An interesting analogy / point: all the men in my family are laborers. They are lobstermen, electricians, and carpenters. All of them enjoy their work and have always been happy to pass on their skills to me. However, none of them wanted me to grow up in their shoes. I wanted to become a carpenter when I was younger because I enjoyed pounding nails, etc. I was very likely influenced by watching the men in my family get up and go to work. There was something admirable in what they were doing, and thus I wanted to be like them. My father, upon hearing this, set out to convince me that there were better opportunities in life. His argumetn was that their lives wre good lives, but also hard ones that they'd rather their children not be required to take on.
John Adams measured progress in much the same way: I study politics and war that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy in order to give their children a right to study painting poetry and music.
Economic progress goes as such: agriculture to industry to service to management to investment to competition, with competition being the point where the quality of life is relatively the same everywhere regardless of nationality. What John Adams was saying is that he does the hard work so that future generations can become more enlightened. Enlightenment leads to better lives.
It is my opinion that better lives deserve to be lived everywhere. We may not be in a position to happily state that work conditions are the same in the developing world as they are in the developed world today, but we are in a position to state that work conditions are better in the developing world today than they were yesterday, and will continue to improve en masse over the years as we generally improve our lives overall. This is less about current comparability (though it certainly adds and improves the debate), but more about progress instead.
Uhggg. You just convinced me that at least one of my children should be a soldier, as much as I don't really want that.
Wow, what do you do?
I'm a soldier.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
I support our soliders (not the war, there is a difference)
Maybe not as big a difference as you think.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
, but I wouldn't want to be one.
That's exactly the problem we're discussing isn't it?
First off, hoorah for massive thread drift.
Secondly, is that the problem? Isn't it a choice to be a soldier or not? A choice to serve and protect, or to......well, be lazy and protected? It's still a choice.
Thirdly, I support the soldiers gladly, and I support the war in Afghanistan. But I never did and never will support the war in Iraq. You know, the illegal one. I believe that perhaps 20 or 30 years down the line Iraq might have a functional self-sufficient democracy. I also believe that democracy is a good thing, especially when a country is ruled by a psychopathic tyrant. I also believe that we invaded Iraq not to instill democracy, but to fulfill the delusions of a madman who stole 2 elections in a row. The retarded son of a rich man, with a cocaine problem, who has made a mockery of our constitution.
I support our soldiers, but not the Iraq war. I don't believe that these concepts are mutually exclusive.
An interesting analogy / point: all the men in my family are laborers. They are lobstermen, electricians, and carpenters. All of them enjoy their work and have always been happy to pass on their skills to me. However, none of them wanted me to grow up in their shoes. I wanted to become a carpenter when I was younger because I enjoyed pounding nails, etc. I was very likely influenced by watching the men in my family get up and go to work. There was something admirable in what they were doing, and thus I wanted to be like them. My father, upon hearing this, set out to convince me that there were better opportunities in life. His argumetn was that their lives wre good lives, but also hard ones that they'd rather their children not be required to take on.
John Adams measured progress in much the same way: I study politics and war that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy in order to give their children a right to study painting poetry and music.
Economic progress goes as such: agriculture to industry to service to management to investment to competition, with competition being the point where the quality of life is relatively the same everywhere regardless of nationality. What John Adams was saying is that he does the hard work so that future generations can become more enlightened. Enlightenment leads to better lives.
It is my opinion that better lives deserve to be lived everywhere. We may not be in a position to happily state that work conditions are the same in the developing world as they are in the developed world today, but we are in a position to state that work conditions are better in the developing world today than they were yesterday, and will continue to improve en masse over the years as we generally improve our lives overall. This is less about current comparability (though it certainly adds and improves the debate), but more about progress instead.
Uhggg. You just convinced me that at least one of my children should be a soldier, as much as I don't really want that.
Wow, what do you do?
I'm a soldier.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
I support our soliders (not the war, there is a difference)
Maybe not as big a difference as you think.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
, but I wouldn't want to be one.
That's exactly the problem we're discussing isn't it?
First off, hoorah for massive thread drift.
Secondly, is that the problem? Isn't it a choice to be a soldier or not? A choice to serve and protect, or to......well, be lazy and protected? It's still a choice.
