OT - OLDER THAN DIRT QUIZ

Wed, Dec 31, 2003, 10:52am (EST+5) [email protected]
(Charlie=A0Self) says:
Ah, yes! The old double feature. I think they used to cost about a
quarter and eat an ENTIRE afternoon.

I don't recall that we had double features, but we used to have the
Saturdays an with hour or two of just cartoons, the weekly serial, then
a movie. About 4 hours, total. Wow. That theater went out of business
years ago. Was some kind of store, or various businesses, for a long
time. Then someone renovated it and reopened it as a theater, a few
years back. I guess it's doing well. But, I bet the Saturday afternoon
movies aren't near as good as they used to be.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 29 Dec 2003.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

Larry Blanchard responds:

>>
>> Wow. That's grade school stuff. I bet I hadn't thought of that guy in
>something
>> like 30-35 years, at least.
>>
>> Today, they'd probably arrest him as a potential child molester
>
>Well it was 60 years ago that I started grade school :-). But I seem to
>remember that recently there was a revival of the traveling yo-yo expert
>by Duncan. Do a google

Nah. My arthritis would probably keep me from doing even as poorly as I did 60
years ago!

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Wed, Dec 31, 2003, 10:21pm (EST+5) [email protected] (Lawrence=A0L'Hote)
says:
The 'Indian' called himself Straight Arrow and his horse was Fury?
"Kenewa,
Fury" when he wanted to gidddyup.

I'll take your word on that, but it seems to rind a bell. But, I
can still tell you how to make smoke signals. Altho, I kinda doubt any
Indian actually went to that much trouble to do it. Those cards were
always the first thing out of the box. I'm not even sure if I like it
that mch, but, I still eat shredded wheat, finished a box a couple of
days ago. Primitive brainwashing? LOL

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 29 Dec 2003.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

Swingman responds:

>In High School I routinely bought 25 cents worth of gas for my '49 Willys
>Jeepster, and a few drops to go in my Zippo. You had to be careful with the
>first flick, was all ... overfill it and it would take the hair off your leg
>under your jeans pocket.

Ouch. Brings back memories. Late '50s, at Kaneohe Bay MCAS, I got stuck driving
the fuel tanker for some weeks (until someone thought to ask if I had a
military license, which I didn't--and after 6 weeks of that crap, I made sure I
never did get one). Used to fill my lighter with the drip from the hose after
fueling copters. It would not only take hair off your leg, it would leave you
with a really nasty red blotch. But that was AvGas, maybe 125+ octane, IIRC.

Weird vehicles: spot you your Willys versus my '50 Studebaker, with hill
holder, or my '51 Crosley convertible (top slid back on rails above the
windows, had a floor shift--3 speed--spur gears you could shift with your
foot).

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Charlie Self wrote:

> the hose after fueling copters. It would not only take hair off your leg,
> it would leave you with a really nasty red blotch. But that was AvGas,
> maybe 125+ octane, IIRC.

The fuel sold for that purpose will do the same thing too, FWIW.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Silvan writes:

>> the hose after fueling copters. It would not only take hair off your leg,
>> it would leave you with a really nasty red blotch. But that was AvGas,
>> maybe 125+ octane, IIRC.
>
>The fuel sold for that purpose will do the same thing too, FWIW.

Yeah, but you're not trying to get a 3-4 ounce drip from a 2" or more diameter
hose into that tiny little lighter.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Charlie Self wrote:

>>The fuel sold for that purpose will do the same thing too, FWIW.
>
> Yeah, but you're not trying to get a 3-4 ounce drip from a 2" or more
> diameter hose into that tiny little lighter.

The end result is the same. A nasty red blotch if you get too enthusiatic
about filling the thing. Maybe you just have to work a bit harder at it to
get that much naptha into one, but I've definitely done it.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Nahmie notes, correctly:

>Maybe that's our trouble. We're *thinking*, and that leads to all kinds of
>problems when it runs up against our CRS.

I resemble that remark. In more ways than one: my initials just happen to be
CRS.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

On 31 Dec 2003 00:39:37 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:

>I resemble that remark. In more ways than one: my initials just happen to be
>CRS.

That made me laugh out loud. Thanks.


Real Email is: tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
Website: http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

JOAT writes:

>
> The exchange musta seen Charlie comin'. I usta pay a dime a pack
>in the PX. But, now that I think on it, coulda been just oversea, I
>spent about half my time out of the country.

Overseas escaped some kind of tax. Our guys lined up when a ship was nearby, as
they could go aboard and fill a duffle bag at 80 cents a carton. Take those
into town and sell them for 1.50, and hope to HELL you didn't get caught.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

"Charlie Self" wrote in message

> The evening I quit, I finished
> almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the
norm.
> Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.

