Gordo
100 kW
MadRhino said:
In the Province that consumes 2X the sugar, has the highest percentage of smokers and Poutine, you may have a problem? But my mother-in-law still lived to 95.
Please don't let this happen!
- Thread starter JennyB
- Start date
In the Province that consumes 2X the sugar, has the highest percentage of smokers and Poutine, you may have a problem? But my mother-in-law still lived to 95.
Zoot Katz
100 kW
Thank you for confirming the summation of my post.Gordo said:
Your anecdotes and emotional arguments have certainly not changed my mind.
Rock climbing and motorcycling convinced me of the value of protective headgear.
I began wearing a kayaking helmet on my bicycle in 1976. I'd just moved from the interior to the city.
I still wear it.
Originally I began strapping it on as a reminder to maintain a professional attitude on the road.
I knew it was probably unlikely to "save my life" so it was mostly for vanity I guess. Helmets were unusual then.
Later I realised it was a good place to put lots of reflective tape and it aided visibility.
Since the helmet law was enacted it's mostly served as a pig-chaser talisman. I've never, in all those miles, ever needed it.
I think my gods get a chuckle from the kettle and lift me out of any foul moods.
We both know it's the last thing I'd want on my head in case of a crash. It's not my everyday lid.
There are still no testing standards specified in the Act . The kettle generally shuts up the nattering Liddites when they're informed it was CSA approved.
More life years are lost to inactivity than years of life lost to bicycling crashes. When helmet laws discourage people from bicycling it's a greater loss than if they'd ridden around bare headed for those extra years they'd gained.
MadRhino
100 GW
Was she wearing a helmet?Gordo said:
Did you compile the medical cost?
wineboyrider
1 MW
Well put. I am impressed by your logic.
Gordo
100 kW
No, she did not wear a helmet but if she did she would probably still be alive. She fell down the stairs and died of a brain injury. She was brain dead before she was found.MadRhino said:
Gordo
100 kW
Zoot Katz said:
Zoot;
My post was certainly not intended to change anyone's mind. To be specific I have a certain admiration for those brave enough to not wear a helmet. I do not support any rules that limit one's choice of anything. Because I find it impossible to draw the line where we publicly fund the care needed to look after people who injure themselves while taking unnecessary risks, I can't support my own position of not looking after people who don't wear a helmet. It may cost us all, but that is what we collectively have chosen to do. Rescue silly skiers, fallen rock climbers, drowning boaters, etc.
Gordo
100 kW
wineboyrider said:
In New Zealand I noticed in 9 out of 10 intersections there were Yield signs where in NA we would find a 4 way stop. I found the yield signs worked very well, So I asked the locals why not stop signs. I was told stop signs were found to cause too many accidents, because they pissed people off and they were ignored. Did all the thinking people in the UK immigrate to NZ?
Hillhater
100 TW
Gordo said:
..only those ones thinking about rooting sheep. !
Lessss
1 MW
That reminds me - completely off Top - The province of New Brunswick is considering new slogans. Old one Be in this place. One of them under consideration is "We have roots here."
Gordo
100 kW
Hillhater said:Gordo said:
..only those ones thinking about rooting sheep. !
I also got to enjoy some of the legendary Auz/Kiwi humorous rivalry;
On the ferry from North Island to South Island we were having trouble understanding the many safety announcements so I ask a local what was said. He answered, "beats me mate, the bastards and Auzzie, nobody can understand them!" :lol:
liveforphysics
100 TW
A helmet has saved my ass a number of times. I've wrecked hard enough to be KO'd through a knock on the head of a full-face shoei that cracked it. Can't imagine what it would have done to my skull.
However! I would NEVER want the choice to wear some personal safety equipment to be determinedby government policy...
I also feel like bike helmets are worthless. Full-face motorcycle helmets however are not useless, and a damn good idea.
However! I would NEVER want the choice to wear some personal safety equipment to be determinedby government policy...
I also feel like bike helmets are worthless. Full-face motorcycle helmets however are not useless, and a damn good idea.
AppleTown said:
Wow, you pretty much summed up the primary difference between America and Europe.
We are too collectively stupid here to understand things that will collectively benefit everyone are a good thing. Any attempt to make that happen is met with derision. The root cause is corporate interests and an individualistic attitude; which i applaud, but the problem is that the majority of us are only looking out for themselves and cooperation rarely happens.
What we call "socialism" actually works quite well in a lot of places. The difference is in the attitude of the people.
Hillhater
100 TW
liveforphysics said:
Luke, ... you need some instruction on how you wear that helmet !
:lol:
MadRhino
100 GW
Hillhater said:liveforphysics said:
Luke, ... you need some instruction on how you wear that helmet !
Gordo
100 kW
liveforphysics said:
I went cart racing today and took some pretty good whacks. Sore neck from the weight of the full face with no HANS restraints.
