crowded Dutch bikepaths

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:15:04 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 10/14/2013 6:55 PM, Duane wrote:
Radey Shouman wrote:
Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.

--

Wasn't saying which I preferred. Only what I think utopian means. But
there's a difference between working because you want to and working
because you have to.

BTW I think utopian is an adjective usually employed as sarcasm. The
concept of a perfect society is pretty far fetched.


I tell my employees regularly that for every room in heaven
there's one just like it in hell for someone else.

A quick survey of RBT (dynamo/battery, clincher/tubular,
mudguards/no mudguards, clipless/toeclips, etc) would
provide more wisdom than our political leaders show. One
man's utopia may well be my gulag. And from the looks of it,
likely will be soon.

Pogo was right all those years ago when he said, "We've met the enemy
and he is us", or that guy that said "as you sow so shall you reap".
--
Cheers,

John B.

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:12:20 -0700, Dan
wrote:

Radey Shouman writes:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.


Damn! You share my exact vision!!

(We should talk over coffee or beers sometime :-)

However, when sharing my vision with someone one day, he remarked
that he hoped his brain surgery wasn't scheduled on the day that
another person we both knew was in the OR.

I had to agree and consider some refinements.

But anyway yes that's it *exactly*!

OTOH, Utopia by its nature is always out of reach.

When is your day on the garbage truck?

No no you still miss the point. In a utopian society there are no garbage
trucks. You just feed the waste back into the replicator.
--
duane

On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 4:34:50 AM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:12:20 -0700, Dan wrote:
Radey Shouman writes:
Duane writes:
John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George wrote:
On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

[Dan wrote]: I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia
seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.


Damn! You share my exact vision!!

(We should talk over coffee or beers sometime :-)

However, when sharing my vision with someone one day, he remarked
that he hoped his brain surgery wasn't scheduled on the day that
another person we both knew was in the OR.

I had to agree and consider some refinements.

But anyway yes that's it *exactly*!

OTOH, Utopia by its nature is always out of reach.

When is your day on the garbage truck?


Probably the hottest day of the year. Splendid! (I treasure such
epic experiences.)

Duane writes:

Radey Shouman wrote:
Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.

--

Wasn't saying which I preferred. Only what I think utopian means. But
there's a difference between working because you want to and working
because you have to.

I guess it's a vocabulary thing. If you don't have to, I don't call it
work. I still think that most people really are happier and healthier
if they have to do something, although that might not be immediately
obvious.

BTW I think utopian is an adjective usually employed as sarcasm. The
concept of a perfect society is pretty far fetched.

The original work was perhaps satire, I'm not sure "sarcasm" quite fits.
--

Dan writes:

Radey Shouman writes:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.


Damn! You share my exact vision!!

(We should talk over coffee or beers sometime :-)

Any time. (But it's a long ride).

However, when sharing my vision with someone one day, he remarked
that he hoped his brain surgery wasn't scheduled on the day that
another person we both knew was in the OR.

I had to agree and consider some refinements.

The trouble is, that for non-insiders going to the hospital is *always*
that kind of lottery. After all, that "other person" operates day in
and day out, right?

The ideal is that those not cut out for medical practice (or anything
else) should not have mercenary incentives to do it anyway.

But anyway yes that's it *exactly*!

OTOH, Utopia by its nature is always out of reach.

If you don't know where you want to head, what are the chances you'll
get there?

--

John B. writes:

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:26:21 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.

Yes. That sounds like Utopia.... but in real life it is seldom that
nuclear physicists are seen pitching garbage bins into the back of
trucks.

Shortly after the USSR went belly up I suspect you might have been able
to find some.

Or, for that matter, one seldom sees Garbage Men in Nuclear Physics
labs :-)

Back in the latter days of the British Empire, many a gentleman would
have been shocked to think that, one day, he might be expected to button
his own shirt in the morning. I don't want a Cultural Revolution, but
think we should go the other way.

--

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:26:21 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.

Yes. That sounds like Utopia.... but in real life it is seldom that
nuclear physicists are seen pitching garbage bins into the back of
trucks.

Or, for that matter, one seldom sees Garbage Men in Nuclear Physics
labs :-)

You've obviously never encountered Dilbert's garbage man.

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 12:16:57 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:12:20 -0700, Dan
wrote:

Radey Shouman writes:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.


Damn! You share my exact vision!!

(We should talk over coffee or beers sometime :-)

However, when sharing my vision with someone one day, he remarked
that he hoped his brain surgery wasn't scheduled on the day that
another person we both knew was in the OR.

I had to agree and consider some refinements.

But anyway yes that's it *exactly*!

OTOH, Utopia by its nature is always out of reach.

When is your day on the garbage truck?

No no you still miss the point. In a utopian society there are no garbage
trucks. You just feed the waste back into the replicator.

Are you sure that garbage sandwiches on the menu denotes Utopia?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 12:08:41 -0700 (PDT), Dan O
wrote:

On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 4:34:50 AM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:12:20 -0700, Dan wrote:
Radey Shouman writes:
Duane writes:
John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George wrote:
On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

[Dan wrote]: I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia
seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.


Damn! You share my exact vision!!

(We should talk over coffee or beers sometime :-)

However, when sharing my vision with someone one day, he remarked
that he hoped his brain surgery wasn't scheduled on the day that
another person we both knew was in the OR.

I had to agree and consider some refinements.

But anyway yes that's it *exactly*!

OTOH, Utopia by its nature is always out of reach.

When is your day on the garbage truck?


Probably the hottest day of the year. Splendid! (I treasure such
epic experiences.)

Another point, I understand that countries such as the U.SA. no longer
have garbage, or garbage men. From my days as a consultant it seems
that y'all have solid waste, and solid waste engineers, and solid
waste consultants.

Garbage is so outmoded that only developing countries have it any more
:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 03:36:18 GMT, Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:26:21 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Duane writes:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:57:08 +0100, Clive George
wrote:

On 14/10/2013 00:48, John B. wrote:

I almost hesitate to say it, but Utopia seems to look more like
the enlightened socialist societies (?)

And the "enlightened Socialist Societies" are those places where the
very highly skilled weep bitter tears about the high taxes that they
pay to allow the unskilled to live in splendor?

The ones with the highest happiness ratings you mean?

I've always wondered why this is considered utopian in contrast to a
society where every citizen is guaranteed a job.

Which society guarantees every citizen a job?

the point was why it is considered utopian to support people who don't
work rather then striving for a population that is gainfully
employed.

To me a utopian society would be one in which only those that choose to
work would work. I.e. Fantasy such as Star Trek.
Not that I disagree with your point that it would be better to strive
toward full employment because I don't. Just that I think it nearly as
impossible as a utopian society.

I doubt people would be very happy, long term, if they didn't have to
work at *something*. Historically, the idle classes have made an
avocation out of telling others what to do, but that can't work for
everyone.

A typical member of my utopian society would work as a nuclear physicist
three days a week, and a garbageman one, because even in utopia **** has
to get done.

Yes. That sounds like Utopia.... but in real life it is seldom that
nuclear physicists are seen pitching garbage bins into the back of
trucks.

Or, for that matter, one seldom sees Garbage Men in Nuclear Physics
labs :-)

You've obviously never encountered Dilbert's garbage man.

I haven't encountered Dilbert :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.