foraker

The balkanization of CC.com begins.... I always reckoned I got into college because of the 'encouraging geographical diversity' criterion.

http://www.smartwater.com/products/antiIntruder.html

Put some nice shrubbery in the middle and Bob's your uncle.

At Backcountry.com Go here. Use coupon code: X6-1-C064M to lower sale price from $274.95 to $218.75. I was just a bad husband. Since my current cams are 12 years old, I figure it's easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission. ;-)

We are unworthy of your fulsome praise.

Currently masticating Marc Reisner's excellent Cadillac Desert: The American West and it's Disappearing Water . Definitely on my 'Better Late than Never' list.

“Pride is pleasure arising from a man's thinking too highly of himself.” -Spinoza

"Road rage has a new name. In a report published in the June Archives of General Psychiatry University of Chicago psychiatry chief Emil Coccaro suggests that one in 20 Americans may suffer from intermittent explosive disorder, characterized by uncontrollable anger and unjustifiably violent outbursts." intermittent explosive disorder? hmmmm..... I ntermittent E xplosive D isorder

you must be gettin' your internets through pipes.

Hey! Peterbilts are the trucks of peace! WHo says math isn't useful in real life?

The individuals are being held accountable by their poor health and, in many cases, death. Is the fine dispropotionate to the offense? I don't know. Personally, I despise smoking but it seems odd for the state to be fining an industry for a vice it profits from. I wonder how much of that money actually ended up going towards public health. PRobably not a lot. Probably disappeared into 'the general fund'. One question, the state also benefits from liquor sales which clearly have many deleterious health consequences. "Everyone knows" liquor is bad for you. Are you saying it's not the same for cigarettes? If it is, why hasn't anyone gone after the liquor companies and the beer brewers?

Oh, great. All we need now is *more* people not looking at the road while they're driving....

And here I was thinking we were talking about people *today* showing a lack of personal responsibility, despite labels saying "Hey! Fuckwit! These things will kill you!". Even with the labels, surveys have basically said that even with that knowledge, there are plenty of people who don't care. I would be interested to know if, before the labels appeared in 1969, if smoking was really bad for you was common knowledge.

I don't know, do you reckon your average Fremontian starts hyperventilating while contemplating crossing 520? And why would *anyone* need to leave Pasco?

Reminds me of this girl I knew who, leaving for the Irkutsk region for a month of field work, took one suitcase full of clothes and another full of chocolate..... This kind of discussion reminds me of a book I once read where the main characters lived for a time in a place where no drugs of any sort were illegal. The only caveat was that you also paid for your own health insurance so if didn't have the means to bail yourself out if things got bad, you kinda died. According to the author, this encouraged people to be self-limiting and more aware of the consequences of the addictions. An intriguing idea but the initial stages of setting up such a system might be a bit messy (especially given the tendency of people here to wail "Why didn't somebody DO something?!")

No sun required That said, I have an iSun (pre-Coleman) that I picked up off eBay, for about $30.

Seattle: City of Glamour. Just doesn't scan does it?

This discussion reminds me of the myth of the Western American who swaddles himself/herself in a coat of rugged individualism to hide the pale white underbelly fed by federal subsidies. A perfect example is, of course, all the (mostly stupid) hydroelectric projects in the West that were largely paid for by easterners. My home state of Alaska still sucks mightily at the government teat, despite the mystical (some might say musky) air of the individualistic Alaskan man. Back in the day, Anchorage was famous for not having the money to fix its main roads (quickly gutted by all the geniuses using studded tires) because the citizenry wouldn't allow them to raise the money to do so. As it was told to me, the city would then apply to the feds for emergency funds to fix the roads. Yes, get the rest of the country to pay for roads you're responsible for. Lather, rinse, repeat. What's best for taxpayers is rarely an issue in large projects, it seems. The overriding concern is the prestige of politicians and the financial interests of contractors. Neither do they always seem to make economic sense (see, again, western dams). Theoretically, the best economic solution might be to close the port of Seattle and let Tacoma handle the traffic. Political power/presitige and the economic interests of contractors, however, would never allow that to happen even though it might be the 'best' solution. Having seen how well Boston has done with the oversight of it's Big Dig and how SF has fared with the new span to the East Bay, I'd be more than a little concerned that any money spent on a fancy solution like a tunnel would be good money thrown into a crumbling choss pile. Anyway, the only solution we'll likely see is many community input meetings, lots of hand wringing, and eventually a big truck pulls up with lots of duct tape and some bibles.

Which explains their continuing proclivity to eat deep-fried fat and to vote for thieves, lawyers, and userers to represent them in DC.

I see the snark is still firmly in place. I have no particular problem with keeping a tight reign on government spending, F. Neither do I have a problem with being taxed to make sure we have adequate infrastructure, protection of environment, and some help for those who need it. Surely, the state's tax revenues should be based solely on it's actual need for those revenues, I agree. However, barring some fundamental change in character in those who 'serve' us in city/state/national capitols, you'll find that hard to do accomplish. Furthermore, you'll have to overcome the complacency of the average 'voter'. I will disagree with you on the issue of California's prop 13, which hasn't really worked out that well for them. In your mom's example, one can imagine her living in her home so long that her property taxes no longer cover the actual expense of providing them...thus she is subsidized by everyone else. To be honest, I think there are a number of fundamental structural problems with the way government finances itself and is run and, furthermore, I have little trust in either the D's or the R's to solve them. And yet I find myself unwilling to embrace the entire libertarian line. There are too many things, beyond , say, national defense, where government, however imperfect, has a role that is preferable (mostly) to the 'private enterprise solution'. So, all I can say is mom should probably do more than just vote and complain. Nothing like a little voter apathy to make sure nothing happens. Anyway, feel free to continue to label me as a socialist if you want. It's a free country. Not necessarily a smart country, but a free one.

Forgetting, of course, that real estate speculation and demand are what push up property values and thus property taxes.....unless you happen to vote for bond issues that push up your property taxes or don't vote to put an actual dollar value limit on your taxes..... I feel for your mom but people down in Pierce county are more a victim of free market speculation and simple demand than anything, just like people in Seattle are.