When I quit 12 years ago I was easily spending $1500/year on cigarettes ...
that's a nice annual tool budget.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/29/03

Silvan writes:

>> Probably. I gained more weight than I ever thought possible. I seem to
>> have stabilized now, about 90 pound above my "normal" weight.
>
>Die from a heart attack from all the weight, or die from emphyzema...
>Bleah.
>
>You actually have emphyzema now don't you? Aren't you the quit smoking and
>buy a damn dust mask poster boy? Or am I thinking of someone else?

Someone else. I got a lot wrong with me--ask my first wife--but not emphysema
(yet). I smoked so heavily for so long that if there's no more penalty than the
pounds, I'll be way, way ahead of the game. The evening I quit, I finished
almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the norm.
Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.

But I sometimes remember to wear hearing protection and a dust mask.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Swingman wrote:

> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
>
>> The evening I quit, I finished
>> almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the
> norm.
>> Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.

I hope you come through that OK, Charlie. Some people die of lung cancer at
50 without ever lighting a butt, and other people smoke five packs a day
until age 103. You just never really know. I personally think the risk is
blown way out of proportion, but then as an active smoker, and a young man
besides, you'd expect me to think that. :)

> When I quit 12 years ago I was easily spending $1500/year on cigarettes
> ... that's a nice annual tool budget.

I figure I'm spending $1,000. A nice budget, but OTOH if SWMBO doesn't have
to buy me my cigarettes, will I ever actually *see* the $20 a week I'm
saving?

Probably not. It will end up getting funneled into stupid useless pieces of
shiny metal and rock more than likely. One sad but true reason why I
haven't gotten around to quitting the damn things yet.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Silvan notes:

>>
>>> The evening I quit, I finished
>>> almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the
>> norm.
>>> Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.
>
>I hope you come through that OK, Charlie. Some people die of lung cancer at
>50 without ever lighting a butt, and other people smoke five packs a day
>until age 103.

I betcha a buck you cannot locate a single one of the latter. I was 50 when I
quit smoking and wish I'd quit 20 years earlier...about your age, IIRC...but I
was convinced the government was full of shit, so I kept on. Well, the
government IS full of shit, but cigarets are still not a great way to help your
health.

I was smoking an average of 3 packs a day, so that's 21 packs a week, at an
average of 90 cents a back. Call it 20 bucks a week, so like Swingman, I was
pissing away upwards of a grand. My first FIL used to claim he never smoked
(habitually--he liked the very occasional cigar) because he was too cheap,
wanted the money for other things.

>I figure I'm spending $1,000. A nice budget, but OTOH if SWMBO doesn't have
>to buy me my cigarettes, will I ever actually *see* the $20 a week I'm
>saving?
>
>Probably not. It will end up getting funneled into stupid useless pieces of
>shiny metal and rock more than likely. One sad but true reason why I
>haven't gotten around to quitting the damn things yet.

So buy your own, but don't. Stick the money in your sock drawer and use it for
something you want every 6 months or so.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Charlie Self wrote:

> So buy your own, but don't. Stick the money in your sock drawer and use it
> for something you want every 6 months or so.

Just hafta hang out around smokers so I still have that "eau de ashtray"
scent, and she doesn't catch on. :)

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 02:18:57 -0500, Silvan wrote:

> Swingman wrote:
>
>> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
>>
>>> The evening I quit, I finished
>>> almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the
>> norm.
>>> Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.
>
> I hope you come through that OK, Charlie. Some people die of lung cancer at
> 50 without ever lighting a butt, and other people smoke five packs a day
> until age 103. You just never really know. I personally think the risk is
> blown way out of proportion, but then as an active smoker, and a young man
> besides, you'd expect me to think that. :)

My Grandpappy smoked unfiltered Camels till his dying day at 86 years of
age from prostate cancer. My Pappy never smoked and died at 89 years of
age from colon cancer. My mom smoked for about 30 years, then quit. She's
still going (though rather slowly) at age 91. You just never know, but
smoking can't be good for you. I smoked for 30+ years before quiting and
don't have any detectable health problems - yet.

-Doug

"Doug Winterburn" wrote in message
> On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 02:18:57 -0500, Silvan wrote:
>
> > Swingman wrote:
> >
> >> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
> >>
> >>> The evening I quit, I finished
> >>> almost 4 packs of cigarets for the day, and that was not far above the
> >> norm.
> >>> Even at 90 cents a pack, that was getting costly.
> >
> > I hope you come through that OK, Charlie. Some people die of lung
cancer at
> > 50 without ever lighting a butt, and other people smoke five packs a day
> > until age 103. You just never really know. I personally think the risk
is
> > blown way out of proportion, but then as an active smoker, and a young
man
> > besides, you'd expect me to think that. :)
>
> My Grandpappy smoked unfiltered Camels till his dying day at 86 years of
> age from prostate cancer. My Pappy never smoked and died at 89 years of
> age from colon cancer. My mom smoked for about 30 years, then quit. She's
> still going (though rather slowly) at age 91. You just never know, but
> smoking can't be good for you. I smoked for 30+ years before quiting and
> don't have any detectable health problems - yet.

My paternal grandfather, who INHALED Prince Albert pipe tobacco through a
pipe for almost 80 years, was forced by the doctor's to quit smoking at 93,
then died five years later of cancer. I smoked for 30 years, and quit 12
years ago ... a little voice in the back of my head, which kept getting
louder and louder as time went by, left NO doubt it was the thing to do.

Just got over a serious lung infection, missed almost two months in the shop
as a result, and wonder just how much my smoking made me suspectible to it
in the first place.

While it isn't any of my business, my tendency is to say: "Quit smoking
Michael! ... put the money saved into wood/tools and do your _future_ health
a big favor to boot."

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/29/03

In article <[email protected]>, Howard
<[email protected]> wrote:

> http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php

Badda-bing!

Great link!

djb

--
There are no socks in my email address.

"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"

Swingman writes:

>
>While it isn't any of my business, my tendency is to say: "Quit smoking
>Michael! ... put the money saved into wood/tools and do your _future_ health
>a big favor to boot."

Good advice. None of my business either, but think of how much better you, your
house, your clothing will smell, and how many fewer holes you'll have in
clothing, upholstery, etc.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

And how much more time you'll have to teach woodworking to your
grandkids.

(I was a 2-1/2 pack-a-day man until I quit in my 30's. That was 20 or
so years ago and I've never looked back. No grandkids yet but I'm
looking forward to the time I'll spend with them in the shop when they
arrive.)


On 01 Jan 2004 19:07:06 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:
>None of my business either, but think of how much better you, your
>house, your clothing will smell, and how many fewer holes you'll have in
>clothing, upholstery, etc.
>

-- jc
Published e-mail address is strictly for spam collection.
If e-mailing me, please use jc631 at optonline dot net

Charlie Self wrote:

> Good advice. None of my business either, but think of how much better you,
> your house, your clothing will smell, and how many fewer holes you'll have
> in clothing, upholstery, etc.

Holes in things aren't a real problem. The smell isn't really an issue
either. It just masks the unwholesome dog smells.

What I don't like is thinking back to all those biology text books showing
pictures of lungs dripping with black goo, and thinking that my lungs look
like that now.

Know where I can get a Round Tuit?

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

In article <[email protected]>,
Silvan <[email protected]> wrote:
>Charlie Self wrote:
>
>> Good advice. None of my business either, but think of how much better you,
>> your house, your clothing will smell, and how many fewer holes you'll have
>> in clothing, upholstery, etc.
>
>Holes in things aren't a real problem. The smell isn't really an issue
>either. It just masks the unwholesome dog smells.
>
>What I don't like is thinking back to all those biology text books showing
>pictures of lungs dripping with black goo, and thinking that my lungs look
>like that now.
>
>Know where I can get a Round Tuit?

They're filed next to the square ones.
On the shelf below the "one-its", and above the "three-its".


*chortle*

Robert Bonomi wrote:

> As I understand it, they're on back-order.

*THWHACK*

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:

>Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php

--
Howard Lee Harkness
Texas Certified Concealed Handgun Instructor
www.CHL-TX.com
[email protected]
Low-cost Domain Registration and Hosting! www.Texas-Domains.com

In article <[email protected]>,
Silvan <[email protected]> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
>>>Know where I can get a Round Tuit?
>>
>> They're filed next to the square ones.
>> On the shelf below the "one-its", and above the "three-its".
>>
>> *chortle*
>
>OK, well, I've looked, and I can't find any tuits at all. Does the BORG
>carry them, or do I have to do mail order?

As I understand it, they're on back-order.


That means they won't be on display, _until_ they get










{wait for it}










{just a little more}






{just a little more}










a round toit.




{*groan*}

In article <[email protected]>, Larry Blanchard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Another errant thought. When I could still count my age on my fingers,
>my favorite books were a series of "Uncle Wiggily" books about a kindly
>old rabbit. Anyone else remember those?
>
You betcha. Uncle Wiggly and his housekeeper, Nurse Jane Fuzzy-Wuzzy. Don't
remember what sort of critter she was, though. Muskrat, maybe? And of course
his two nemeses, the Skeezics and the Pipseseewah, who were always scheming to
do him in.

