c'mon Johan, tell us how you really feel

Bill C wrote:
Jonathan v.d. Sluis wrote:
"Bill C" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jonathan v.d. Sluis wrote:
"Bill C" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jonathan v.d. Sluis wrote:
"Raptor" wrote in message
...
Marlene Blanshay wrote:

I think it's also that they don't have to work two jobs and
scramble
to
pay doctor bills, as health care is universal. That may sound like
a
little thing, but i see how many americans scramble to pay bills
when
someone gets sick. God help you if you have some low paying minimum
wage
job.

By contrast, Amerikans work twice as hard and pay comparable taxes
with
none of that stuff cradle-to-grave stuff. But we've got this great
big
cool army, so we don't get ****ed on like France and other socialist
euros. Instead, we get ****ed off.

France does not have a socialist government, unless I am very
mistaken.


Choices & priorities. Frankly, as the years go by those euro-pussies
are
looking a hell of a lot more comfortable than I.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall

Conservative dictionary:
Judicial Activist: n. A judge who tends to rule against your wishes.

Let's see State owned industry, mostly centrally planned economy,

'Mostly'...well, that's one way to put it. With such vagueness you can
convince anyone. France has a free market, it's not a planned economy
with
five-year plans or such. And they don't have a socialist government.In
fact
I'd be hard pressed to call it a socialist state even if the socialist
party
had a majority in parliament.

cradle to grave government net no matter how little you contributepaid
for by income redistribution.

Yes, everyone is rich there because the government gives people money.
And
they steal it from the rightful owners, ofcourse.

I don't know how much welfare you can receive in France, but there is
poverty there, too, so it's probably not much. Perhaps about the same as
here in the Netherlands, where there is no such thing as 'cradle to grave
government'.

I'd say that France has a socialist
system that has been democratically chosen, and now they are paying the
bill for it.

I'd say you don't know what you're talking about.
Obviously I don't and neither do my family members who have lived in
and around Paris for a couple of centuries.

Perhaps one of the Sans Culottes in your family can explain what a
conservative party is.

[snipped low content/rant ratio drivel]
This might be a real stretch for you, but it doesn't matter what they
call themselves, it's what they do. Here's a perfect example for you:
http://www.korea-dpr.com/
They call themselves The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. Do you
see anything resembling a democracy or republic happening in N. Korea?
I sure haven't.
Here's a piece commenting on the EU in general being unable
economically to support it's socialist policies, and the outrage coming
from the people who have been carried along by the system based on
socialist policies when the governments can no longer afford them.
Even you're "conservative" parties aren't conservative, barring the
nutcases parties. IMO our disagreement is based on the position of the
observer. What I would see as being very socialist as a ibertarian
type, you might very well see as conservative because it's less
socialist than what you are used to. IMO just about all the countries
in western Europe are fairly socialist, as is Canada. France in
particular due to it's economic policies:

From http://encarta.msn.com/text_761568934___24/France.html

Successive French governments have encouraged varying levels of
intervention in the economy, including state ownership and control of
key industries. In 1982 the Socialist-led government of president
François Mitterrand initiated a program of extensive nationalization.
At the peak of this program, 13 of the 20 largest firms in France were
owned by the state. The election of a center-right parliamentary
majority in 1986, however, led to a reduction of state ownership.
During the 1990s and early 2000s, the government continued the process
of privatization, selling off a variety of state-owned enterprises and
reducing its holdings in others. Despite these measures, the public
sector as a share of GDP remains higher in France than in any other
country to adopt the euro. In addition, France's progress in opening
its domestic markets to foreign competition as required by the EU,
especially in the energy sector, has been slow, inviting criticism and
legal challenges from the EU.
If all those things I've brought up aren't socialist I don't know what
is.
Bill C
Here's a piece on the painful transition they are starting to make:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4184155.stm
Here's another piece:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4305456.stm
Bill C

"Bill C" wrote in message
oups.com...

This might be a real stretch for you, but it doesn't matter what they
call themselves, it's what they do. Here's a perfect example for you:
http://www.korea-dpr.com/
They call themselves The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. Do you
see anything resembling a democracy or republic happening in N. Korea?
I sure haven't.

With such reasoning, I don't even need to add anything for your statements
to look ridiculous.

I can see you've taken to responding to yourself. Have fun, I've had my
laugh.

