Biker Killed by Mountain Lion

Edward Dolan wrote:

...
I suspect everything you say above is true, but I know how to handle
bikes with tender loving care an I know how to fix something before it
becomes broken. Nothing ever seems to wear out on my bikes except
chains and tires. If a component part breaks or needs replacement, I
can just go to my local hardware store and get a cheap replacement. I
am only talking about street bikes. Mountain bikes are for trails and
off-trail use - and I never do that sort of thing. I have got hiking
boots for that.

A very large percentage of the bicycle shaped objects sold by mass
merchandisers bear a strong resemblance to real mountain bikes. They are
even advertised at times as being mountain bikes. Therefore, it is not
unreasonable to consider how well they would work under off-road
conditions. The answer is; poorly enough that the $500 bicycle at the
LBS is a better value for the money than the $50 bicycle shaped object
if off-road use is an objective.

I have never been able to figure out how complete bicycles can be sold
for as little as around $50. (when on sale) at the local discount
stores. It seems like they are just giving them away.

One answer is here [1]. The other answer is in the low wages and
benefits paid by the mass merchandisers to their employees.

[1]
http://www.nlcnet.org/campaigns/archive/chinareport/huffybikesdoc.shtml.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Edward Dolan wrote:
...
It's the Bush/Cheney administration, or do you believe that the
Vice-President is actually the President.

By his own public admission, G. W. Bush does not read or watch the news
by relies on his advisors to inform him. He is also known for his lack
of intellectual curiosity, and his non-scripted speaking shows a rather
poor grasp of issues. It is no great leap to determine that those around
him manipulate him with respect to policy (without him realizing it). He
is little more than a figurehead for the powers that be in the
Republican Party (the same powers that decided well before the 2000
primaries that he would be the Republican nominee, and pulled out all
the stops to defeat John McCain). It is public knowledge that the head
of his vice-presidential selection committee, Dick Cheney chose himself.
It is not hard to determine who is really responsible for policy.

In most of the world, the holders of capital are perfectly willing to
let much of the population live in abject poverty.


Yes, Saddam Hussein, the holder of most of his country's capital, was
more than willing to let practically everyone live in abject poverty
except for his particular tribe. But more than that, he was also
perfectly willing to kill several hundred thousand of his own
population - more or less for sport. He also delighted in warfare and
killed many more hundreds of thousands while so engaged. Compare that
with your typical capitalist plutocrat.

Like the ones in the US military-industrial complex that supported the
killing of 2,000,000+ Vietnamese and Cambodians?

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Edward Dolan wrote:

All my very cheap bicycles go back at least 20 years and are street
bikes (10-speeds). It would never even occur to me to ride them
off-road.

If you go to any mass merchandise store, you will see many bicycle
shaped objects that resemble mountain bikes, but are unlikely to see
anything resembling a road bike. It has been this way for about 15 years.

I have never been able to figure out how complete bicycles can be sold
for as little as around $50. (when on sale) at the local discount
stores. It seems like they are just giving them away.

One answer is here [1]. The other answer is in the low wages and
benefits paid by the mass merchandisers to their employees.

[1]
http://www.nlcnet.org/campaigns/archive/chinareport/huffybikesdoc.shtml.


That makes for very depressing reading to say the least. And I thought
I was overworked and underpaid when I was in the Navy! I do not know
what we can do about China's problems though. They will have to work
it out among themselves. Another communist revolution is of course not
the answer. I think in order to have a welfare state you have got to
have a certain amount of wealth to begin with. Most third world
nations simply don't have the wealth. All they have is a surplus of
people unfortunately.

Mainland China has moved rather seamlessly from a centralized command
economy [1] to fascism. It remains to be seen if the rapid economic
growth there will improve living standards, or (combined with India)
prove to be such a drain on the world's natural resources that it will
hasten worldwide ecological and economic collapse.

As for our local Wal-Marts, it is unskilled labor (clerks primarily)
and no one should plan on working in that kind of place for more than
a few years. I would imagine the employee turnover there reflects that
attitude.

Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the US, and appears to be typical of
future jobs in this country. The pressure of competition and the removal
of trade barriers combined with modern communications is leading the
race to the bottom, where even educated people with graduate degrees in
the US can expect to work for less than what blue collar factory workers
made on the average 30 years ago.

[1] I will not call it communism, since it is far from what Marx envisioned.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Edward Dolan wrote:

Tom Sherman wrote in message ...


Edward Dolan wrote:

...
It's the Bush/Cheney administration, or do you believe that the
Vice-President is actually the President.

By his own public admission, G. W. Bush does not read or watch the news
by relies on his advisors to inform him. He is also known for his lack
of intellectual curiosity, and his non-scripted speaking shows a rather
poor grasp of issues. It is no great leap to determine that those around
him manipulate him with respect to policy (without him realizing it). He
is little more than a figurehead for the powers that be in the
Republican Party (the same powers that decided well before the 2000
primaries that he would be the Republican nominee, and pulled out all
the stops to defeat John McCain). It is public knowledge that the head
of his vice-presidential selection committee, Dick Cheney chose himself.
It is not hard to determine who is really responsible for policy.


Nothing you say in the above paragraph makes any sense to me at all.
No one in this country can ever becomes President without being an
extremely smart person. Furthermore, once they become President they
will act the role fully. You are conspiratorially inclined in your
thinking. Be careful about that as it can lead to paranoia!

Think of elections in the US as a form of "reality TV combined with a
new product introduction, and it will become obvious that intelligence
in a candidate is not really necessary if he/she is marketed properly.

For more direct evidence compare the scripted speaking of G. W. Bush
with his un-scripted speaking (and it will become clear why his advisors
shield him from the press so much). He is a rather good actor with
sufficient rehearsal time (this also worked very well for R. W. Reagan).

I think Scott is right in that you do not argue fairly. The topic that
I responded to was your statement on "holders of capital". I pointed
out that others behave this very same way (Saddam Hussein) and are
infinitely worse in other ways (killers and murderers). You needed to
address that by either agreeing with me or disagreeing with me about
what I had just said. Instead, you take off on another tack entirely.

To answer your new tack would take us in yet another direction. You
are constantly deflecting from the point under discussion when you
know you are weak. Yet, you know how to stay on point when you are
strong. You do not argue fairly.

The question for me of course is do I take you up on all your
deflections off the point. If I do so, I am playing your game with
your rules. It is intellectually untidy for me to do this and so I
will only do it on occasion when it amuses me to do it. Right now, I
do not care to get into a discussion of totalitarian communist regimes
vs. democratic capitalist regimes (which is what your tail end comment
calls for).

You need to concentrate more on your thinking and less on your writing
(which is as good as I have ever seen on any newsgroup).

This is Usenet, not a formal debate. I will use any tactics I see fit.
If people do not like them, I suggest that they refrain from posting
off-topic right wing political opinion - by doing so I will have no
reason to post off-topic political material.

It is rather humorous for Mr. Dolan to complain about this, since he
answers criticism of Zionism with accusations of being anti-Semitic
(this is also humorous, since the average Palestinian is of much greater
percentage of Semitic descent than the average Israeli Jew). Personal
attacks are the last refuge of those who do not have an answer to
arguments presented.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Edward Dolan wrote:
...
It will probably do both, but I am not planning on living long enough
to see how it will all end. However, since in your world view
everything tends toward fascism, maybe you should try to understand
why this is the case. Maybe it has something to do with our numan
natures. Or is it just that there are villains everywhere?...

It is in the nature of some people to want to have power over others.
The system does not really matter; it can be fascism, feudalism,
oligarchy, theocracy, plutocracy, etc. Often systems change names
without really changing the fundamentals; e.g. China from Imperial rule,
to the Nationalists, to the Communists, and the current trend towards
neo-fascism.

Democracy is an attempt to restrain the worst excesses of those with
avarice for power. How well it will work in the long run is a yet
unanswered question.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Dear readers,

As you may have noticed, these boardless chess games can go on indefinitely
with no winner ever declared. This one is not yet a record but might be
getting close. The best outcome, (for us) is that one player tires of the
game and withdraws. ( My money would be on Tom.) The other possibility is
that the game continues until a player expires. ( In this case the smart
money would be on Ed.)

Stay tuned for the not too exciting conclusion.....





"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
...
It will probably do both, but I am not planning on living long enough
to see how it will all end. However, since in your world view
everything tends toward fascism, maybe you should try to understand
why this is the case. Maybe it has something to do with our numan
natures. Or is it just that there are villains everywhere?...

It is in the nature of some people to want to have power over others.
The system does not really matter; it can be fascism, feudalism,
oligarchy, theocracy, plutocracy, etc. Often systems change names
without really changing the fundamentals; e.g. China from Imperial rule,
to the Nationalists, to the Communists, and the current trend towards
neo-fascism.

Democracy is an attempt to restrain the worst excesses of those with
avarice for power. How well it will work in the long run is a yet
unanswered question.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Killfile both. Works like a charm.

"Jack Davis" skrev i en meddelelse =
y.com...
Dear readers,
=20
As you may have noticed, these boardless chess games can go on =
indefinitely
with no winner ever declared. This one is not yet a record but might =
be
getting close. The best outcome, (for us) is that one player tires =
of the
game and withdraws. ( My money would be on Tom.) The other =
possibility is
that the game continues until a player expires. ( In this case the =
smart
money would be on Ed.)
=20
Stay tuned for the not too exciting conclusion.....
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
...
It will probably do both, but I am not planning on living long =
enough
to see how it will all end. However, since in your world view
everything tends toward fascism, maybe you should try to =
understand
why this is the case. Maybe it has something to do with our numan
natures. Or is it just that there are villains everywhere?...

It is in the nature of some people to want to have power over =
others.
The system does not really matter; it can be fascism, feudalism,
oligarchy, theocracy, plutocracy, etc. Often systems change names
without really changing the fundamentals; e.g. China from Imperial =
rule,
to the Nationalists, to the Communists, and the current trend =
towards
neo-fascism.

Democracy is an attempt to restrain the worst excesses of those with
avarice for power. How well it will work in the long run is a yet
unanswered question.

--=20
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

=20
=20

In article , says...
Killfile both. Works like a charm.

"Jack Davis" skrev i en meddelelse y.com...
Dear readers,

But then do you killfile the posters with OT commentary about OT posts.

Soon there would be no one left but me and thee (And you are already on my watch list).

--

Cletus D. Lee
Bacchetta Giro
Lightning Voyager
http://www.clee.org
- Bellaire, TX USA -

Hehehe. The cold weather is about over, so I imagine that may put an end to
it. Cherry blossoms are just around the corner...

--
--Scott
"Jack Davis" wrote in message
y.com...
Dear readers,

As you may have noticed, these boardless chess games can go on
indefinitely
with no winner ever declared. This one is not yet a record but might be
getting close. The best outcome, (for us) is that one player tires of
the
game and withdraws. ( My money would be on Tom.) The other possibility is
that the game continues until a player expires. ( In this case the smart
money would be on Ed.)

Stay tuned for the not too exciting conclusion.....





"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Edward Dolan wrote:
...
It will probably do both, but I am not planning on living long enough
to see how it will all end. However, since in your world view
everything tends toward fascism, maybe you should try to understand
why this is the case. Maybe it has something to do with our numan
natures. Or is it just that there are villains everywhere?...

It is in the nature of some people to want to have power over others.
The system does not really matter; it can be fascism, feudalism,
oligarchy, theocracy, plutocracy, etc. Often systems change names
without really changing the fundamentals; e.g. China from Imperial rule,
to the Nationalists, to the Communists, and the current trend towards
neo-fascism.

Democracy is an attempt to restrain the worst excesses of those with
avarice for power. How well it will work in the long run is a yet
unanswered question.

--
Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

Soon there would be no one left but me and thee (And you are already =
on my watch list).=20

Boo ****ing hoo