My grandparents had the entire series. My cousins and I grew up reading those
stories. Loved 'em. I wonder if they're still in print.


--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

Charlie,
I never really got above a pack, or so, a day. Unfiltered Camels, or Lucky
Strikes {isn't *that* name ironic !!}. Any more than that and my chest would
'get tight'.

Although my MIL 'smoked like a chimney', none of her three kids would say or
do anything. After we got married, Joanne had her own 'way' of pushing the
issue. If I started to smoke when we were driving in the car, she would roll
down her window, wrap a scarf {handkerchief, etc.}around her face, and lean
next to it . . . NO MATTER what the weather !!

Cold, Hot, Wet, Snow . . . crap flying all around . . . no matter. For a
shicksa, she sure learned how to use the Jewish 'Guild Offense' in short
order !!

It's been so long, I can't remember the last time I had a cigarette. But
every time one of those 'Stop Smoking' spots come on . . . the feeling comes
into my head to go out and buy a pack of 'Luckies'. Joanne says it's just
because I'm, 'Contrary & Ornery'.

Regards & Good Luck,
Ron Magen
Backyard Boatshop

"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
SNIP
> Good advice. None of my business either, but think of how much better you,
your
> house, your clothing will smell, and how many fewer holes you'll have in
> clothing, upholstery, etc.

Ron Magen notes:

>It's been so long, I can't remember the last time I had a cigarette. But
>every time one of those 'Stop Smoking' spots come on . . . the feeling comes
>into my head to go out and buy a pack of 'Luckies'. Joanne says it's just
>because I'm, 'Contrary & Ornery'.

Could be. I always swore I'd never be one of those PITA ex-smokers. I've got a
couple friends like that, they panic and sweep their hands through the air when
someone lights up near them, and so on. But the longer I'm off the butts, the
less I can stand being around them, and the more I feel they are ruinous, both
fiscally and physically.

So I get to be a PITA. But I still abhor those damned anti-smoking crusade ads.

Luckies and Camels. I started on Viceroys, graduated to Camels, changed to
Luckies when I got out of the Marines. I was still smoking Luckies when I
finally quit. Makes me wonder how many bucks I made for the various governments
taxing those things.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Fri, Jan 2, 2004, 12:16am (EST+5) [email protected]
(Charlie=A0Self) says:
<snip> But the longer I'm off the butts, the less I can stand being
around them <snip>

When I say I can't stand smoke, I'm not kidding. Anymore, someone
smokes around me, feels like my lungs start filling
up with water, from the bottom up. Just gets harder, and harder to
breathe. Once the smoke goes away, I'm fine, but, I figure if I was
around it for more then a minute, I'd probably pass out. Only thing I
can put that to is those years smoking.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 1 Jan 2004.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

On 02 Jan 2004 00:16:11 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:

> But the longer I'm off the butts, the
>less I can stand being around them, and the more I feel they are ruinous, both
>fiscally and physically.

I certainly cannot argue that smoking is good for you.

However, I just don't understand why drinking alcoholic beverages
doesn't receive the same treatment as tobacco smoking. Beyond, of
course, the fact that the grain farmers have a better lobby than the
tobacco farmers.

Abuse of alcohol has caused more social grief and cost more money than
tobacco. We all know of families that have been ruined by an
alcoholic. The injuries alcoholics cause on their spouses, siblings
and children make second hand smoke look like a walk in the park.
Smokers don't kill people when they drive, or have a fight with a
spouse or "bar buddy," drunks do that time and time again.

Would you really rather sit next to a normally courteous smoker or a
drunk?

Why are the do-gooders, health nazis, lay and professional, and
elected reps so afraid tin stand up against drinking? It's caused
more problems and killed more people than all the tobacco ever smoked.

Cape Cod Bob writes:

>
>Why are the do-gooders, health nazis, lay and professional, and
>elected reps so afraid tin stand up against drinking? It's caused
>more problems and killed more people than all the tobacco ever smoked.

I think we tried that. Prohibition it was called. Worked great. We ended up
with bootleggers, bathtub gin, speakeasies, a super advanced moonshining
industry, and crime bosses, along with several more government groups that are
still hanging around. Like many other substances, alcohol is very simple to
produce, so total control is impossible.

Controls are fairly tight on booze in this country, yet we still seem to have
more problems with it than most countries. I think we need to figure out why
before we go much further. We've reached the point now where a drinker outside
the home is limited to 1 shot (or equivalent) per hour or so (90 minutes to be
really safe) unless he wishes to face being jugged for drunken driving. I'm not
exactly sure what else we can, or should, be doing. Help is generally readily
available for alcoholics and their families, but they have to WANT to get that
help before it does any good.