In article . com,
"amit" wrote:

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

no one would argue the reason why the spanish are better GT riders than
the belgians is because of some overarching difference between spanish
and belgian society.

No? Danny Coyle's book "Lance Armstrong's War" muses on the surprising
number of very successful riders from hardscrabble upbringings. Perhaps
the issue is that Belgium is a happy and prosperous country, while Spain
has only recently emerged from its role as one of the poorest countries
in western Europe.

the counter to that is why are the spanish so lousy in the classics
compared to the belgians ?

And the answer to that is "cultural imperatives." Or to put it another
way, the Spanish mostly don't care about the classics, and if a rider
was even marginally disposed towards becoming a GT racer or a climber, I
daresay he would opt for the latter rather than the former.

And why are the Iberians naturally disposed to mountains, while the
Netherlanders prefer the flat one-day races? Well, it's no secret the
classics favor the big men, and the Dutch are the biggest men in Europe.

http://www.oberlin.edu/alummag/oamcu...ay99/tall.html

This is pure speculation, but I bet the Belgians are a lot closer in
average height to the Dutch than the Spanish.

None of this precludes the coming of another outlier like Miguel
Indurain, tall by any standards, but the fact that this Spaniard chose
to focus on the GTs rather than become a Classics rider probably says it
all.

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article . com,
"amit" wrote:

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

no one would argue the reason why the spanish are better GT riders than
the belgians is because of some overarching difference between spanish
and belgian society.

No? Danny Coyle's book "Lance Armstrong's War" muses on the surprising
number of very successful riders from hardscrabble upbringings. Perhaps
the issue is that Belgium is a happy and prosperous country, while Spain
has only recently emerged from its role as one of the poorest countries
in western Europe.

the counter to that is why are the spanish so lousy in the classics
compared to the belgians ?

And the answer to that is "cultural imperatives." Or to put it another
way, the Spanish mostly don't care about the classics, and if a rider
was even marginally disposed towards becoming a GT racer or a climber, I
daresay he would opt for the latter rather than the former.

And why are the Iberians naturally disposed to mountains, while the
Netherlanders prefer the flat one-day races? Well, it's no secret the
classics favor the big men, and the Dutch are the biggest men in Europe.

http://www.oberlin.edu/alummag/oamcu...ay99/tall.html

This is pure speculation, but I bet the Belgians are a lot closer in
average height to the Dutch than the Spanish.

I don't believe that. When i'm in Holland it always surprises me how
tall most of them are in comparison to here in Belgium. I'm only 1m74
so i defenitely notice when i'm among tall people (it gets dark). And
that's not (that often) the case over here. IMO another difference is
the fact that many dutch people are not only tall but also extremely
thin (just check out the dutch riders Weening, Dekker, Boogerd who are
less muscled than let's says Boonen, Van Petegem or Museeuw). We,
Belgians, don't have that characteristic very often due to our
Burgundian way of life. I believe dutch people are more similar to
german people in terms of physical features (blond, blue eyes). And
you can see that their athletes (like Germans) do a lot better on
international level while most of us really suck.

And I don't believe that there is a rule that says classics are more in
favour for big men. There are a lot of classic kings that don't reach
1m80. On the top of my head: Van Petegem, Tchmil, Bartoli, Bettini,
Maertens, Godefroot,...
Even for the GT's the rule is doubtful: Basso, Indurain, Ullrich, Riis
e.g. are quite tall. I think the type of musculature has a larger
impact then the length on what type of rider you are. Basso and Boonen
are both tall but Boonen's thighs are twice as large as Basso's. Van
Petegem and Simoni are both smaller but Simoni fits twice in PVP.

Also the dutch size hasn't resulted in better classics achievements in
comparison to GT's. There were Raas, Van der Poel, Knetemann, Dekker
and Boogerd against Zoetemelk, Janssen, Breukink, Rooks and Kuiper (OK,
Rooks and Kuiper were all rounders). I think that's quite equal.

I don't know how Spanish village historically developped but over here
people built their house around the church tower. That's why a lot of
villages here have a pattern of concentric circles with the church as
centre. Resulting in a lot of communities separated from each other.
I don't know why cycling was already popular in the early 20th century
but on certain occasions (e.g. ecclesial feastdays, yes people were
still catholic back then) races where held around the "church tower".
It was a social happening, hence the criteriums or "Kermesses". Hence
the belgian tradition of one day racing.

Kenny