Jump to content

Menu

ThatHomeschoolDad

Members
  • Posts

    1,515
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ThatHomeschoolDad

  1. Give me a nano any day! Darn those big ammo cans in the woods... they elude me WAY more often than urban nanos do!

    No way. I made lanyards with little giraffe beads (our geocache username) to leave in those ammo cans! Worst nano was a penny glued to the top of a dinky tube pressed into the dirt. That's nothin' but evil.

     

    Besides, you can't fit a travel bug that's been to, say, Denmark in a nano.

  2. We started with guided hikes and worked up to doing longer sections of the AT. Best way to do it, and yes, you can still get in trouble on paths. Every year, park police have to go out and retrieve someone who brought one bottle of water and crocs on a day hike.

     

    Start in a group.

     

    Ticks are pretty preventable, black bears aren't much of a threat if you do what the rangers/naturalists say.

  3. My husband is in the camp that thinks both evolution and creation are a bunch of stories. Creation is philosophical imaginings, and evolution takes little bits and pieces that we've found and creatively makes up a bunch of stuff that nobody really knows.

     

    It would seem we have a collective (nationally) misinterpretation of semantics, and scientists have been historically lousy at addressing that head on, until it's too late, or it starts to become educational policy.

     

    "Theory" as in "theory of evolution" gets mixed up with "I have a theory as to why Uncle Joe smells so bad."  Rather, the first theory is a long and interwoven collection of observations from a multitude of disciplines, and, like all theories, has been modified as new evidence is revealed.  That squishy bit in there, that science is willing to revise and even refute, doesn't sit well with those seeking the yes and the no.

  4. I'm sorry for another member to the club. There are those who follow a different path, largely out of anyone's control (I'm stage IV 3 years). The good thing is that every year, that path gets a smidgen longer, but not for all, which sucks. Early detection is good.

     

    Make lasagna.

     

    Think no more than 24 hours ahead.

     

    Eat, live, love.

  5. I was set to cut the cable cord and did a free month of Netflix, but it turned out we didn't watch TV that way -- plan, pick, watch.  We're more of a flip on and flip through, so we're staying with cable for now ($$).  I don't watch sports, except the Olympics, and I might fiddle around with doing the BBC iplayer this winter via a proxy server.  It's gotta come down to whether I want to change the mechanics of the viewing habit.

  6. We got a cheap Meade at a consignment store.  Moon looked great.  Planets looked like fuzzy blobs.

     

    We did a field trip to the observatory at Williams College and saw the same things through their giant telescope.  The grad students explained that astronomers prefer the blobs to Hubble-like pictures of Saturn and such because they measure things that don't need photo-like pics.  Kind of a downer, since it's not what kids want to see.

     

    Serious hobbyists seem to spend several hundred on their first telescopes, so for your $150ish, think moon not Jupiter.  DD's scope now sits in the basement, so I'm glad we didn't pay a lot.

  7. I've noticed that as well, but it seems have become a much stronger trend in the last several years. 

     

    It's tied to an increasing suspicion that the deck is already stacked, the game already rigged.  Entrepreneurs still abound, and always will.  What's taking longer to work it's way into our collective noodles is that it's quite likely you can NOT follow your parent(s)' career path, such as starting out in junior sales at Xerox, and retire as CFO 40 years later...with a pension.

     

    It's possible that you might have to go back to dustbowl farmers giving it all up to go into the factories to find similar circumstances, or maybe the industrial revolution?  All those look like single events in history, but living through them was probably not fun for all.

  8. I am intrigued by the fact that folks who had relatively *more* income in 1968 ended up seeing no growth over the following years.  And those who had relatively less income in 1968 ended up much better off.  What was it about those 95th %ile people that kept their growth curve so consistent while others' dropped off?  Hmm.

     

     

     

    An economist could lay it out better than I, but the suspected factors could include the decline in union membership, globalized outsourcing of jobs and manufacturing, relaxation of banking and cap gains tax laws, Reaganomics, NAFTA, changeover to a service and info economy, etc., etc.  It could also be that the bump in WWII GI Bill grads and large public works projects is what kept the bottom line closer to the top line, up until that workforce cruised past its peak earning years.

     

    A trend that large and pronounced has to have a host of interlinked causes, most of which lay beyond the control of all but a sliver of the populace.

  9. I had a sort of duality.  From K-10th grade, I lived in Upper Montclair, NJ (and the Upper is important, you know).  Trey posh.  Yogi Berra had a house there.  Olympia Dukakis, and Bob McGrath from Sesame Street, among others behind the gates of the really big houses with views of Manhattan.  Every one of my school friends either had a second vacation home, or took frequent trips abroad.  I knew we did not have that kind of money, but it didn't seem like a huge deal.  By my 11th grade, my father's business boomed and we moved onto a 5-acre plot in a more rural part of the state, and I finished high school with kids who were in Future Farmers of America because they really were going to run the family farm.  We were prob upper middle class in that area.  At least I got a bigger room.

     

    Now, our family income exceeds my father's at his peak,  but we have less and struggle more (and my parent's mortgage was at 15%!).  That's why I threw that graph up on the other thread.  The economic history of the past two-ish decades really matters, but barely registers.

  10. Because homes in particular postcodes sell for over 2 million ? If you can afford to buy a 2 million buck house, you're wealthy.

     

    There may be wealthy people living in the modest suburbs but in general, in my city, the wealthy choose to live in suburbs with better housing and amenities.

     

    I'm just commenting on my city. There are places most people just cannot afford to live.

    For many towns around NYC, you can use train maps to trace the wealth. Makes sense.

×
×
  • Create New...