birthday of labor leader Cesar Chavez.

Notice that the two major public university systems in
California (UC and CSU) no longer tie their spring
breaks to Easter (as is traditional). Instead, spring
break in these two university systems is now the week
that contains Chavez Day. This reflects a current trend
across the nation (and possibly the globe) of having
spring break appear at a fixed point in the term,
rather than tied to Easter with its five-week swing.

Under the Usher plan, Easter appears at a fixed point
in the term, and so many schools and universities might
return to having spring break contain Easter if we were
to use the Usher plan. I'm not sure what California
would do, since the latest Usher Easter is eleven days
after Chavez Day. Of course, since Washington's Birthday
isn't always on February 22nd, Chavez's Birthday need
not always be observed on March 31st. The observed
holiday might fall on the Monday after Palm Sunday, so
that the spring break can always include both Chavez
Day and Holy Week.
From: Nick on
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> writes:

> On 3/2/2010 4:38 AM, Lewis wrote:

[nothing I wasn't going to snip]

Look everybody - it's Lewis and Clark(e)!

(sorry guys)
--
Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu
Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk