Split Stoves, Ovens, And Parties, Oh My. Split from The Race For 2024

[laughing dog]

We do however, come from different universes in some ways. You trust a computer to speak for you on the internet. I don't trust electric windows in vehicles.

I really dislike power googaws in cars. I'll shift the transmission myself, wherever I think it should be. I'll roll down the windows myself, thank you very much. Unfortunately, for us oldsters, crank windows in cars are now a premium "classic" feature in a used car.

You can roll down a power window while still paying attention to the road. You can't roll down a manual window while paying attention to the road so you must stop to do it.

I'm with TomC on this one - I never had any trouble paying attention to the road while rolling a manual window down or up while driving.

 

[Gospel]

True, there was something more satisfying about rolling down the window to flip a fellow New Yorker the bird that you can't get from automatic windows.

 

[zorq]

I just want to state here that when I was much younger I once slightly embarrassed myself by inquiring about an "oven" during a job interview when I meant to inquire about a "stove." It's anecdotal, but it happened.

To explain, all of the homes I grew up in had a combination oven/stovetop and all of the extended members of my family and probably most if not all of my friends and their families referred to this appliance as an "oven." I didn't even know that the proper term for this object is a "range" until this thread, though the word has been in my vocabulary for ages. Of course, we would use the "stove" occasionally, and I understood that restaurants usually had separate stoves and ovens hidden in the back kitchen, but it had never occurred to me that I ought to divide the different cooking functions into different object names. English is a wonky language and there are seemingly more exceptions than rules.

So in my opinion, this semantic derail is extremely overblown.

Mistakes happen and regional, cultural, dialect, and language differences exist.

... Anyway...

 

[thebeave]

We do however, come from different universes in some ways. You trust a computer to speak for you on the internet. I don't trust electric windows in vehicles.

I really dislike power googaws in cars. I'll shift the transmission myself, wherever I think it should be. I'll roll down the windows myself, thank you very much. Unfortunately, for us oldsters, crank windows in cars are now a premium "classic" feature in a used car.

You can roll down a power window while still paying attention to the road. You can't roll down a manual window while paying attention to the road so you must stop to do it.

The drivers side is easy to roll down while driving and paying attention. You don't need to stop for that. Sometimes you need to be able to roll down the passengers side while in the driver's seat, and that can be a risky, difficult manuever while driving, in which case you definitely should stop. I only got power windows for the first time in my life in 2014 when I got my "new" truck. I like the power windows much better (particularly for the passenger side), though I still have these paranoid thoughts that I'm going to drive into a lake someday and the power windows will short out and I'll be the male version of Mary Jo Kopechne.

 

[Toni]

We do however, come from different universes in some ways. You trust a computer to speak for you on the internet. I don't trust electric windows in vehicles.

I really dislike power googaws in cars. I'll shift the transmission myself, wherever I think it should be. I'll roll down the windows myself, thank you very much. Unfortunately, for us oldsters, crank windows in cars are now a premium "classic" feature in a used car.

You can roll down a power window while still paying attention to the road. You can't roll down a manual window while paying attention to the road so you must stop to do it.

I'm with TomC on this one - I never had any trouble paying attention to the road while rolling a manual window down or up while driving.

Yeah, but you can’t get into some passive aggressive battle of the wills with your passengers if you don’t have power windows, with the driver having ultimate control over who does and who does not get air

 

[TomC]

You can roll down a power window while still paying attention to the road. You can't roll down a manual window while paying attention to the road so you must stop to do it.

It occurs to me.
I have an armspan that's a little over 6.5'.
I kinda take that for granted.

I could reach between the driver's seat and the passenger side door without looking away from the road, even back when I was driving a lumbering old Ford station wagon that could sleep 6.
Tom
ETA ~Oh wait.
I just did some math in my head. Went and measured. 68" is closer.~

 

[Gospel]

In hindsight, it all was frivolous. But, truth be told, anyone I gestured at had it coming.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You can roll down a power window while still paying attention to the road. You can't roll down a manual window while paying attention to the road so you must stop to do it.

Maybe you can't.

I never had trouble doing it. I suppose I planned things a tiny bit, rolled down the window in slow traffic or on an empty road. Maybe even before I put the car in gear.
But I've had more trouble in my life being stuck in a car with windows that won't go down because the power googaw failed than I have with manually rolling down a window in a car.
Tom

I'm thinking more along the lines of rolling up to a booth or the like--you don't want the window open while you're driving down the road, you want to open it for the specific purpose. When it's a simple take-a-ticket type thing you're going to slow traffic with a manual window.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The drivers side is easy to roll down while driving and paying attention. You don't need to stop for that. Sometimes you need to be able to roll down the passengers side while in the driver's seat, and that can be a risky, difficult manuever while driving, in which case you definitely should stop. I only got power windows for the first time in my life in 2014 when I got my "new" truck. I like the power windows much better (particularly for the passenger side), though I still have these paranoid thoughts that I'm going to drive into a lake someday and the power windows will short out and I'll be the male version of Mary Jo Kopechne.

The car I learned on had manual windows--and at the bottom of the range it would force you low enough to be an issue for driving--no way would I have opened that while in motion.

 

[TomC]

I'm thinking more along the lines of rolling up to a booth or the like--you don't want the window open while you're driving down the road, you want to open it for the specific purpose. When it's a simple take-a-ticket type thing you're going to slow traffic with a manual window.

Some of us are capable of planning far enough in advance to have the two seconds task of rolling down our window finished by the time we get to the stop.
Tom

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If your food is on it it’s a stove. If your food is in it it’s an oven.
Glad I could clear that up fer y’all.

Thank you for supporting my point that you were using the terms differently. Now if only you could explain your obsession with gas ovens.

I am going to have to respond to this slowly over time, since I don’t have a lot of time right now. However, such an egregious distortion of the historical record and of my own comments requires correction.

pood, since your entire post was on the Southern Strategy, I supposed that means you concede on:
Lower Taxes, since indirect taxes are also taxes

I already told you I wasn’t discussing taxes, and fail to see the relevance of taxes for this discussion. So please withdraw your false claim that I “conceded” on anything. If you want to start a thread about taxes, do so, and I may or may not participate

Since you are trying to convince me of the rather absurd proposition that the parties have switched places, then you are discussing taxes whether you want to or not as that is part of what the parties stand for.

Roosevelt being a Morgan man

Excuse me? I already pointed out that Morgan was the first target of Roosevelt’s famed trust-busting. How can you possibly write something so inane and inaccurate as the above?

With counter-evidence that you skipped.

How the Democrats leapfrogging the Republicans may have switched them relatives to each other but not absolutely.

The above is gobbledeygook. What is your metric of difference between “relative” and “absolute” here? The fact is that in 1860, Democrats stood for limited government, defense both of slavery and the expansion of slavery, states’ rights, a curtailment of federal power, and the like. Republicans under Lincoln, deriving from the Whig Henry Clay’s American System, favored strong federal power (construction of the transcontinental railroad, land-grant colleges, internal improvements, which is today called “infrastructure,” prosecution of the civil war, opposition to the spread of slavery and its eventual aboliton and so on. Today, quite clearly to anyone who is not blinded by some warped ideology, the party of Donald Trump is the heir of the party of the traitor Jeff Davis and the party of Joe Biden is the heir to the party of Abe Lincoln.

I addressed much of that already. All you are doing is restating your position again as if I hadn't responded to it.

Try going back to the posts where I responded to all of those.

The Civil Rights Acts prior to 1964, and how many who supported the previous CRAs opposed the 1964 act, and how many who opposed the previous CRAs supported the 1964 act.

You also pretend these don't exist:
The CRAs before 1964
Calexit

Calexit?? What in the world does that have to do with anything?

pood: The parties switched since in 1860 the Democrats suppored secession and in 2008 there were some Republican in Texas who supported secession.
Jason: And in 2016 there were some Democrats in California who supported Calexit.
pood: Why are you talking about Calexit? What has that got to do with anything?

I think you've lost track of your own argument.

I do not ”pretend” there were not previous civil rights act; I even cited the main precursor to the 1964 act, which came in 1957, but it was not nearly as sweeping as the 1964 version. Before that the last sweeping civil rights legislation came in the 1860s and was pushed through by Republicans over opposition from Democrats, futher supporting my establishment of the fact that the two parties have essentially swapped ideological profiles since then.