Thirdly, I support the soldiers gladly, and I support the war in Afghanistan. But I never did and never will support the war in Iraq. You know, the illegal one. I believe that perhaps 20 or 30 years down the line Iraq might have a functional self-sufficient democracy. I also believe that democracy is a good thing, especially when a country is ruled by a psychopathic tyrant. I also believe that we invaded Iraq not to instill democracy, but to fulfill the delusions of a madman who stole 2 elections in a row. The retarded son of a rich man, with a cocaine problem, who has made a mockery of our constitution.
I support our soldiers, but not the Iraq war. I don't believe that these concepts are mutually exclusive.
"Protect and serve" isn't that the police? I think the army is more like: "to fight for the political beliefs of my seniors"
i'm sorry but this is the only discussion in this thread i am interested in. i think it proves that quality can slip even in things made by good old fashioned lazy-ass americans. you don't have to outsource something to have it suck. you just have to lower your standards and not care about whether it sucks or not.
While I won't intentionally use the word, I think the 'ir' adds a phonetic value that is worth consideration.
And it is so damn easy to irritate the shit out of people with it.
heh. well yeah, we all have our buttons right? it's like saying "WARSH" or spelling night "NITE" or calling snow "THE WHITE STUFF". pretty much makes me want to put a chinese made boot in somebody's ass.
...now stay tuned for several more pages of high school level economics.
Ach, go warsh the white stuff of yer troos and git some sleep tha nite.
i'm sorry but this is the only discussion in this thread i am interested in. i think it proves that quality can slip even in things made by good old fashioned lazy-ass americans. you don't have to outsource something to have it suck. you just have to lower your standards and not care about whether it sucks or not.
While I won't intentionally use the word, I think the 'ir' adds a phonetic value that is worth consideration.
And it is so damn easy to irritate the shit out of people with it.
you need more workers? obviously you have to then pay more.
Sorry Capt Obvious, but that's wrong. Here's the key sentence:
The workers who make these clothes, Asian immigrant women, are finding more attractive occupations and are leaving behind their sewing jobs.
Look, no offense, but there AREN'T enough people in North America who are willing to do this work for pretty much ANY price who CAN do it...Garment shops here in NYC pay around $25 an hour plus benefits and they can't find enough workers -- that's about $50k a year. The Garment Workers Union is dying out. Even if you could afford to pay $50 an hour, you couldn't find enough skilled workers...maybe if we had free immigration but not otherwise.
Nobody who works behind a sewing machine wants their kids to do it. It's hard, monotonous work where a slight distraction or loss of concentration results in damaged goods. It takes five to six years of work to become decent. Every single machine operator I've ever talked to wanted their kids to go to school for those five to six years and get a "better" job. This includes folks I know here in NYC making over $100k a year sewing ...
I'll work for you... Do I get to test the kit in the field, too???
i'm sorry but this is the only discussion in this thread i am interested in. i think it proves that quality can slip even in things made by good old fashioned lazy-ass americans. you don't have to outsource something to have it suck. you just have to lower your standards and not care about whether it sucks or not.
While I won't intentionally use the word, I think the 'ir' adds a phonetic value that is worth consideration.
...now stay tuned for several more pages of high school level economics.
Economics? Have you read the above posts?
yes.
by my recollection the posts have been primarily about wages, workers, raw materials, consumers, what motivates consumers, the consumer's willingness (or lack thereof) to pay higher prices and it's effect on the quality of goods, the relationship between price point and the manufacturing process, the relative availability of cheap skilled labor, government regulation of the manufacturing process and its effect on where goods are manufactured...
which of those things does not fall into the category of economics? and, more importantly, in what way is "downclimb" the credo of the trad climber?
(This post was edited by elvislegs on Jul 10, 2008, 11:19 PM)
An interesting analogy / point: all the men in my family are laborers. They are lobstermen, electricians, and carpenters. All of them enjoy their work and have always been happy to pass on their skills to me. However, none of them wanted me to grow up in their shoes. I wanted to become a carpenter when I was younger because I enjoyed pounding nails, etc. I was very likely influenced by watching the men in my family get up and go to work. There was something admirable in what they were doing, and thus I wanted to be like them. My father, upon hearing this, set out to convince me that there were better opportunities in life. His argumetn was that their lives wre good lives, but also hard ones that they'd rather their children not be required to take on.
