Skirt Cafe is an on-line community dedicated to exploring, promoting and advocating skirts and kilts as a fashion choice for men, formerly known as men in skirts. We do this in the context of men's fashion freedom --- an expansion of choices beyond those commonly available for men to include kilts, skirts and other garments. We recognize a diversity of styles our members feel comfortable wearing, and do not exclude any potential choices. Continuing dialog on gender is encouraged in the context of fashion freedom for men. See here for more details.
oldsalt1 wrote:the sentence doesn't make sense if he changed the word " of" to " are it might convey the message he is trying to relate.
I thought this was a social site and as such I don't need your english lesson or appreciate your condesending attitude towards my computer skills or lack there of .
Oldsalt1, I apologise for the tone of my posting; on reflection, it was somewhat blunt. I certainly did not mean for it to be offensive or condescending.
The parts about the inclusion of quotes was to clarify how to ensure the relevant parts are clearly included.
Similarly, as said in both this thread and the one you started titled: "How about telling the truth", I commented on the use of equipment. I accept that not everybody is adept at using equipment, either from general knowhow or maybe physical limitations, and acknowledged so.
Please understand, however, that knowing you are an accountant suggests to me a level of education, knowledge, intelligence and ability above the average "man in the street"; yet the construction of some of your posts leaves me dismayed. To be frank, they sometimes bear the hallmarks of the phrase: "better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to speak and put it beyond doubt". I am absolutely certain you are not a fool; and sometimes I wonder if my postings may leave me open to the same scrutiny.
All of the above said, I read your posts just as I do almost every active member. There is much to be learnt from each other. I may not agree with your stance on any given matter, but if there's a chance that I'd alter my position, then the quality of the argument put to me will have a bearing on it. I look forward to reading more; even within the "off-topic" sections
I feel that I am a very good accountant but to put it bluntly I suck at computers. Will try to follow your suggestions to improve by posts. I just came home from running a few errands I wonder how many people thought my skirt was part of a costume.
oldsalt1 wrote:I feel that I am a very good accountant but to put it bluntly I suck at computers.
The two are not interchangeable skills. I've been singled out as a highly competent technologist, but unless I forced things and learned one heck of a lot I'd make a lousy accountant.
The good thing is that these skills can be learned, and usually learning new things is both enjoyable and mind-expanding. I know I hammer on the theme, but ignorance really is innocent, expected, and easily and entirely curable; it's stupidity (wilful ignorance) that's terminal.
I just came home from running a few errands I wonder how many people thought my skirt was part of a costume.
Who cares? You know the facts. Let everybody else guess.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
oldsalt1 wrote:I feel that I am a very good accountant but to put it bluntly I suck at computers. Will try to follow your suggestions to improve by posts. I just came home from running a few errands I wonder how many people thought my skirt was part of a costume.
The easiest way to a nice clean properly referenced quote is to locate the text you want to quote in the discussion history down below the text box, highlight what you want to quote, and press the "QUOTE" button on top of the post.
See image below, highlight and press the button (circled in red)
quotetrick.jpg
(Click to enlarge)
Bonus tip:
This trick also works on my smart phone, albeit it's a little more tricky. You simply hold down your finger on the text you want to quote and drag either end of the quoted text to complete your quote.
-Moon Shadow
(Who is reading the latest political stream at SkirtCafe, but still is suffering from a bad case of foot in mouth syndrome from my previous thoughts on solving the worlds problems)
*unchecks subscribe
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
If we can avoid from getting too emotionally involved, I would be interested to read a view from the US of what Ms Clinton's stated policies are. I know how the UK press reports them, but we don't get to vote. Please can we try to stay true to the OP's intention and keep this positive rather than stooping to the mud slinging negativity that has characterised the campaign.
I am genuinely curious.
Have fun,
Ian.
Do not argue with idiots; they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Cogito ergo sum - Descartes
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
Milfmog wrote:If we can avoid from getting too emotionally involved, I would be interested to read a view from the US of what Ms Clinton's stated policies are. I know how the UK press reports them, but we don't get to vote. Please can we try to stay true to the OP's intention and keep this positive rather than stooping to the mud slinging negativity that has characterised the campaign.