The part you ignore is how many people who supported the previous acts that opposed that one, and how many people who opposed previous acts that supported that one, and you can't explain why.

Now for the only part you paid attention to, since it was the only part you thought you could easily defend.

Oh, what presumptions you make! Risible, I’m sure.

The Southern Strategy is allegedly based on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the fact that it was signed by a Democrat president, even though it was put on his desk because Congressional Republicans pushed it through.

Wrong! Look up the facts — Google is your pal, dude. Southern Democrats opposed the Civil Rights act of 1964 — my whole point precisely! After the southern Democrats lost, opportunistic Republicans filled the racist vote vacuum caused by the national Democratic Party’s abandoment of its long-standing resistance to civil rights, That was called the SOUTHERN STRATEGY, initiated by NIxon and amplified by Reagan. Did you somhow miss the wiki discussion I linked?

The musing of a racist person talking about potential effects of a particular act, that is what your whole argument is based on. And you still can't tell me anything about how the 1964 act was different from previous acts because the party hasn't told you.

Key votes are examined such as when Goldwater voted for every Civil Rights Act before the 1964 one

Name them, please.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957
The Civil Rights Act of 1960

I guess you weren't ignoring them because you actually didn't know about them.

, and key votes are ignored such as when Goldwater's opponents voted against every Civil Rights Act before the 1964 one.

What sort of point do you imagine you are making? Yes, prior to 1964, Democrats, principally in the south, opposed civil rights — my entire point, for heaven’s sake!

Yes. I grant that.

Of course nobody knows about the other Civil Rights Acts, they have been dropped down the memory hole.

Why don’t you refresh our memory as to what they were? Please, be specific!

The Civil Rights Act of 1957
The Civil Rights Act of 1960

Now I’m going to stop here before going on later. I just returned to this thread today. I have not yet read beyond this post of yours. So maybe you answer the question later. But, in case you have not, I repeat my question to you:

Do you, as a Libertarian, support the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Yes or no?

You are trying to set up a trap and you're going to be disappointed in the result.

When I first started working, people wondered if I got there on merit, or if I got there on Affirmative Action or some other special program. I resented the implication that I didn't get there on merit, and had to work twice as hard as everyone else just to prove I belonged there just as much. Of course as an engineer, people who don't have merit don't last very long and I've been in the field for over 25 years, so nobody questions me anymore.

Of course both personally and as libertarian I oppose the unfair burdens that act places on the people it pretends to help. Then again, hurting the people you are pretending to help is the Democratic platform. The Republicans are honest enough to tell you they don't care about anyone else.

Now, I will in turn support your argument, but not in the way you want. There is one way that the parties have switched position.

I personally believe you can't be anti-establishment and be in a major party, but others disagree with me and say they are anti-establishment and subscribe to one of the two parties. From the 1970's to the 1990's those who called themselves anti-establishment and subscribed to a major party were all Democrats. Starting around 2007 those who call themselves anti-establishment and subscribe to a major party are Republicans.

 

[Toni]

I sort of out grew my need for anti-establishment pretensions and decided to embrace pragmatism.

I want a society where everyone has equal protection under the law, excellent and equal access to excellent education, excellent healthcare and decent food and housing. I want everyone to be able to have employment that divides a decent living and a safe, fair workplace. I think people should get to make their own healthcare decisions. I think everyone, including future generations, deserves clean air, clean water, a healthy Earth.

 

[Elixir]

I'm thinking more along the lines of rolling up to a booth or the like--you don't want the window open while you're driving down the road, you want to open it for the specific purpose. When it's a simple take-a-ticket type thing you're going to slow traffic with a manual window.

Some of us are capable of planning far enough in advance to have the two seconds task of rolling down our window finished by the time we get to the stop.
Tom

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I'm thinking more along the lines of rolling up to a booth or the like--you don't want the window open while you're driving down the road, you want to open it for the specific purpose. When it's a simple take-a-ticket type thing you're going to slow traffic with a manual window.

Some of us are capable of planning far enough in advance to have the two seconds task of rolling down our window finished by the time we get to the stop.
Tom

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

I believe you.