My wife smacked a pole with a bike helmet on and got 3 stitches over her right eye. The helmet had severe damage to it, so I was happy she was wearing it. Not quite worthless, but close at anything over walking speed.
wineboyrider
1 MW
We haven't had a capitalistic free market insurance since at least the 1920's so to base your experience on the socialistic system we now have is sort of ironic.
Ahem...
8) 8)
Anytime the government forces any party of a contract between citizens it is force. Some people call it slavery, but I just call it socialism. There is nothing free about health care nor is capitalistic today it is mired in government regulations and special deals for lawyers, lawsuits and special interests. Health care is not a right it is a good and anytime the government starts dealing out goods and stealing from one portion of society and giving to another that is socialism.
DON"T STEAL GOVERNMENT HATES THE COMPETITION! 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
number1cruncher
1 kW
AppleTown said:
I think that Switzerland would be a good example of the consequence of promoting(not requiring) high gun ownership rates. :wink: Very low crime...If you know your neighbor is packin', you're less likely to rob them.
And yes I'm a libertarian, so I am against most governement involvement in our lives. I agree that we should all work together, but not at the price of losing individual freedom and liberty. That was what the US was founded upon. The constitution says nothing about the government providing the means to pursue liberty, freedom and happiness. Its all about the INDIVIDUAL right to pursue these things... But alas, we seem to be moving back toward the very concepts that ignited our forefather's passion to separate from England.
I wonder how long until we are forced to wear breathing aparatus to minimize pollutant intake. I'm sure the carbon monoxide we are huffing is quite bad for us...
Hmmm, not really sure if it is a good idea or a bad idea.
Northern Ireland has the NHS which means if you are injured, you are
putting a burden on the state - other tax payers. Even if it didn't
have public healthcare - there is still a burden on other people.
Hospitals are over-crowded and your need for treatment, stemming from
not wearing a helmet, still impacts on others.
In the real world, we are all interdependent. One person's action
invariably affects someone else.
I don't get this Libertarianism nonsense. It is nothing more than
classical liberalism for people who don't like the word 'liberalism'.
Liberalism and conservatism for that matter are virtually identical
apart from one aspect. One philosophy adheres rigidly to the status
quo the other doesn't.
Socialism is also not the same as communism. Without some aspects of
socialism countries are little more than fascist oppressive states.
Too much socialism and you get a totalitarian state - Soviet
Russia/China etc. This black-and-white notion of good and bad is
ridiculous. A country needs a healthy mix of everything.
France are thanking their lucky stars that they have big government -
inefficient as they are - they are the best placed of all the first
world countries to recover from the global recession. The voters will
get rid of Sarkozy in the next election and it will be awhile before
someone tries to make their economy completely deregulated again. Big
Government has got huge inefficiency problems but it also has built-in
safeguards that prevent the country going into meltdown during bad
times.
A fully capitalist state would be terrible as well - you only have to
look at the damage that was inflicted on Argentina, Chile and Russia
when they adhered to the capitalist deregulated model. Tens of
millions of people suffered, tens of thousands were tortured and
thousands died of starvation. Argentina has started to recover, Chile
has went the opposite way and Russia, well Russia is a basket case. It
had a chance with Gorbachev but the nutter Yeltsin was backed by Bush.
Now it seems like it will take a monumental effort to change it's
corrupt regime. And these things usually require monumental pain.
Capitalism is fatally flawed. There is only so much room at the top.
The lower tiers run the country and prop up those who are higher on
the food chain. No matter how meritocractic the society is, there are
not many people that can make it up there. It is basically a giant
pyramid scheme - sometimes people change positions but the structure
remains the same. Even if everyone worked the hardest, had brilliant
ideas and were brilliant individuals, most of them would be treated
worse than their peers. The dregs down below suffer the most.
Therefore, you have to put safeguards in place.
Germany will be an interesting country to watch. Europe's largest
economy and the world's largest exporter (actually ahead of China), it
is the powerhouse of Europe. But it has one huge fatal flaw - it is a
victim of its own efficiency. The Germans are very austere when it
comes to spending (public or private). Basically, the country is awash
with money but it has no where to spend it, or rather no desire to
spend. So where does it put it - in the banks. Now the German banks
have no choice but to lend money out to other countries - if they
don't lend they lose money. So they loan money to deregulated
countries such as Ireland, Greece etc.
Ireland had removed all the safeguards and had a completely
deregulated banking industry with an idiot of a regulator. If the
German banks had paid attention they would have realised quite quickly
not to loan the Greeks, Irish, Portuguese, Spanish banks money. But
then again who else were they going to lend to?
So now there is a mountain of debt, none of these countries can pay
back the loans (bailout is the euphemism) and so we will all have to
default unless there is a massive write off. The whole system
collapses and Germany is left with no money. But that is the quandary
it will always face every couple of decades or so. You can't be the
largest exporter in the EU and not expect to bail out the peripheral
countries - these are the countries that are making you rich in the
first place. The economic system in its current format has a circular
flow that will always cause collapses. It will be fascinating to watch
when the penny drops and the Germans start to understand this.
So to recap - countries need a balanced system with a mixed economy.
Become over-reliant on anything and you go bust.
Libertarianism is not a distinct philosophy - just a word for people
who don't like liberalism. There seems to be a huge confusion between
conservatism and liberalism - which are almost identical. (Not saying
on this site but in general.)
Fully capitalist, de-regulated states are doomed. So are
communist/totalitarian countries - but that has a longer end-game.
Helmets - for the greater good probably should be worn. But it does
suck to wear them and I myself won't be so keen to wear one if this
was to happen in Ireland. It is one more thing to carry around.
Yellow Magpie - Home Of The Talented And The Interesting
Northern Ireland has the NHS which means if you are injured, you are
putting a burden on the state - other tax payers. Even if it didn't
have public healthcare - there is still a burden on other people.
Hospitals are over-crowded and your need for treatment, stemming from
not wearing a helmet, still impacts on others.
In the real world, we are all interdependent. One person's action
invariably affects someone else.
I don't get this Libertarianism nonsense. It is nothing more than
classical liberalism for people who don't like the word 'liberalism'.
Liberalism and conservatism for that matter are virtually identical
apart from one aspect. One philosophy adheres rigidly to the status
quo the other doesn't.
Socialism is also not the same as communism. Without some aspects of
socialism countries are little more than fascist oppressive states.
Too much socialism and you get a totalitarian state - Soviet
Russia/China etc. This black-and-white notion of good and bad is
ridiculous. A country needs a healthy mix of everything.
France are thanking their lucky stars that they have big government -
inefficient as they are - they are the best placed of all the first
world countries to recover from the global recession. The voters will
get rid of Sarkozy in the next election and it will be awhile before
someone tries to make their economy completely deregulated again. Big
Government has got huge inefficiency problems but it also has built-in
safeguards that prevent the country going into meltdown during bad
times.
A fully capitalist state would be terrible as well - you only have to
look at the damage that was inflicted on Argentina, Chile and Russia
when they adhered to the capitalist deregulated model. Tens of
millions of people suffered, tens of thousands were tortured and
thousands died of starvation. Argentina has started to recover, Chile
has went the opposite way and Russia, well Russia is a basket case. It
had a chance with Gorbachev but the nutter Yeltsin was backed by Bush.
Now it seems like it will take a monumental effort to change it's
corrupt regime. And these things usually require monumental pain.
Capitalism is fatally flawed. There is only so much room at the top.
The lower tiers run the country and prop up those who are higher on
the food chain. No matter how meritocractic the society is, there are
not many people that can make it up there. It is basically a giant
pyramid scheme - sometimes people change positions but the structure
remains the same. Even if everyone worked the hardest, had brilliant
ideas and were brilliant individuals, most of them would be treated
worse than their peers. The dregs down below suffer the most.
Therefore, you have to put safeguards in place.
Germany will be an interesting country to watch. Europe's largest
economy and the world's largest exporter (actually ahead of China), it
is the powerhouse of Europe. But it has one huge fatal flaw - it is a
victim of its own efficiency. The Germans are very austere when it
comes to spending (public or private). Basically, the country is awash
with money but it has no where to spend it, or rather no desire to
spend. So where does it put it - in the banks. Now the German banks
have no choice but to lend money out to other countries - if they
don't lend they lose money. So they loan money to deregulated
countries such as Ireland, Greece etc.
Ireland had removed all the safeguards and had a completely
deregulated banking industry with an idiot of a regulator. If the
German banks had paid attention they would have realised quite quickly
not to loan the Greeks, Irish, Portuguese, Spanish banks money. But
then again who else were they going to lend to?
So now there is a mountain of debt, none of these countries can pay
back the loans (bailout is the euphemism) and so we will all have to
default unless there is a massive write off. The whole system
collapses and Germany is left with no money. But that is the quandary
it will always face every couple of decades or so. You can't be the
largest exporter in the EU and not expect to bail out the peripheral
countries - these are the countries that are making you rich in the
first place. The economic system in its current format has a circular
flow that will always cause collapses. It will be fascinating to watch
when the penny drops and the Germans start to understand this.
So to recap - countries need a balanced system with a mixed economy.
Become over-reliant on anything and you go bust.
Libertarianism is not a distinct philosophy - just a word for people
who don't like liberalism. There seems to be a huge confusion between
conservatism and liberalism - which are almost identical. (Not saying
on this site but in general.)
