Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.tech.]
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 12/6/2010 10:08 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:

At home I use Outlook Express for a news reader.[...]

Bill Gates holding a gun to your head?

Most of us are already paying enough for our Internet connection without the
extra expense of a newsreader.


There are over a dozen free newsreaders available to Bill's minions,
so the "extra expense" is zero.


--
Tad McClellan
email: perl -le "print scalar reverse qq/moc.liamg\100cm.j.dat/"
The above message is a Usenet post.
I don't recall having given anyone permission to use it on a Web site.

On 07/12/2010 05:04, Tim McNamara wrote:

I think you are drawing unwarranted conclusions about the benefits of
EMRs and overlooking the problems. This may be the result of
perspective- you're a computer programmer and not a health care provider.

I'm a computer programmer too, and I don't share Peter's belief in the
magic power of computers :-)

"Tad McClellan" wrote in message
...
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.tech.]
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 12/6/2010 10:08 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:

At home I use Outlook Express for a news reader.[...]

Bill Gates holding a gun to your head?

Most of us are already paying enough for our Internet connection without
the
extra expense of a newsreader.


There are over a dozen free newsreaders available to Bill's minions,
so the "extra expense" is zero.

I think a lot of folks have ISPs which do not provide free newsreaders. I
used to use Outlook Express and now I use Windows Mail. It is convenient to
use them and they work well enough as far as I can tell. I am pretty sure
Mr. Sherman is paying for his newsreader.

What is a good free newsreader just in case I need one someday?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

I just realized I will not see a response to this post unless I make sure it
comes to RBS. I do not monitor RBT.

Ed Dolan


"Tad McClellan" wrote in message
...
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.bicycles.tech.]
Edward Dolan wrote:
"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 12/6/2010 10:08 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:

At home I use Outlook Express for a news reader.[...]

Bill Gates holding a gun to your head?

Most of us are already paying enough for our Internet connection without
the
extra expense of a newsreader.


There are over a dozen free newsreaders available to Bill's minions,
so the "extra expense" is zero.

I think a lot of folks have ISPs which do not provide free newsreaders. I
used to use Outlook Express and now I use Windows Mail. It is convenient to
use them and they work well enough as far as I can tell. I am pretty sure
Mr. Sherman is paying for his newsreader.

What is a good free newsreader just in case I need one someday?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Dec 6, 11:22*pm, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Dec 6, 7:29*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Dec 6, 2:45*pm, DirtRoadie wrote:

On Dec 6, 12:35*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

So DR, when you're bicycling in a 10 foot lane with a truck that's
8' 6" wide coming up behind you, what exactly do you do?

Frank, you're ignoring me. Remember?

No, obviously, I'm asking you a question..

When you're bicycling in a 10 foot lane with a truck that's 8' 6" wide
coming up behind you, what exactly do you do?

Are you really so afraid to answer?

No, Frank not afraid, just bored and exercising a bit of restraint.
With regard to the situation you describe one might wonder why it is
necessary to do anything unless it is a dangerous or extremely
dangerous situation. So is it?

It's not dangerous for me, because I do control the situation by
controlling the lane.

I think it's dangerous for a cyclist to ride the road's edge so as to
not displease the trucker. It's unacceptably dangerous to imply to
the trucker (or any motorist) that he's welcome to pass you with only
tiny clearance.

There is no room for the truck to pass within the lane in any case.
Why are you making a big deal of it? Don't you feel adequately safe?

I feel extremely safe handling it the way I do. I'm making a big deal
of it because Duane mocked the fact that I control the trucker's
behavior.

So DR, what _do_ you do in that situation? 10 foot lane, 8.5 foot
truck. Do you suddenly bail to ride the sidewalk, or do you bump
along in the gutter, or do you control the lane?

- Frank Krygowski

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 6:17 pm, "Duane Hebert" wrote:

I would make myself as visible as possible and try to verify that
he sees me. If so, I would stay in the center of the lane. If
not, and he keeps coming I would do the same thing that Dan would
do.

So you really bail out and try to jump to the sidewalk, eh? Wow. Do
you do this when he's a block back? Seems you can't delay until he's
50 feet behind, else you may not be able to bail out in time. So much
for a right to the road!

Again, you can't deal with my answer so you make up one and
ridicule me for that. Have you always been such an arrogant idiot?

On 12/6/2010 9:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Of course, there aren't _always_ trucks waiting to pass me. There are
frequently cars, though, and it makes little difference; a ten foot
lane is far too narrow to be safely shared.

Somebody needs to tell that to the cops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHNd_...eature=related

Forget about the drivers, they'll never get it. They don't want to.

On 12/6/2010 9:37 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 12/5/2010 2:16 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
[...]
In the US, something like 60% of bankruptcies are related to health
problems. In much of the rest of the developed world, it is 0%. There
are really no valid economic arguments against universal insurance under
a robust public option. The arguments against it are primarily those of
political philosophy (e.g., the canard of "freedom"). The benefits are
massive- reduced total costs, elimination of bad debt for services
provided which in turn can reduce costs of care, removing the cost of
insurance from payrolls and putting US businesses on a more even footing
with businesses in other countries (benefitting small businesses as much
or more), etc. Funding can be diversified across large segments of the
economy (a combination of payroll taxes and broader taxes) which can
distribute the burden quite tolerably.[...]

Worthless eaters do not deserve medical care.


Wow.

On 12/7/2010 6:33 AM, Peter Cole wrote:
On 12/6/2010 9:37 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 12/5/2010 2:16 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
[...]
In the US, something like 60% of bankruptcies are related to health
problems. In much of the rest of the developed world, it is 0%. There
are really no valid economic arguments against universal insurance under
a robust public option. The arguments against it are primarily those of
political philosophy (e.g., the canard of "freedom"). The benefits are
massive- reduced total costs, elimination of bad debt for services
provided which in turn can reduce costs of care, removing the cost of
insurance from payrolls and putting US businesses on a more even footing
with businesses in other countries (benefitting small businesses as much
or more), etc. Funding can be diversified across large segments of the
economy (a combination of payroll taxes and broader taxes) which can
distribute the burden quite tolerably.[...]

Worthless eaters do not deserve medical care.


Wow.

Just stating the policy of the important people who run the world.

(And you really should take a look at my full header.)

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 12/6/2010 11:04 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
In ,
Peter wrote:
[...]
Medicine, in the US, via a number of mechanisms, is pretty much a
cartel.
Bull****. But you have to stop mixing things up to be able to
understand that.


The financing of medical care in the US is a cartel.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.