Alcoholism is generally considered a chronic and progressive disease now (and
for about 50 years), while smoking is classed as a habit. It's a lot easier to
break even a difficult habit than it is to cure a disease that can't be
treated--successfully--with drugs.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Sat, Jan 3, 2004, 10:00am (EST+5) [email protected]
(Charlie=A0Self) says:
<snip> Controls are fairly tight on booze in this country, yet we still
seem to have more problems with it than most countries. <snip>

Oh, I dunno. When I was in Turkey, alcoholism was apparently a
major problem - and that's a country where, supposedly, drinking alcohol
is against the major religion. Didn't seem to stop them from selling
beer in grocery stores, or having bars. No, I didn't do any drinking
while I was over there, just a beer once in awhile, bought in a grocery
store.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 2 Jan 2004.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

JOAT notes:

> Oh, I dunno. When I was in Turkey, alcoholism was apparently a
>major problem - and that's a country where, supposedly, drinking alcohol
>is against the major religion.

Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work. As
someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society we've
ever uncovered.

Charlie Self
"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave
it to. " Dorothy Parker

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Sat, Jan 3, 2004, 10:05pm (EST+5) [email protected]
(Charlie=A0Self) says:
Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't
work. <snip>

Not unless the guvmint wants to periodically raid every home in the
country. And, I wouldn't put that past a few of our politicians, if
they could get away with it.

Too easy to make booze, of one form or another. Maybe not in huge
amounts, but enought for the average person anyway.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 3 Jan 2004.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

>Not unless the guvmint wants to periodically raid every home in the
>country. And, I wouldn't put that past a few of our politicians, if
>they could get away with it.
>
> Too easy to make booze, of one form or another. Maybe not in huge
>amounts, but enought for the average person anyway.
>
>JOAT

It's pretty damn easy to grow pot, too. The gov't goes to some pretty extreme
levels to try to catch people growing a little pot in the house. They go so far
as to use thermal scanners to look for grow lights or check your utility
company for excessive electricity usage. So if they ever again criminalize
booze, nothing as meaningless as the Constitution will keep them out of your
house if the dogs smell the still or you buy too many grapes.

Dave Hall

Sun, Jan 4, 2004, 3:14am (EST+5) [email protected] (David=A0Hall) says:
It's pretty damn easy to grow pot, too. The gov't goes to some pretty
extreme levels to try to catch people growing a little pot in the house.
<snip>

That's because of the point value. They get 1 point for catching
some guy trafficking a truck load of cocaine, with a few dozen guys with
guns.

They get the same 1 point for catching some guy growing one pot
plant, for his own use, and who isn't likely to shoot at them.

A drug agent gets the same credit for any drug bust, doesn't matter
if it's one truckload, one plant, or one joint. I don't think that's
right, but that's they way they work. Gubmint liberals.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 3 Jan 2004.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

T. wrote:

> A drug agent gets the same credit for any drug bust, doesn't matter
> if it's one truckload, one plant, or one joint. I don't think that's
> right, but that's they way they work. Gubmint liberals.
>


Liberals?

I think you've got that one a little off target.



--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

> Too easy to make booze, of one form or another. Maybe not in huge
> amounts, but enought for the average person anyway.

Yeah, even my *grandmother* makes booze. Wine for her church. She doesn't
otherwise drink. Never has in 80-something years.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Silvan writes:

>> Too easy to make booze, of one form or another. Maybe not in huge
>> amounts, but enought for the average person anyway.
>
>Yeah, even my *grandmother* makes booze. Wine for her church. She doesn't
>otherwise drink. Never has in 80-something year

It's legal to make up to 200 gallonos of wine for your own use. Used to have an
Italian landlord who did that: I had the basement apartment; he made wine in
the other end; you could get drunk walking down the hall, it almost seemed.
Great stuff. This guy was a delight. Hardest working man I've ever know. By the
time I left Albany, he'd gone from one 4 story apartment building to being
rich. Worked as a laborer when he first got here.

Charlie Self
"I am a marvelous housekeeper. Every time I leave a man I keep his house." Zsa
Zsa Gabor

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Charlie Self wrote:

> almost seemed. Great stuff. This guy was a delight. Hardest working man
> I've ever know. By the time I left Albany, he'd gone from one 4 story
> apartment building to being rich. Worked as a laborer when he first got
> here.

