Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

""Tºm Shermªn™ °_° --"" wrote in
message ...
The current world population is unsustainable, as evidenced by increasing
ecological system breakdowns and natural resource depletion.

The hominid population *will* be reduced. The only question is will it be
done by reduced birthrates, or by mass disease and starvation?

--


debunked
alien invasion

"Dan O" wrote in message
...
I was walking down the two carpeted steps to the garage yesterday,
when my big toe got caught in the other pajama pantleg. Damn! I
forgot to put my heljmet on!! (Fortunately, my wife was right there
with me, giving me someone to lean on :-)

(Actually, with my heljmet on it would strike the doorway to the steps
unless I duck down a bit - even in bare feet.)

The roads here at this moment are not fit for vehicular travel sans
studs. If I do go out for a ride, I *will* wear my heljmet.

now I will have to run out and get one

thanks for letting me know

"Peter Cole" wrote in message
...
On 11/22/2010 7:31 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

And yet, there have been people who have posted here, saying that
cycling is obviously dangerous because there are more fatalities per
mile for cycling than for riding in a car. At this point, I don't
remember exactly who made that argument and whether you were in the
discussion. But can I assume, then, that you'd discount any such
claim that cycling was more dangerous than motoring?

There are also more fatalities per trip. of you'd prefer that. About 3x
for cycling and walking vs. motoring, whereas the per mile are roughly 11x
& 30x respectively (US).

I don't think it makes much of a case for cycling just to compare it to
motoring. I consider motoring to not be particularly safe either. We've
just come to tolerate the carnage. If there's been any propaganda campaign
conducted it's been one that's equated motoring to personal freedom --
that's sacred in the US.


compare it to firing employees
I m scheduled to pop number two employee on Monday

This is the one I am dreading

"Dan O" wrote in message
...
I don't really give a flying fig about numbers (except those like
dropout spacing). I only know that I was just soaking my paronychia
in a Sponge Bob cup of magnesium sulfate while hosing walnut slime off
the driveway with the other hand :-)

I recently came from a holiday party where the hosts had us play blackjack
for real cash after the turkey dinner.
We played with Sponge Bob cards.
Apparently 6 and 9 look the same under water
sink or swim

Per Ala:
I read about this a long time ago and may be misremembering it.
I seem to remember that the no call list is actually owned by AT&T and that
by adding your name to it you've only given marketers more information about
live contacts

Not the case in Pennsylvania.

Although both state and federal no-call lists seem tb heading for
irrelevance in the light of offshore boiler rooms spoofing phone
numbers via Skype, Penna's actually had some teeth a few years
back.

I say this because I even got a check from the Attorney General's
office for twenty-some dollars - my share of the settlement in
which the prosecuted somebody named in one of my complaints.
--
PeteCresswell

On Dec 18, 10:42*pm, RobertH wrote:


Hold on there. There is no evidence that correlates experience with
lane position, and no evidence that correlates differences of a few
feet in lane position with visibility.

http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...e-positioning/

In the absence of evidence, all
you have is the unsupported assertion that a cyclist can change their
likelihood of being noticed by an approaching driver "a considerable
amount" just by altering their lane position a small amount. I don't
buy it, to put it mildly.

http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...gplotchart.jpg

There is no evidence to support the core VC assertions about lane
position and visibility, and no evidence to justify VC's hypocritical
rearward fixation on "dangerous passes." There is however plenty of
evidence showing that the visibility-enhancing powers of assertive
lane position are highly fallible.

Your definition of "no evidence" is different from mine.

So, Peter, where do _you_ ride in a 10' lane when an 8.5' truck is
approaching from behind?

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 18, 4:56*pm, RobertH wrote:
On Dec 18, 2:37 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I think that may be the case with some, including Robert. *That's why
I asked the question about being passed by an 8.5' truck in a 10'
lane.

To my surprise, some people were very resistant to saying they would
ride away from the road edge.

It Depends. On a narrow twisty road like that described by Jay
Beattie, with blind corners, I might be over at the edge to start
with. "Timidly" -- hell yeah, in that situation.

Interesting. On a road where it's more difficult for the trucker to
see you, you make yourself even less visible. Despite the fact that,
if it's narrow and twisty, his closing speed will be lower.

And if he does accept your invitation to pass, despite oncoming
traffic keeping him in the narrow lane? I suppose you use your bike
ninja skills to steer super-precisely and never flinch as your left
shoulder polishes the truck's right side?

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 18, 10:42*pm, RobertH wrote:

Hold on there. There is...no evidence that correlates differences of a few
feet in lane position with visibility.

http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...e-positioning/

In the absence of evidence, all
you have is the unsupported assertion that a cyclist can change their
likelihood of being noticed by an approaching driver "a considerable
amount" just by altering their lane position a small amount.

http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/...gplotchart.jpg

Your definition of "no evidence" is different from mine.

- Frank Krygowski

On Dec 19, 2:15*am, James wrote:

Just imagine you need to move around a hole or debris as they skim
passed. *6 inches could be the difference between no problem and
clipped handlebars and a nasty fall - or worse.

So, when I'm in a narrow lane, I ride close enough to lane center to
discourage unsafe passing. They don't "skim passed."

If they did move only partially into the next lane and come too close
to me as they passed (an extremely rare event) I'd have far more than
6" room to my right to use to my advantage.

- Frank Krygowski

In article ,
"Ala" wrote:

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Tim McNamara:
As Dick Cheney said, deficits don't matter. We live that way in the
private sector as well as in the public sector.

Once it was apparent that Reagan was successful in pandering to
that segment of the electorate, I figured the handwriting was on
the wall. Cheney put the cap on it.

I would say that people on pensions without a COLA and with, say,
10 years life left in them are doomed to dying in poverty at this
point.

Maybe people with COLAs too - since the government is, with a
straight face, claiming there was almost no inflation this
year.....
--

President Reagan's son Ron is supposed to be coming out in the near future
with a biography that is supposed to have some wow moments about the
president

http://www.theliberaloc.com/2010/12/...e-mr-moorlach/

You're A Mean One Mr. Moorlach
December 16, 2010
By Chris Prevatt

"The Orange County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday will review its annual
Strategic Financial Plan. Our county has been doing 10-year fiscal
projections since our embarrassing bankruptcy protection filing in 1994. It
is an excellent management tool. However, this year it tells us that the
County of Orange is going to hit a wall. Why? Because our defined benefit
pension plan is demanding ever higher annual contributions."

Moorlach goes on with this misleading argument against defined benefit
retirement plans. "In the private sector, unsustainable traditional
defined-benefit pension plans (employer guarantees benefits) have been
frozen and converted to defined-contribution pension plans (the employee
contributes and reaps the compounding benefits). Municipalities in
California may not have this management tool at their disposal and cannot
impose changes to existing pension plans."

What Moorlach leaves out is that the change from defined benefit to defined
contribution plans in the private sector is due to the fact that most of the
industries that offered defined benefit plans, such as manufacturing, have
been moved out of the country, where the profits are greater, and
responsibilities to their workforce less. The drop in prevelance of defined
benefit plans is not due to their sustainability, it is due to corporate
greed. Pensions that have failed have done so primarily because the
corporations managed to raid their plans of their value

According to Milton Friedman, the economic god of conservative
politicians, "There is one and only one social responsibility of
business*to use it resources and engage in activities designed to
increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game,
which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception
or fraud." Never mind that deception and fraud are now cherished parts
of capitalism these days. Greed rules.

--
Gotta make it somehow on the dreams you still believe.