John Adams measured progress in much the same way: I study politics and war that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy in order to give their children a right to study painting poetry and music.
Economic progress goes as such: agriculture to industry to service to management to investment to competition, with competition being the point where the quality of life is relatively the same everywhere regardless of nationality. What John Adams was saying is that he does the hard work so that future generations can become more enlightened. Enlightenment leads to better lives.
It is my opinion that better lives deserve to be lived everywhere. We may not be in a position to happily state that work conditions are the same in the developing world as they are in the developed world today, but we are in a position to state that work conditions are better in the developing world today than they were yesterday, and will continue to improve en masse over the years as we generally improve our lives overall. This is less about current comparability (though it certainly adds and improves the debate), but more about progress instead.
Uhggg. You just convinced me that at least one of my children should be a soldier, as much as I don't really want that.
Wow, what do you do?
I'm a soldier.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
I support our soliders (not the war, there is a difference)
Maybe not as big a difference as you think.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
, but I wouldn't want to be one.
That's exactly the problem we're discussing isn't it?
I guess I'm a little confused why you'd want your son to be a soldier based on my argument. My argument states that, regardless of what it is that you do, you want your kids to be in a better position than you. Or, you work hard and make sacrifices so he doesn't have to.
I don't think I ever said my son, just one of my children. Funny, I didn't picture you as that innately sexist.
Sure I want my children to be in a position to have a better life than I do, whatever that means, my life's not so bad. But I also want them to know what hard work is and to have a real view of life and not the fuzzy pink pillows view that too many Americans have who think that hard work and self-sacrifice is something for someone else. Eventually we'll run out of someone elses.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
As for the war vs soldier comment, I think there is a difference.
Yeah, I got that. But picture this, you're some poor bastard in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting a war that half of your country doesn't support. Ever wonder how that feels? But wait, here's the part that should make him/her feel better - my countrymen/women support me! In what way I wonder? How do you actually support those soldiers, airmen, marines, and sailors over in the desert? From some people it's a lot of lip service. I suspect most service members appreciate it nevertheless, but...
I support my daughter, but when I didn't fully commit to supporting her involvement in diving last winter it really affected her attitude.
What do you do?
Gmburns2000 wrote:
It would be a bad thing if our military decided on going to war as opposed to our politicians.
Probably so, I'm not contesting that issue.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
The soldiers have no choice (beyond enlisting), and that's a good thing. I can disagree with the politics and hope for the best for the men and women charged with following orders.
Right, but hoping for the best while creating a political climate that is clearly divided presents a front that isn't very imposing to a dedicated and patient enemy. I'm not saying you shouldn't be opposed to these conflicts, just that your opinion of your actions and thoughts may not be the same impression that others get.
An interesting analogy / point: all the men in my family are laborers. They are lobstermen, electricians, and carpenters. All of them enjoy their work and have always been happy to pass on their skills to me. However, none of them wanted me to grow up in their shoes. I wanted to become a carpenter when I was younger because I enjoyed pounding nails, etc. I was very likely influenced by watching the men in my family get up and go to work. There was something admirable in what they were doing, and thus I wanted to be like them. My father, upon hearing this, set out to convince me that there were better opportunities in life. His argumetn was that their lives wre good lives, but also hard ones that they'd rather their children not be required to take on.
John Adams measured progress in much the same way: I study politics and war that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy in order to give their children a right to study painting poetry and music.
Economic progress goes as such: agriculture to industry to service to management to investment to competition, with competition being the point where the quality of life is relatively the same everywhere regardless of nationality. What John Adams was saying is that he does the hard work so that future generations can become more enlightened. Enlightenment leads to better lives.
It is my opinion that better lives deserve to be lived everywhere. We may not be in a position to happily state that work conditions are the same in the developing world as they are in the developed world today, but we are in a position to state that work conditions are better in the developing world today than they were yesterday, and will continue to improve en masse over the years as we generally improve our lives overall. This is less about current comparability (though it certainly adds and improves the debate), but more about progress instead.
