Posts by ncxcrnnr

Original Post by danaofdoom:

And don't forget all the body weight exercises you can do. Squats, planks, pushups, crunches. All kinds of stuff.

Bingo. All those and then dips/pullups (if you can find something to use for the latter) and you'll be fine.

Original Post by sauvignon:

What do you, ncxcrnnr, propose we do to get ourselves out of the recession? The issue comes down to $$$, regardless if we spend it on Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid/universal health care. You think if we sit on our current money it will get better? I'm not trying to be glib, economics are my weakness, enlighten away.

Well I'm going to have to keep this short for now given that it's 1:55 am and I'm pretty beat already... But in short: I believe in a Keynesian Economic approach towards stimulating a receding economy. Let me qualify that by saying that I am referring to a TRUE Keynesian strategy rather than the President's current plan which has been branded as such by political pundits rather than by economists.

A real Keynesian plan would entail the lowering of interest rates (a virtual impossibility when they are already this low), and a re-investment in infrastructure on the part of the government. Obama has ignored the part about limiting government spending to investment in infrastructure (the construction of which is primarily designed to create jobs) and has instead included absurd amounts of funding for pork-barrel spending in the form of earmarks (something he said he would work against).

In the context of this specific post however, I do not know of any way that the provision of universal health care could be a benefit. Given the priority of job-creation: stimulating the health care sector appears to me to be one of the least-direct ways to go about accomplishing this goal given the extensive training needed to be a doctor, nurse practitioner, insurance adjuster, nurse, or in some hospitals even an orderly. Additionally, the increased burden of taxes which would be required in order to fund such an endeavor would bring private spending to a virtual halt. Requiring already struggling individuals to pay significantly more taxes is by no means a way to jumpstart spending and thus renew faith in the markets.

Wow this went on longer than planned.

Today? 4:20.

Original Post by loriklorik:

Teachers are just the start of the line when you have a problem.... i have gone over my teachers head countless times (haha). If they do something i think is unfare...i talk to them first...and then when i dont hear what i like, i go right to the head of their department (and after that i go to the deen). 

Exactly what I was going to say (though probably with different spelling ). I once had a teacher try to take a full letter grade off on a 25 page paper because I used MLA instead of Chicago style citation. I went straight to the department head (it helped that I already knew him pretty well) and asked him to fix it. While he cannot simply change one of his teacher's grades, he can make them an offer they can't refuse. In this case the anal-retentive teacher was an adjunct anyways so he simply told her she could change the grade or stick to teaching exclusively at the **** local community college rather than our top-30 university.

Point being: there is always someone higher up who is willing to listen to reason.

"The Patriotic Diggers" by Samuel Woodworth. You don't much more patriotic, pro-violence lyrics than these.

Right, my whole point however is how ridiculous the concept of having each individual self-define "minimum training" is. It's that type of thought which would facilitate someone like me claiming to be a musician, chef, etc. because I have a passing fancy in one of those fields (and peeled an onion once).

This is by no means intended to be offensive, but I'm just not satisfied with a definition which allows someone to "train" 15 minutes a day 3 days a week for a 5k and then expect to be regarded as an athlete in spite of their 1 hour finish time.

I like the thought of your definition but I don't know if it totally works. See if you're going to call someone an "athlete" then it must be apparent that said person expends significant effort at training/racing. I could call myself a musician because I sing in the shower but that doesn't make it true.

I do agree with you that one's ability in whatever athletic pursuit they choose is not necessarily the most important factor; however I would say that some sort of minimum commitment is necessary. Not a huge one because I believe everyone should have a enough time each day to pursue multiple goals not just athletic ones. I'd say something along the lines of at least half an hour a day, 5 days a week would suffice.

By the way, I agree the aforementioned comment from Obama was in poor taste. I volunteer at the S.O. and a lot of those kids are personal heroes of mine.

Eric

I've been fortunate enough have travelled to: Ireland, England, Scotland, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Monaco, The Vatican, Kenya, Tanzania, Antarctica, The Falkland Islands, Chile, Argentina, Japan, China, New Zealand, Australia, Mexico, The Bahamas, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. John, St. Croix, St. Thomas, Virgin Gorda, Tortola, Puerto Rico, and Costa Rica all by the age of 20.