It is kind of surprising how often that works out. Hard work and *enormous*
risks I guess. I'm risk-averse, which makes me a very lousy entrepeneur.
I go for the sure thing every time, and the sure thing is always the option
that pays the least.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work. As
> someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
> case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society we've
> ever uncovered.
>
It's been said that prostitution is the worlds second oldest profession -
brewer was first. I wouldn't be surprised - our ancestors were
undoubtedly drinking alcohol before rape became a crime and sex was
restricted :-).

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On 03 Jan 2004 22:05:26 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
> wrote:
>
> >JOAT notes:
> >
> >> Oh, I dunno. When I was in Turkey, alcoholism was apparently a
> >>major problem - and that's a country where, supposedly, drinking alcohol
> >>is against the major religion.
> >
> >Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work. As
> >someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
> >case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society we've
> >ever uncovered.
>
> Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
> taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
> expensive to sustain?
>

No, when taxation on any item becomes sufficiently oppressive,
enterprising folks will find a way around that tax -- i.e. bootleg
cigarettes or alcohol. When the taxation rate reaches sufficient
levels, the profit motive / risk margin in bootlegging becomes
sufficiently large that the shadier elements of society view it as a
reasonable endeavor and the formerly law abiding tolerate those shady
elements to get what they want at less confiscatory prices. There is a
law of unintended consequences to the ever-persistent "solution" of
"just tax it until it's too painful to do". The flip side of this is
that to provide sufficient level of enforcement to break the bootlegging
business, the civil liberties of the entire society are sacrificed --
look at the various loss of privacy and liberty already resulting from
the war on drugs.

More government playing momy and daddy. The tax on a bottle of booze should
be no higher than the tax on a bottle of orange juice. It's not up to the
government to run people lives.

"Cape Cod Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 03 Jan 2004 22:05:26 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
> wrote:
> >ever uncovered.
>
> Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
> taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
> expensive to sustain?

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:43:18 -0500, Cape Cod Bob
<[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:

>On 03 Jan 2004 22:05:26 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
>wrote:
>>Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work. As
>>someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
>>case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society we've
>>ever uncovered.
>
>Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
>taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
>expensive to sustain?

That's worked well with all items on the black market, hasn't it?
Nobody uses that expensive heroin, cocaine, crack, etc. do they?

What taxes do is reinforce overexpenditure by the gov't.

As to smoking, subsidizing tobacco and then taxing it to the hilt
doesn't make sense. It's hurting the people (us) in multiple ways.


----------------------------------------------------
Thesaurus: Ancient reptile with excellent vocabulary
http://diversify.com Dynamic Website Applications
====================================================

Larry Jaques responds:

>What taxes do is reinforce overexpenditure by the gov't.
>

Agreed. And that's something that needs absolutely NO reinforcement.

>As to smoking, subsidizing tobacco and then taxing it to the hilt
>doesn't make sense. It's hurting the people (us) in multiple ways.

Presumably, there is no subsidy on tobacco. What it is is an allotment system
that keeps anyone from growing extra tobacco, except for personal use.
Presumably.

Charlie Self
"Brevity is the soul of lingerie." Dorothy Parker
http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

On 03 Jan 2004 22:05:26 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:

>JOAT notes:
>
>> Oh, I dunno. When I was in Turkey, alcoholism was apparently a
>>major problem - and that's a country where, supposedly, drinking alcohol
>>is against the major religion.
>
>Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work. As
>someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
>case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society we've
>ever uncovered.

Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
expensive to sustain?

Cape Cod Bob responds:

>>Just reinforces my point: bans on alcohol don't work, probably can't work.
>As
>>someone else noted, many things are invented by a single society, but in the
>>case of booze, some version or other has been invented by every society
>we've
>>ever uncovered.
>
>Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
>taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
>expensive to sustain?
>

Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the reasons
alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a similar
amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.

Charlie Self
"Brevity is the soul of lingerie." Dorothy Parker
http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

>Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the reasons
>alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
>substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a similar
>amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
>
>Charlie Self

Comon, Charlie. If pot and other "recreational drugs" were legalized, regulated
and taxed like booze the amount of tax dollars would be staggering. Just ask
all the "importers" and "retailers" willing to risk serious prision time and
death to keep our supply lines WIDE open in the US. They do it for the HUGE
amounts of money. Very little of that goes to the farmer or the processors.
Legalized with production competition, raw material costs, production costs and
packaging/marketing costs would be nominal - leaving enourmous amounts for
profits and taxes. If you then factor in the reduction in prision costs,
policing costs, court costs and add some funds for detox and treatment programs
and lord only knows how many votes could be bought. (of course you lose the
votes of prision guards, policemen, judges, criminal justice staffers, drug
"importers" and "retailers", and others with a vested interest in the "War
for...ooops ON Drugs").