Fully capitalist, de-regulated states are doomed. So are
communist/totalitarian countries - but that has a longer end-game.
Helmets - for the greater good probably should be worn. But it does
suck to wear them and I myself won't be so keen to wear one if this
was to happen in Ireland. It is one more thing to carry around.
Yellow Magpie - Home Of The Talented And The Interesting
wineboyrider
1 MW
Glad to see some people actually agree that the freedom choose one owns destiny and helmet freedom. Yes, libertarianism is a philosophy and yes I believe I am classically liberal. Some people define libertarian leaning as true conservatism as well (Barry Goldwater, Thomas Jefferson) might be good examples. Libertarians shouldn't become confused with libertines that do whatever feels good. Libertarian are the ultimate un-control freaks. I don't want to tell you or anyone else what to do unless it affects my liberty or yours. So yes it is a very idealistic approach to life. What I find really hard is the hatred from the left and right (Europeans actually define left and right oppositely) from libertarianism as an evil form of force when in fact it's quite the opposite.
@number1cruncher: The forcing someone to own a gun was only a reverse analogy. I no more want to force you or anyone to carry gun more than I want you to wear helmet. Both have risks as well a gun in a well trained hand is force of good a helmet worn sloppily or incorrectly is just as dangerous as not wearing one at all.
Rationalism is always grand I just wish more people thought about the consequences of other before they make laws that protect people from themselves.
Peace and chicken grease.
LegendLength
100 W
Joseph C. said:
To understand the 'nonsense', ask the person nearest to you what a 'liberal' is. After they finish explaining a philosophy that is the exact opposite of classical liberalism you'll understand why we don't call ourselves classic liberals anymore.
wineboyrider
1 MW
LOL.
LegendLength wrote:
Joseph C. wrote:
I don't get this Libertarianism nonsense. It is nothing more than
classical liberalism for people who don't like the word 'liberalism'.
To understand the 'nonsense', ask the person nearest to you what a
'liberal' is. After they finish explaining a philosophy that is the
exact opposite of classical liberalism you'll understand why we don't
call ourselves classic liberals anymore.
Ah! That used to drive me nuts but I get your position now. I might
try asking that but I would imagine your point would be best proved in
the US. Maybe I'm wrong.
I'm all for self-choice as long as others aren't affected - but they
probably will be in this case.
The Irish Government decided not to implement the suggestions of a
safety review which wanted helmet use several years ago. I suppose
they were too busy lining their pockets and overheating the economy to
bother with bicycles!
You mention of guns kindles thoughts on crime and fear. (I get your
point - and it is well-made.) I agree.
Now crime and fear:
I don't understand this fear of crime. Crime has never been lower in
the history of humanity in the Western World. There are no marauders
killing people. No anti-women witch hunts (By the way, why does every
religion hate women? I still haven't worked that one out.) But yet the
media covers crime as if there was an epidemic. If I had a choice,
there would be no details of a terrorist attack, school shooting, work
shooting etc. other than one line and the next item please. The whole
reason for these sociopaths doing what they do is narcissism, nothing
else. Terrorists, and their ilk, blame others for their problems, as
only narcissists can. So don't give them any attention as they get off
on it. That should be a law in every country as clearly we're not
learning. Rant over!
Joseph C. wrote:
I don't get this Libertarianism nonsense. It is nothing more than
classical liberalism for people who don't like the word 'liberalism'.
To understand the 'nonsense', ask the person nearest to you what a
'liberal' is. After they finish explaining a philosophy that is the
exact opposite of classical liberalism you'll understand why we don't
call ourselves classic liberals anymore.
Ah! That used to drive me nuts but I get your position now. I might
try asking that but I would imagine your point would be best proved in
the US. Maybe I'm wrong.
I'm all for self-choice as long as others aren't affected - but they
probably will be in this case.
The Irish Government decided not to implement the suggestions of a
safety review which wanted helmet use several years ago. I suppose
they were too busy lining their pockets and overheating the economy to
bother with bicycles!
You mention of guns kindles thoughts on crime and fear. (I get your
point - and it is well-made.) I agree.
Now crime and fear:
I don't understand this fear of crime. Crime has never been lower in
the history of humanity in the Western World. There are no marauders
killing people. No anti-women witch hunts (By the way, why does every
religion hate women? I still haven't worked that one out.) But yet the
media covers crime as if there was an epidemic. If I had a choice,
there would be no details of a terrorist attack, school shooting, work
shooting etc. other than one line and the next item please. The whole
reason for these sociopaths doing what they do is narcissism, nothing
else. Terrorists, and their ilk, blame others for their problems, as
only narcissists can. So don't give them any attention as they get off
on it. That should be a law in every country as clearly we're not
learning. Rant over!