I am genuinely curious.
Have fun,
Ian.
Thank you, Ian.
Yes, please, anyone who can tell us about the proposed policies; not just those of DT, but also those of HRC, plus the other candidates.
Don't bust a blood vessel in doing so, but we have genuine interest here.
As the moderator I feel you need to sanction yourself and probably delist your posts. Our brother who started this thread asked that we limit ourselves to discussing our candidates' policies. Since you seemed to not have one that is still running you shouldn't have responded. You certainly shouldn't have reprised your screeds about how the whole d*m# country is going h@l! in a handbasket.
Hello Disaffected Citizen,
Thank you for starting this thread. Since no one else has stuck to the rules I would like to request some license to fact-check:
The US has always to some degree or another been a haven for refugees. Nonetheless, this time around our vetting is so strict that it takes, on average, 2 years for a refugee to get into the US.
Banning Iranians after what passed for the government violated centuries of international law by invading our embassy (invading is exactly the right word because embassies have extraterritoriality, i.e. legally they are part of the country for which the embassy is set up, so there's a little bit of Russia in Washington, DC) is quite different from wholesale banning the adherents of a religion, especially when our Bill of Rights guarantees freedom of religion.
The Obama Administration built twice the length of border barriers, including walls, between the US and Mexico as the Bush Administration had.
Because of economic conditions, the amount of immigration, legal and illegal (there are accepted ways of measuring it), has dropped over the last few years.
There are more dollars worth of manufacturing going on in the US than ever. However, thanks to the efficiency and flexibility of the most advanced machinery, it takes fewer and fewer people to produce that growing amount of goods. Like what? Boeing jetliners, virtually every sort of weapon other than nuclear bombs and warheads, dimensional lumber (there's a plant nearby that exports said product to Japan), speaking of local manufacturers there's a job/machine shop I visited that does work for assemblers in Singapore, not to mention supercomputers and yes, automobiles and light trucks. For awhile, Honda shipped Preludes built in the US back to Japan. And let's not forget pollution control equipment.
China must give a really big hoot about pollution and climate change because a year or two ago they signed an agreement with the US on that very subject. The reality is, that because China has been so dependent on coal, their cities have become almost uninhabitable. They basically had to shut down the factories upwind from Peking for the Olympics. (Btw, the Big 3 Auto makers are in favor of some sort of Climate Change legislation because they know it is coming and as global manufacturers they want something they can live with and that will be relatively uniform around the world. For some inexplicable reason they have teamed up with Big Oil to fight carbon taxes and cap & trade. Old habits die hard I guess. Another btw, the cap & trade approach to pollution was first proposed by Republicans to fight acid rain. It worked so well that the acid rain problem was solved faster and less expensively than anyone ever imagined. Nothing like directing a free market economy to work on a problem to make things happen!)
Getting our allies to share the cost of NATO is nothing new. Lots of Presidents, including Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama have been working on that.
The negotiations for the Iranian nuclear deal began under Pres. GW Bush and involved I believe it was 7 nations.
Most of our trade deals have a longer genesis and involve more nations. The practicality of renegotiating them is daunting to say the least.
For whatever Obamacare may not have done, 90% of Americans now have healthcare insurance. This is the highest percentage ever.
Donald Trump has bragged about how well he's characterized the status quo; that he donates to candidates of both parties to ensure he has access to people in power.
If Winston Churchill ever said, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick," he was quoting Pres. Theodore Roosevelt who brought the expression back from Africa where he picked it up from the locals while he was on safari.
So what does Hillary stand for:
Making public college educations free for families that earn less than $125,000 per year. And debt free for everyone else.
Increasing vocational education. Programming and running those advanced manufacturing machines requires proficiencies I hadn't heard of before I read about them and my first two undergraduate years were spent in the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan.
Providing a public option for healthcare. Yes, Carl, it's still insurance rather than rebuilding systems that provide healthcare, but the Affordable Care Act created mechanisms for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care delivery systems.