As to the other poster whose solution to all social ills seems to be taxes,
what "illicit" product or activity that people want has ever been taxed out of
existence? Not tobacco, not drugs, not prostitution, not Big Macs. Methinks
this is just a way to shift the tax burden of all the social programs you want
onto "Other People". These types of taxes are also extremely regressive as
upper middle class and wealthy folks spend a far smaller percentage of their
income on tobacco & booze than poorer people. Hey sounds like that other
panacea for shifting taxes to "Other People" - Gambling.

Dave Hall

David Hall wrote:

>>Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the reasons
>>alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
>>substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a similar
>>amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
>>
>>Charlie Self
>
>
> Comon, Charlie. If pot and other "recreational drugs" were legalized, regulated
> and taxed like booze the amount of tax dollars would be staggering.


Yes, it would.

At least till the private crop came in.



--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

Mark responds:

>David Hall wrote:
>
>>>Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the reasons
>>>alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
>>>substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a
>similar
>>>amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
>>>
>>>Charlie Self
>>
>>
>> Comon, Charlie. If pot and other "recreational drugs" were legalized,
>regulated
>> and taxed like booze the amount of tax dollars would be staggering.
>
>
>Yes, it would.
>
>At least till the private crop came in.

Yeah, and I'll bet that is one of the considerations, too. Tobacco needs
prcoessing for use, as does alcohol. Pot needs drying, period. Hard to stop
private growth if it's legal.

Charlie Self
"Brevity is the soul of lingerie." Dorothy Parker
http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

[email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Mark responds:
>
> >David Hall wrote:
> >
> >>>Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the reasons
> >>>alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
> >>>substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a
> similar
> >>>amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
> >>>
> >>>Charlie Self
> >>
> >>
> >> Comon, Charlie. If pot and other "recreational drugs" were legalized,
> regulated
> >> and taxed like booze the amount of tax dollars would be staggering.
> >
> >
> >Yes, it would.
> >
> >At least till the private crop came in.
>
> Yeah, and I'll bet that is one of the considerations, too. Tobacco needs
> prcoessing for use, as does alcohol. Pot needs drying, period. Hard to stop
> private growth if it's legal.
>
> Charlie Self
> "Brevity is the soul of lingerie." Dorothy Parker
> http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Tobacco only needs more processing than pot if you want a good cigar,
good pipe tobacco or a standardized cigarette. Lots of folks in the
more rural past grew tobacco and used it, but we want something better
than that big leaf we grew out back. Same with alcohol. It's not that
hard to make (see Luigi's post abot 50 gallon of homemade wine) and
yet we do not have a nation of brewers and distillers. (I believe it
is just as legal to make moonshine for your own consumption as it is
beer and wine). I see no reason to believe that after the novelty wore
off that people would be out growing their own and they certainly
wouldn't be planting a lot of backyard coca trees.

Dave Hall

David Hall wrote:

> I see no reason to believe that after the novelty wore
> off that people would be out growing their own and they certainly
> wouldn't be planting a lot of backyard coca trees.


Not cocoa trees in the back yard as they need a different climate.


But my daddy could buy tomatoes, corn, cucumbers at the local mart. I
wonder why he grew his own. ?


--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (David Hall) wrote:
[snip]
> (I believe it
>is just as legal to make moonshine for your own consumption as it is
>beer and wine).

Nope. Not a bit legal. Not in the United States, anyway.

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

In article <GuEKb.21548$P%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (David Hall) wrote:
> [snip]
> > (I believe it
> >is just as legal to make moonshine for your own consumption as it is
> >beer and wine).
>
> Nope. Not a bit legal. Not in the United States, anyway.
>
You're right. But it used to be. Many decades ago (1955?), I sent off
for a booklet from, IIRC, the department of agriculture. It showed how
to build your own still. In the back was a registration form you were
supposed to fill out and send to the revenuers.

But then somebody decided to "protect" us :-).

> --
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?
>

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mark responds:
>
> >David Hall wrote:
> >
> >>>Aren't we at least trying to do that already? Another one of the
reasons
> >>>alcohol and tobacco will never be banned is the amount of money the 2
> >>>substances bring in to various governments. If marijuana brought in a
> >similar
> >>>amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
> >>>
> >>>Charlie Self
> >>
> >>
> >> Comon, Charlie. If pot and other "recreational drugs" were legalized,
> >regulated
> >> and taxed like booze the amount of tax dollars would be staggering.
> >
> >
> >Yes, it would.
> >
> >At least till the private crop came in.
>
> Yeah, and I'll bet that is one of the considerations, too. Tobacco needs
> prcoessing for use, as does alcohol. Pot needs drying, period. Hard to
stop
> private growth if it's legal.