Given that background, I'll tell you that there is no where in the world (that I've seen) which is more beautiful AND enjoyable to visit as Ireland. France comes close but doesn't quite catch it. Given that you have at most 5 days to travel however, neither of those places is your best bet. I'd reccomend somewhere either in the Carribean (Puerto Rico can be done for very little) or Mexico. If you want something that will feel less "touristy", I've heard very good things about Quebec.

Let us know where you choose!

Eric

Original Post by dnrothx:

People tend to only care about the costs to them individually...that good ol' rugged individualism:  Let Rome burn, my wallet is safe.  To care more for the town or market at large than your own fiscal well-being is noble, but not primal, so to speak.

Yeah I know, and usually I'd fault someone for that. In this economy I really can't anymore! You've gotta do what you've gotta do to get by.

I'm a male wit a bf% of 8 (which I hope counts of skinny despite the fact I'm 5' 11" and weigh 170) and I can genuinely say it has much more to do with diet than metabolism for me. That and exercise for sure. 3 days of gym and 2 of cardio per week.

St. Patricks day

Original Post by delilah87:

While the DUI shows a serious lack of judgement (don't get me wrong, I'm not condemning all driving after the imbibement of alcohol, but if you're drunk enough to get caught... c'mon)

 

Well. Here is one problem.... If you're drunk enough to get caught? really? So the legal alcohol limit doesn't matter, so long as i'm not drunk enough to get caught? Well i know alot of people who can drink alot and function normally (or so it seems) they're fine to get behind the wheel after 10 pints so long as they don't get caught are they?

Is that even a question? You're asking me whether I place higher stock in an individual's ability to operate a motor vehicle versus the arbitrary laws laid out which are expected to encompass every type of individual in a given COUNTRY? Fine. I'll humour your naivety once more. Understand that I'm no longer willing to waste any of my time with such foolishness and triviality. As the most ignorant of all Americans would say: "I'll let you have the last word"- Bill O'Reily

Simply put (listen well): I believe that if an individual is able to, as you say "function normally" then they should not be unduly punished for (once more now, just for fun) "functioning normally".

Just as I would not punish a regularly functioning individual for driving a car sober, I would not punish a functioning individual for "functioning normally" whether they've been drinking grape juice, wine, kool-aid, or straight grain alcohol. In the end, the only thing which matters is their ability to conduct themselves on a roadway SAFELY without jeopardizing those around them. While I respect your adherence to all presented laws (even in the face of say... facts), I must conclude that blind acceptance is nothing more than total disregard for the facts at hand.

Again, that's it kiddos. These charades have distracted me long enough (trust me, 20 minutes net is substantially more than this defense required). In the words of another U.S citizen (a legitimate one this time) "Goodnight, and good luck".

Eric

Original Post by morganbclaw:

Personally, I don't think your son has a problem at all.  Binge drinking systemically affects youth in America, especially college students.  

Seconded. Why just last night binge drinking struck me! Hard. Out of my friends (in college obviously) I'd estimate well over half have received citations. While the DUI shows a serious lack of judgement (don't get me wrong, I'm not condemning all driving after the imbibement of alcohol, but if you're drunk enough to get caught... c'mon), the citations are far from evidence of an un-natural reliance upon alcohol. 

Personally I'd just recomend you buy him some good running shoes so he stops getting caught so much. I mean about the one thing you can rely on in regards to campus police is that you're almost always going to be faster then them. If they don't catch you, it's not a crime. I've got about two years of college under my belt and a grand sum of 0 citations by way of adhering to that logic.

It's a stretch to call this on topic but how the heck did "love handles" become an acceptable term? I mean, you can say that to a four year old kid and no-one would fault you. If I went around calling them f*** grips... let's just say I doubt it would go over as well. Yet they mean the exact same thing. I just don't get it.

Original Post by dnrothx:

The more I think about it, the more I think that government linking anything to marriage is an improper mingling of church and state.  Marriage started as an inherently religious ritual; I don't see why government needed to get involved  through licensing, ensuring tax benefits and health benefits, and the lawyer-supporting divorce-processes 

Amen.