Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #161395 > unrolled thread

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Started by	Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com>
First post	2016-03-23 02:31 -0700
Last post	2016-03-30 14:56 +0100
Articles	20 on this page of 401 — 44 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →

#162349

From	"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-12 17:20 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.3177309faa09bc8398a0c0@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162321

In article <PM000530491999FCFF@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com 
says...
> 
> Scott Lurndal wrote:
> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
> >>Dan Espen wrote:
> >>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >>>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
> >>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong place
> >>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on in
> >>>>> the engine.
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers) are
> >>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
> >>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
> >>>
> >>> Wow!
> >>>
> >>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
> >>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
> >>
> >>If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
> >>weight would increase.
> >
> > Yet another unsupportable assertion from Barb.   I don't suppose
> > you could actually support your assertion with some actual facts,
> > like the daily recommended caloric intakes published by some
> > federal government agency?
> >
> > http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCal
> orieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Obeying the recommendations of the food pyramid is a lot of food
> each day.  Excess calories are supposed to be turned into fat
> and stored in the body; that's a biological feature.

What is this "food pyramid"?  If you go to the USDA site they go on 
about "My Plate" and have recommendations broken down by desired caloric 
intake level from 1600 to 3200.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162376

From	jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-13 13:02 +0000
Message-ID	<PM0005305D2B3ADD07@aca43c2a.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to	#162349

J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <PM000530491999FCFF@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
> says...
>>
>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>> >>Dan Espen wrote:
>> >>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> >>>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>> >>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong
place
>> >>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on
in
>> >>>>> the engine.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers)
are
>> >>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>> >>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>> >>>
>> >>> Wow!
>> >>>
>> >>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>> >>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>> >>
>> >>If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>> >>weight would increase.
>> >
>> > Yet another unsupportable assertion from Barb.   I don't suppose
>> > you could actually support your assertion with some actual facts,
>> > like the daily recommended caloric intakes published by some
>> > federal government agency?
>> >
>> >
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCal
>> orieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>> Obeying the recommendations of the food pyramid is a lot of food
>> each day.  Excess calories are supposed to be turned into fat
>> and stored in the body; that's a biological feature.
>
> What is this "food pyramid"?  If you go to the USDA site they go on
> about "My Plate" and have recommendations broken down by desired caloric
> intake level from 1600 to 3200.

It's divided into sections of food groups with recommendations of the
minimum number of servings/day from each section.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162405

From	Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
Date	2016-04-13 16:05 -0500
Message-ID	<nemc5c$9l3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#162376

On 4/13/2016 8:02 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> In article <PM000530491999FCFF@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
>> says...
>>>
>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>>>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>>>>   "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong
> place
>>>>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on
> in
>>>>>>>> the engine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers)
> are
>>>>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>>>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>>>>> weight would increase.
>>>>
>>>> Yet another unsupportable assertion from Barb.   I don't suppose
>>>> you could actually support your assertion with some actual facts,
>>>> like the daily recommended caloric intakes published by some
>>>> federal government agency?
>>>>
>>>>
> http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCal
>>> orieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Obeying the recommendations of the food pyramid is a lot of food
>>> each day.  Excess calories are supposed to be turned into fat
>>> and stored in the body; that's a biological feature.
>>
>> What is this "food pyramid"?  If you go to the USDA site they go on
>> about "My Plate" and have recommendations broken down by desired caloric
>> intake level from 1600 to 3200.
>
> It's divided into sections of food groups with recommendations of the
> minimum number of servings/day from each section.
>

While they're not the only ones who had a "food pyramid", the one seen 
most in the US was the USDA's. A few years ago they replaced it with a 
"MyPlate", which is a circular graph like a pie chart.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162409

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-13 17:29 -0400
Message-ID	<1018951763.482275504.500715.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162405

Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 4/13/2016 8:02 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article <PM000530491999FCFF@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
>>> says...
>>>> 
>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>>>>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong
>> place
>>>>>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on
>> in
>>>>>>>>> the engine.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers)
>> are
>>>>>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>>>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>>>>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>>>>>> weight would increase.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yet another unsupportable assertion from Barb.   I don't suppose
>>>>> you could actually support your assertion with some actual facts,
>>>>> like the daily recommended caloric intakes published by some
>>>>> federal government agency?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCal
>>>> orieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Obeying the recommendations of the food pyramid is a lot of food
>>>> each day.  Excess calories are supposed to be turned into fat
>>>> and stored in the body; that's a biological feature.
>>> 
>>> What is this "food pyramid"?  If you go to the USDA site they go on
>>> about "My Plate" and have recommendations broken down by desired caloric
>>> intake level from 1600 to 3200.
>> 
>> It's divided into sections of food groups with recommendations of the
>> minimum number of servings/day from each section.
>> 
> 
> While they're not the only ones who had a "food pyramid", the one seen 
> most in the US was the USDA's. A few years ago they replaced it with a 
> "MyPlate", which is a circular graph like a pie chart.
> 
> 

Very appropriate ;-)

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162445

From	jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-14 12:50 +0000
Message-ID	<PM0005307120884727@aca423ab.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to	#162405

Dave Garland wrote:
> On 4/13/2016 8:02 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article <PM000530491999FCFF@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>, See.above@aol.com
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>>>>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>>>>>   "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong
>> place
>>>>>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on
>> in
>>>>>>>>> the engine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers)
>> are
>>>>>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>>>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>>>>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>>>>>> weight would increase.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yet another unsupportable assertion from Barb.   I don't suppose
>>>>> you could actually support your assertion with some actual facts,
>>>>> like the daily recommended caloric intakes published by some
>>>>> federal government agency?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCal
>>>> orieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Obeying the recommendations of the food pyramid is a lot of food
>>>> each day.  Excess calories are supposed to be turned into fat
>>>> and stored in the body; that's a biological feature.
>>>
>>> What is this "food pyramid"?  If you go to the USDA site they go on
>>> about "My Plate" and have recommendations broken down by desired caloric
>>> intake level from 1600 to 3200.
>>
>> It's divided into sections of food groups with recommendations of the
>> minimum number of servings/day from each section.
>>
>
> While they're not the only ones who had a "food pyramid", the one seen
> most in the US was the USDA's. A few years ago they replaced it with a
> "MyPlate", which is a circular graph like a pie chart.

I haven't seen that one.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162254

From	Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date	2016-04-11 09:52 -0400
Message-ID	<nega05$cko$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#162251

jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:

> Dan Espen wrote:
>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>
>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>  "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong place
>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on in
>>>> the engine.
>>>
>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers) are
>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>
>> Wow!
>>
>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>
> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
> weight would increase.
>
> /BAH

Feel free to point out why:

http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/

Here I am banging my head against a rock wall.

For those that can actually read and understand things,
here are the recommended calories:

http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162256

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-11 11:43 -0400
Message-ID	<1169926522.482082008.403209.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162254

Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
> 
>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong place
>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on in
>>>>> the engine.
>>>> 
>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers) are
>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>> 
>>> Wow!
>>> 
>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>> 
>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>> weight would increase.
>> 
>> /BAH
> 
> Feel free to point out why:
> 
> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/
> 
> Here I am banging my head against a rock wall.
> 
> For those that can actually read and understand things,
> here are the recommended calories:
> 
> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/
> 

As others have said, the government giveth and the government taketh away. 
They give large subsidies to producers of sugar and corn (HFCS), so sweets
are relatively cheaper than they should be.  It's like grocery coupons - I
never see coupons for broccoli or kale, but always do for soda and potato
chips.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162258

From	Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date	2016-04-11 13:16 -0400
Message-ID	<neglv0$thv$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#162256

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:

> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong place
>>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on in
>>>>>> the engine.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers) are
>>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>>> 
>>>> Wow!
>>>> 
>>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>>> 
>>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>>> weight would increase.
>>> 
>>> /BAH
>> 
>> Feel free to point out why:
>> 
>> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/
>> 
>> Here I am banging my head against a rock wall.
>> 
>> For those that can actually read and understand things,
>> here are the recommended calories:
>> 
>> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/
>
> As others have said, the government giveth and the government taketh away. 
> They give large subsidies to producers of sugar and corn (HFCS), so sweets
> are relatively cheaper than they should be.  It's like grocery coupons - I
> never see coupons for broccoli or kale, but always do for soda and potato
> chips.