Increasing the federal minimum wage to something significantly closer to a living wage though probably not all of the way to $15/ hour. (Here in Oregon we will soon start implementing a 3-tier minimum that will get to $14.75 in the Portland Metropolitan Area in the next few years. The smaller cities will have a lower 2nd tier and our rural areas will have an even lower 3rd tier that will still be a significant increase from the current state minimum wage.)
Getting to wage equality between men and women.
Increased access to child care so it is easier for parents to work.
I believe she's seen the wisdom to Bernie Sanders' proposal to tax financial transactions and is touting it as a mechanism to fund all of these proposals. The percentage is absurdly low, but the amounts of money that would be generated by current market volatility would be enormous. If it actually slowed down the rate of financial transactions, which is doubtful (again the rate is miniscule something like 0.0005%), that would probably be a good thing. It is that volatility that has divorced corporate America from any real long-term thinking.
She also talks about increasing our spending on infrastructure. Roads, light and high-speed rail at least. Obama wanted to create the smart electrical grid, which would drastically reduce the need for additional power plants, and increase access to wireless communications so I'm sure Hillary intends to advance those causes as well.
Increasing regulations on the financial markets and the banks.
I know there's lots more concrete proposals; first and foremost she's a policy wonk. Additional plans are on her website.
As I said in another post, Sen. Sanders' platform appealed to me more than Secretary of State's Clinton's. However, she has the chops to get her program, such as it was and now is, through the House and Senate and Sanders didn't. So I voted for Clinton. As it has played out, Clinton's success so far has been dependent on the support of Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Yes, plenty of Wall Street types have donated to her campaign, but so have lots of other folks. Bernie and Elizabeth have delivered the votes and as I keep saying, dollars don't vote, people do.
Mr. Trump loves to talk about what a great negotiator he is, but it was widely reported as soon as he officially entered the race that at heart he is a bully. That may work in real estate development; it will be a total non-starter on Capital Hill for the simple reason that the folks aren't beholden to the President for much of anything. And what little leverage the Pres. has, would be lost on a political neophyte ... such as a Pres. Donald J. Trump. In his world, it's all about the Trump Brand. Washington, DC is awash in over-sized egos.
I know you wanted to keep it to issues, but they need a context of facts and the personalities matter to the extent that they impact the candidate's ability to get things done.
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer
Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Our brother who started this thread asked that we limit ourselves to discussing our candidates' policies.
At the moment we don't have policies, we have campaign promises. Policies will start to slowly take hold in January and then we'll see where things fall. The interesting thing will be seeing how much the promises and the policies diverge by.
Quite honestly I hope to stand corrected and that my observations about how the thing is running are proved wrong -- it's a model I absolutely detest, but it's been more accurate as a predictor of things than anything else.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Negotiating trade deals that favor the United states.
Saving the coal industry
Having the countries that we protect help pay for the cost of maintaining their freedom.
and yes securing our boarders and prohibiting potential terrorists from entering the country.
Taking these in turn, and as a UK citizen:
Rebuilding the military: I wasn't aware of the US military requiring a rebuilding, but I'm not sure what the perceived benefits would be unless there are significant shortfalls in current capability.
Replacing "Obamacare" (my emphasis) - what I find amazing is how any civilised nation does not have a free healthcare system available to all, as one of the central tenets of civilised society. I was delighted to see the USA make a step in that direction. Replacing it? Yes, but what with?
Renegotiating the Iranian nuclear deal: Two questions. 1 - why? 2 - as it was signed by the P5+1, plus the EU, this is not something that the USA can unilaterally renegotiate.
Negotiating trade deals that favour the Unites States: Fair enough; I think that every country would take the same stance.
Saving the coal industry: The cost of doing so is too great in terms of global pollution, to which the USA is unfortunately a major contributor. Until proper carbon capture can take place, the industry is inevitably set for decline. Climate change and the risk to the planet trumps the needs of the industry. I'm sorry - and I used to work with, and advise coal companies - but it's not a resource that can currently economically be used without severe damage to the environment. See China for an example of this.