Uhggg. You just convinced me that at least one of my children should be a soldier, as much as I don't really want that.
Wow, what do you do?
I'm a soldier.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
I support our soliders (not the war, there is a difference)
Maybe not as big a difference as you think.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
, but I wouldn't want to be one.
That's exactly the problem we're discussing isn't it?
First off, hoorah for massive thread drift.
Secondly, is that the problem? Isn't it a choice to be a soldier or not? A choice to serve and protect, or to......well, be lazy and protected? It's still a choice.
Yep, absolutely a choice, and it's best that way. I just worry that some day too many people will think it's somebody else's job to do it. I was talking to the mother of one of my daughter's friends one day and she said something to the effect of, "I appreciate what you do but I don't want my daughter to do that." Yeah, I'm not sure I want my children to do it either, but if everyone says someone else should do it, who will? I guess it's inherent in the rise and fall of nations. Hard men establish them and pass them on to softer and softer generations who let the inevitable changes happen.
yes, it's called rc.com. You all prove on a daily basis that when you put outdoorsy peple in cubicles they become raging/boring assholes (myself included). I can only handle rc.com in 5-6 month doses, then all the whining/arguing about random bs gets old and my time needs to be spent preparing for draft day and after that watching the waivers. So I'll be around for another month or so when I'll become pretty scarce till next February. But by all means continue your lame discussions without me...I won't be missing much. Maybe while your at it try and do some climbing and be safe if you do. B...
yes, it's called rc.com. You all prove on a daily basis that when you put outdoorsy peple in cubicles they become raging/boring assholes (myself included). I can only handle rc.com in 5-6 month doses, then all the whining/arguing about random bs gets old and my time needs to be spent preparing for draft day and after that watching the waivers. So I'll be around for another month or so when I'll become pretty scarce till next February. But by all means continue your lame discussions without me...I won't be missing much. Maybe while your at it try and do some climbing and be safe if you do. B...
Maybe I'll get myself stuck behind some slow ass climbers and come on here and wine about my sunburn.
...now stay tuned for several more pages of high school level economics.
Economics? Have you read the above posts?
yes.
by my recollection the posts have been primarily about wages, workers, raw materials, consumers, what motivates consumers, the consumer's willingness (or lack thereof) to pay higher prices and it's effect on the quality of goods, the relationship between price point and the manufacturing process, the relative availability of cheap skilled labor, government regulation of the manufacturing process and its effect on where goods are manufactured...
which of those things does not fall into the category of economics? and, more importantly, in what way is "downclimb" the credo of the trad climber?
Dude, calm down. I wasn't insulting you. I was referring to the exchange of "I know you are but what am I" banters between WVCLIMBER and Arrogant Bastard that were directly above my initial post to you. Apparently you weren't quick enough to see the reference. SORRY!
I support our soliders (not the war, there is a difference)
Maybe not as big a difference as you think.
Gmburns2000 wrote:
, but I wouldn't want to be one.
That's exactly the problem we're discussing isn't it?
I guess I'm a little confused why you'd want your son to be a soldier based on my argument. My argument states that, regardless of what it is that you do, you want your kids to be in a better position than you. Or, you work hard and make sacrifices so he doesn't have to.
I don't think I ever said my son, just one of my children. Funny, I didn't picture you as that innately sexist.
Well said. My bad. Sorry.
In reply to:
Sure I want my children to be in a position to have a better life than I do, whatever that means, my life's not so bad. But I also want them to know what hard work is and to have a real view of life and not the fuzzy pink pillows view that too many Americans have who think that hard work and self-sacrifice is something for someone else. Eventually we'll run out of someone elses.
Hard work doesn't have to be that of a soldier or laborer. A well earned, comfy life can also have a lot of hard work in it. Warren Buffet has a pretty comfy life, and somehow I don't think he didn't work hard for it. And look now, he's giving his kids only enough to do something and not enough to do nothing while giving the rest to charity. Not a bad outcome.