No one from the "government" forces you to eat any of that stuff.
Seriously, blaming the government for what you eat is ridiculous.
And that document cited above tells you not to eat junk food.

I know current RW culture blames everything on the government,
but blaming the government for overeating points at a mental
deficit in the blamer.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162264

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-11 16:32 -0400
Message-ID	<1461964954.482099422.669856.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162258

Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> In article <MPG.316b7c2a14d4f4a698a077@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Disaster is more likely to come
>>>>>>> from not understanding that putting too much weight in the wrong place
>>>>>>> can cause control problems than from not understanding what goes on in
>>>>>>> the engine.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Oh yes. Some drivers overload their car, because they (the drivers) are
>>>>>> so obese. What do you expect when the government is doing everything
>>>>>> thing the can do to increase obesity?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Wow!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can only guess that you are blaming your own over eating on the
>>>>> government.  No cops in my kitchen, how about you?
>>>> 
>>>> If you obeyed what the government recommends you should eat, your
>>>> weight would increase.
>>>> 
>>>> /BAH
>>> 
>>> Feel free to point out why:
>>> 
>>> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/
>>> 
>>> Here I am banging my head against a rock wall.
>>> 
>>> For those that can actually read and understand things,
>>> here are the recommended calories:
>>> 
>>> http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/appendix-2/
>> 
>> As others have said, the government giveth and the government taketh away. 
>> They give large subsidies to producers of sugar and corn (HFCS), so sweets
>> are relatively cheaper than they should be.  It's like grocery coupons - I
>> never see coupons for broccoli or kale, but always do for soda and potato
>> chips.
> 
> No one from the "government" forces you to eat any of that stuff.
> Seriously, blaming the government for what you eat is ridiculous.
> And that document cited above tells you not to eat junk food.
> 
> I know current RW culture blames everything on the government,
> but blaming the government for overeating points at a mental
> deficit in the blamer.
> 

Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162267

From	hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date	2016-04-11 13:42 -0700
Message-ID	<dd9a7722-e715-4581-b678-a61ff0e82d8d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#162264

On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.

Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
necessary.

However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162270

From	Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net>
Date	2016-04-11 17:03 -0400
Message-ID	<neh39h$kvo$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#162267

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>
> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
> necessary.
>
> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.

Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
things because they go out of season.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162279

From	"3899jk" <3899jk@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-12 07:52 +1000
Message-ID	<dn2kkjFlb6bU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#162270


"Dan Espen" <despen@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:neh39h$kvo$2@dont-email.me...
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>>
>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
>> necessary.
>>
>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
>
> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
> things because they go out of season.

And quite a bit of other stuff like bananas
because they grow much better outside the US.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162283

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-11 18:02 -0400
Message-ID	<1551529457.482104721.955751.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162270

Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> 
>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>> 
>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>> 
>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
>> necessary.
>> 
>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
> 
> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
> things because they go out of season.
> 

We import tons of stuff from Mexico.  Other places in Central and South
America account for less.  I don't trust food imported from Mexico.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162306

From	Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid>
Date	2016-04-12 10:58 +0200
Message-ID	<duputc-ia3.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to	#162283

In article <1551529457.482104721.955751.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>> 
>>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>>> 
>>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
>>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
>>> necessary.
>>> 
>>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
>>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
>> 
>> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
>> things because they go out of season.
>> 
>
>We import tons of stuff from Mexico.  Other places in Central and South
>America account for less.  I don't trust food imported from Mexico.

Watch out for Mexico. They are developing *rapidly*. It is noticable
from visit to visit, (around 2 years between).

They are currently at a GDP per person level equal to what the US
had ca 1965, and they are advancing rapidly.