Having the countries that we protect help pay for the cost of maintaining their freedom: I think that this, too, is broadly fair, but in many cases, the USA assists in maintaining a country's freedom, and is not the ultimate protector. Also, a cynic would say that the prime driver for the Iraq wars was to secure lovely juicy private sector contracts to rebuild the country, and to be paid in oil. Could that not be payment, and more?
Securing our boarders (sic) and prohibiting potential terrorists from entering the country: Border control is a reasonably desirable trait. Building walls isn't. Terrorism isn't really a threat to the US in terms of numbers killed. With 30,000+ annual deaths by....cars (did you think I was going to say guns?) and yes, quite a few deaths by guns (stripping out the suicides etc), it makes the 3,066 killed by terrorism from 11 September 2001 - 31 December 2014 (where my stats stop) look rather minuscule by comparison. Yet the FEAR of terrorism is out of proportion to the fear of other causes of death. Building walls is not the answer. Retracting the drawbridges is not the answer.
" replacing Obama care"
Our NHS is on it's knees because a bunch of tosspot tory politicians. They want NO NHS, preferring insurance based care as in US. And I have to say, it is a lot of the US insurance companies which are snatching this governments hand off to get them.
Probably a lot of "can't be bothered to protest or march" people here don't realise that when NHS is gone, the insurance companies are going to reject lots of claims because of pre conditions.
If one takes out insurance and you tell them you have heart trouble or any other trouble, then premiums will be sky high. If you don't tell them of a pre condition, your are knackered. Damned if you do or don't.
Gregg - I echo your sentiments, and if you are talking about Jeremy Hunt, I absolutely agree, but I'd take issue with your assertion that the Conservative Party want to dispense with the NHS. I do not see that, nor do I hear it from tory voters. There may be errors with the running of the NHS - but it's quite remarkable in what it can do. I don't see it as being on its knees - but my views are clouded by knowing several people who work in the NHS - at all levels - and being next to a modern (and very large) NHS hospital. We would, I am sure, agree that funding it is important, even though it's not quite going to get the £350m a week which was promised by some politicians whose deceit and lies put US presidential candidates in the shade...
The comments on the UK's NHS are always interesting, and I've heard quite a few including a few horror-stories. But, on the whole, most of the commentary is fairly positive which, really, is all something of that size can hope for. The same applies for the system in Canada.
The German system is interesting in that it is based on "insurance" and has a Romneycare-like "personal mandate", but that mandate is subsidised, and for-profit entities are prohibited from taking part in it. This is another possible path if "single-payer" is too unattractive for some. The point is, is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution (any more than there is in clothes). (I admit ignorance of the situation in Scandinavia; it never makes the news here. Russia is also a bit of a black hole.)
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Ray,
Camoron said when he was made PM that the NHS is safe in his hands. Wrong. Along came lansley who proceeded to start selling off parts of NHS. ( I always thought it was stealing and dishonest to sell something that didn't belong to you). Then came the biggest tosspot ever- hunt, and he has made such a mess of NHS. When Theresa May went into No 10, and said hunt was not going to be health secretary, there was a big cheer up and down the land, only to be replaced by a groan when the silly moo changed her mind and gave him back his job.
I have so much contempt for politicians. Of all parties, in all countries. All they do is cause trouble, then duck down a hole when the flak is flying. They cause all wars.
Better to load them all up in hot air balloons- (they wouldn't need burners- plenty of hot air already)- give them a blunderbuss, and let them get on with it, leave the rest of us in peace.
Don't like tories one little bit. They don't want us healthy, or be educated, don't want us to have money- all they want is us under their thumb. At 70, I can see what NHS was, and now is under tories. A wasteland which very soon will be just a junk yard full of insurance agents and companies. If you can't see it, take off the rose coloured glasses- and hope that I could be wrong. And I hope you don't develop something which will prove me right.
Fed up with writing now- going to have a nice Singletons single malt whisky. Nite.