I'm not saying soldiering is a bad job. I'm saying there are better jobs out there, and many of those jobs also require hard work where the values of sacrifice can also be learned.
In reply to:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
As for the war vs soldier comment, I think there is a difference.
Yeah, I got that. But picture this, you're some poor bastard in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting a war that half of your country doesn't support. Ever wonder how that feels? But wait, here's the part that should make him/her feel better - my countrymen/women support me! In what way I wonder? How do you actually support those soldiers, airmen, marines, and sailors over in the desert? From some people it's a lot of lip service. I suspect most service members appreciate it nevertheless, but...
I support my daughter, but when I didn't fully commit to supporting her involvement in diving last winter it really affected her attitude.
I absolutely agree that support helps. However, it's the notion of supporting whether they should be there or not that is the issue. I bet there are a lot of servicemen and women in Iraq who would rather not be there, either politically or simply because they're sick of being away from home (both perfectly good reasons to not want to fight). If I automatically give up my attitudes over the war then how can there be debate? I guess I just feel that a healthy opposition is nearly always justified.
I know there is a slight difference in scale here (tongue-in-cheek), but I don't always get support in my job either. It doesn't mean I stop doing it, but it is nice to know that sometimes, when I disagree with a decision and despite that I still have to do the task, there is someone who agrees with me that the task shouldn't be done. I guess I'm more speaking to the soldiers who would rather not be there, because they need support, too, in believing that they are doing their job and someone is trying to ensure that they don't have to do things they disagree with in the future.
In reply to:
What do you do?
Healthcare finance. I'd rather be climbing, writing, and working in public service; all three of which I am currently trying to achieve.
yes, it's called rc.com. You all prove on a daily basis that when you put outdoorsy peple in cubicles they become raging/boring assholes (myself included). I can only handle rc.com in 5-6 month doses, then all the whining/arguing about random bs gets old and my time needs to be spent preparing for draft day and after that watching the waivers. So I'll be around for another month or so when I'll become pretty scarce till next February. But by all means continue your lame discussions without me...I won't be missing much. Maybe while your at it try and do some climbing and be safe if you do. B...
We've discussed this, you're in no position whatsoever to comment on other people's climbing. Yes, we have more posts than you. No, it doesn't stop us from climbing far more than you.
...now stay tuned for several more pages of high school level economics.
Economics? Have you read the above posts?
yes.
by my recollection the posts have been primarily about wages, workers, raw materials, consumers, what motivates consumers, the consumer's willingness (or lack thereof) to pay higher prices and it's effect on the quality of goods, the relationship between price point and the manufacturing process, the relative availability of cheap skilled labor, government regulation of the manufacturing process and its effect on where goods are manufactured...
which of those things does not fall into the category of economics? and, more importantly, in what way is "downclimb" the credo of the trad climber?
Dude, calm down. I wasn't insulting you. I was referring to the exchange of "I know you are but what am I" banters between WVCLIMBER and Arrogant Bastard that were directly above my initial post to you. Apparently you weren't quick enough to see the reference. SORRY!
oh i'm calm. in fact i wasn't insulted at all, more like baffled. i think you can probably see how i might have been.
...now stay tuned for several more pages of high school level economics.
Economics? Have you read the above posts?
yes.
by my recollection the posts have been primarily about wages, workers, raw materials, consumers, what motivates consumers, the consumer's willingness (or lack thereof) to pay higher prices and it's effect on the quality of goods, the relationship between price point and the manufacturing process, the relative availability of cheap skilled labor, government regulation of the manufacturing process and its effect on where goods are manufactured...
which of those things does not fall into the category of economics? and, more importantly, in what way is "downclimb" the credo of the trad climber?
Dude, calm down. I wasn't insulting you. I was referring to the exchange of "I know you are but what am I" banters between WVCLIMBER and Arrogant Bastard that were directly above my initial post to you. Apparently you weren't quick enough to see the reference. SORRY!
oh i'm calm. in fact i wasn't insulted at all, more like baffled. i think you can probably see how i might have been.
i still don't get your sig line.
Cool.
Sig - just a joke that is probably funnier because it is more true than not. I fall on trad gear a fair amount, but I'd much rather not!
47 /
57%