 

[TomC]

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

Every time I get into a 21st century car and can't roll down the window due to some minor electrical glitch, I wish for the good old days.
I bet that happens more often than driving into a lake.
Tom

 

[Toni]

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

Every time I get into a 21st century car and can't roll down the window due to some minor electrical glitch, I wish for the good old days.
I bet that happens more often than driving into a lake.
Tom

Really? I’ve never ever had that problem with electric windows.

 

[TomC]

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

Every time I get into a 21st century car and can't roll down the window due to some minor electrical glitch, I wish for the good old days.
I bet that happens more often than driving into a lake.
Tom

Really? I’ve never ever had that problem with electric windows.

You probably have more money than lots of other people do.
Tom

 

[Toni]

Every time I drive into a lake and my electric windows short out, I wish I had that manual crank to let myself out of the car.

Every time I get into a 21st century car and can't roll down the window due to some minor electrical glitch, I wish for the good old days.
I bet that happens more often than driving into a lake.
Tom

Really? I’ve never ever had that problem with electric windows.

You probably have more money than lots of other people do.
Tom

Lol. The first car I bought was a Camry. I think I had it more than 10 years before my husband told me it wasn’t considered a luxury car.

But point taken: I’m a middle class American so I do have more money than most people in the world. Which is further boosted by the fact that my spouse is at his peak earning ( I retired so my personal income is pretty small. In my state, my own income would put me below poverty level) and we’ve been saving for retirement for over 40 years. We’ve paid off our home and my car ( not the aforementioned one which was passed to one of my kids with 285K miles on it). Hubby got a new vehicle a couple of years ago and we’re making payments on that,

 

[TomC]

But point taken: I’m a middle class American so I do have more money than most people in the world.

We can narrow it down.
You have way more disposable income than a great many Americans.

People who are constricted by a transportation system dependent on private cars, for the most part.

Yeah, you might be surprised to find out how many Americans need that 20 year old car, but don't have the few hundred bucks to invest in fixing the power windows.
Tom

 

[Toni]

But point taken: I’m a middle class American so I do have more money than most people in the world.

We can narrow it down.
You have way more disposable income than a great many Americans.

People who are constricted by a transportation system dependent on private cars, for the most part.

Yeah, you might be surprised to find out how many Americans need that 20 year old car, but don't have the few hundred bucks to invest in fixing the power windows.
Tom

I know that a lot of people need twenty year old cars. I gave one ( ok, it was 13.5 at the time) to my kid who will drive it another 20 years if it will go that long. Sold for an extremely minimally price an old van to someone who was happy to take it, scrapes along the body and all.

In my family, we tend to drive our cars as long as we can. Only replaced old van because it seemed sensible to do before hubby retires. Over the years we’ve been able to buy better cars that will last more than 100K miles or so—and more cars are built to last longer, too.
I tend to well made, modestly priced fuel efficient cars with good reputations for repairs/longevity. Don’t need no fancy thing. I bought both mine at 0% interest, which made them more affordable.

Yes, we are ( now) better off that most Americans and above the median income for my state. Lots of hard work, lots of modest living, some careful decision making, mostly about saving and not spending and lots and lots and lots of luck. We were fortunate to have a gift of enough cash to put a minimal down payment on our first home, which cost us significantly under $80K. I know a lot of people don’t get that—I was surprised at the offer but it was very welcome as our rent had just been raised to be more than a mortgage. Did not sell at a profit—barely satisfied remaining mortgage and closing costs. Bought another modest priced home and have spend a bunch of money updating it/making it meet current code. When we sell, we do not expect to make a profit. We’re ok with that. Wish it were different but we should be ok. We inherited a very modest amount of cash when our parents died. We’re hoping to be able to pass along something more than that to our kids. But may not be able to.

But yes, better off than most Americans and most Americans in our age cohort. Which makes us richer than most people in the world.

I grew up in very modest circumstances. For a time as a child, we lived in a 3 room house, none of which was a bathroom. That was out back. That was Mom, Dad and their first 3 kids. My parents had 4 kids when they bought their first and only home together. A very modest 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath house in a small commuter town. I’m happy with how well we’ve done. I know very well that we are much better off than most people.

If you are looking to buy a reliable used vehicle, I’d heartily recommend a Toyota Camry. They are built to last.