Moreover, consider all of the money/spending that occurs around the drug
trade presently. Yeah, a good chunk of it prolly goes outside our borders,
but a bunch of it stays here (speaking from a USA standpoint). That that
goes outside our borders is prolly used to buy weapons from the U.S.

Legalize dope and you'll see fewer Escalades and Uzis in the 'hoods... that
part of the economy will tank, along with jobs used to create those
Escalades and Uzis, etc. So now we are talking gov't. subsidies to the
economy to offset loss of drug money. Will it balance?

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:

>Yeah, and I'll bet that is one of the considerations, too. Tobacco needs
>prcoessing for use, as does alcohol. Pot needs drying, period. Hard to stop
>private growth if it's legal.
>
Alcohol doesn't need much processing, my friend. I've been making wine at home
for years, and it ain't that hard. Making _good_ wine can be a bit tricky at
times... :-)

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

Mon, Jan 5, 2004, 3:43pm [email protected] (Cape=A0Cod=A0Bob) puts
out:
Charlie, look beyond banning alcohol entirely. How about very heavy
taxation so that drinking beyond a socially accepted range becomes too
expensive to sustain?

Nice thought. How about we include cocain, heroin, and a bunch of
those other drubs? Get rid off all the nasty stuff at once.
Prohibition banned alcohol. Made it illegal. So, people who otherwise
wouldn't have drank started drinking. People made their own. It was
smuggled into the country. Read history, it didn't work then, no reason
it would work now.

JOAT
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm.
- Sir Winston Churchill

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 5 Jan 2004.
Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

It would but it's illegal. Illegal in the US means free market. either
legalize it and make money off it or really do something about it. Neither
option has been tried yet.

"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If marijuana brought in a similar
> amount, it would be on sale at all convenience stores.
>
> Charlie Self
> "Brevity is the soul of lingerie." Dorothy Parker
> http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/myhomepage/business.html

Does anyone else remember Busy Buzz Buzz from the Snuffy Smith cartoons?
Another cartoon? A girl who couldn't get enough of cleaning?


Or was I hallucinating when I was 5?





--

Mark

N.E. Ohio


Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens,
A.K.A. Mark Twain)

When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the
suspense. (Gaz, r.moto)

On 03 Jan 2004 10:00:33 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
scribbled:
>I think we tried that. Prohibition it was called. Worked great. We ended up
>with bootleggers, bathtub gin, speakeasies, a super advanced moonshining
>industry, and crime bosses, along with several more government groups that are
>still hanging around. Like many other substances, alcohol is very simple to
>produce, so total control is impossible.
>
>Controls are fairly tight on booze in this country, yet we still seem to have
>more problems with it than most countries.

It seems that the further north one goes, the worse the alcohol
problems become and the larger the social problem caused by it. Think
Scandinavian countries, Russia, Canada, UK, Ireland. I think all these
countries have worse alcohol problems than the US.

Canada and the Scandinavian countries are really tough on drunk
driving and tax the hell out of alcohol. In Canada, drunk driving has
been a criminal offense for a long time, and the penalties are tougher
than in most US states. Here in the Yukon, we have a serious Fetal
Alcohol Syndrome problem, with kids whose mother drank are born with
different levels of mental retardation. We also have the highest per
capita alcohol consumption of any jurisdiction in Canada.

Not that any of this is going to stop me from making my 50 gallons of
wine a year, which I drink in moderation. Well, maybe except for New
Year's Eve.

Luigi
Replace "no" with "yk" for real email address

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Ron Magen notes:
>
> >It's been so long, I can't remember the last time I had a cigarette. But
> >every time one of those 'Stop Smoking' spots come on . . . the feeling comes
> >into my head to go out and buy a pack of 'Luckies'. Joanne says it's just
> >because I'm, 'Contrary & Ornery'.
>
> Could be. I always swore I'd never be one of those PITA ex-smokers. I've got a
> couple friends like that, they panic and sweep their hands through the air when
> someone lights up near them, and so on. But the longer I'm off the butts, the
> less I can stand being around them, and the more I feel they are ruinous, both
> fiscally and physically.
>
> So I get to be a PITA. But I still abhor those damned anti-smoking crusade ads.
>

I never smoked and was never tempted to do so, but everytime I hear
one of those blasted PSA anti-smoking ads, the urge to go out and buy a
carton of cigarettes sweeps over me. I guess it's because those ads are
a) stupid, b) condescending, and c) take the idea of government as
caregiver in the role of "mother knows best" to the extreme.