They do have a lot of problems, but many of them are really indirectly
imported from the US (the drug trade and the violence spree).

The income inequality are of their own making, however. 

And they do have decent coffee. 

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162322

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-04-12 12:54 +0000
Message-ID	<Jd6Py.10$bJ2.2@fx16.iad>
In reply to	#162283

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>> 
>>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>>> 
>>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
>>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
>>> necessary.
>>> 
>>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
>>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
>> 
>> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
>> things because they go out of season.
>> 
>
>We import tons of stuff from Mexico.  Other places in Central and South
>America account for less.  I don't trust food imported from Mexico.

Why don't you trust food from Mexico?

Around here, we get a lot of fruit from Argentina and Chile this
time of year.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162344

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-04-12 16:36 -0400
Message-ID	<540462546.482185671.964409.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162322

Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>> 
>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>>>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>>>> 
>>>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
>>>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
>>>> necessary.
>>>> 
>>>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
>>>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
>>> 
>>> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
>>> things because they go out of season.
>>> 
>> 
>> We import tons of stuff from Mexico.  Other places in Central and South
>> America account for less.  I don't trust food imported from Mexico.
> 
> Why don't you trust food from Mexico?

I assume that imported foods are supposed to have been produced under
something similar to our laws regarding pesticides, etc.  Given the
free-wheeling environment in Mexico I don't trust them to follow their own
laws.  What does the "organic" label mean for produce from Mexico.

> 
> Around here, we get a lot of fruit from Argentina and Chile this
> time of year.
> 



-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162350

From	"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-12 17:21 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.317730f3949c66ad98a0c1@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#162344

In article <540462546.482185671.964409.peter_flass-
yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says...
> 
> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> >> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> >>> 
> >>>> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
> >>>>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
> >>>> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
> >>>> necessary.
> >>>> 
> >>>> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
> >>>> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
> >>> 
> >>> Don't know what numbers you are thinking of, but we import some
> >>> things because they go out of season.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> We import tons of stuff from Mexico.  Other places in Central and South
> >> America account for less.  I don't trust food imported from Mexico.
> > 
> > Why don't you trust food from Mexico?
> 
> I assume that imported foods are supposed to have been produced under
> something similar to our laws regarding pesticides, etc.  Given the
> free-wheeling environment in Mexico I don't trust them to follow their own
> laws.  What does the "organic" label mean for produce from Mexico.

About the same as it does in the US--that there's one born every minute.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162604

From	Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx>
Date	2016-04-17 09:09 -0500
Message-ID	<87a8kstjhq.fsf@senguio.mx>
In reply to	#162344

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> I assume that imported foods are supposed to have been produced under
> something similar to our laws regarding pesticides, etc.  Given the
> free-wheeling environment in Mexico I don't trust them to follow their own
> laws.  What does the "organic" label mean for produce from Mexico.

As I'm sure you know, the USDA inspects "all" (samples) food being
imported from Mexico before it can be sold.

A recent story in the expat press picked up on an article posted in
Consumer Reports that Mexican produce had substantially *lower* levels
of pesticide and defects than US produce, across a wide variety of
classes.  (The ones that stood out in my mind were Lettuce, and Melons -
but there were about a dozen mentioned in the article).

I've been living here (MX) for the last 16 years, and I can say without
exaggeration:  The locally available produce is an order of magnitude
better (and cheaper) than anything I could get even in the snootiest
SFBA store (looking askance at YOU, Whole Paycheck).

[Actually -- the Nob Hill in Campbell was my preferred grocer when I
lived there]

--NK1G

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162666

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-04-18 13:39 +0000
Message-ID	<rs5Ry.6961$iY2.4998@fx15.iad>
In reply to	#162604

Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> writes:
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> I assume that imported foods are supposed to have been produced under
>> something similar to our laws regarding pesticides, etc.  Given the
>> free-wheeling environment in Mexico I don't trust them to follow their own
>> laws.  What does the "organic" label mean for produce from Mexico.

>A recent story in the expat press picked up on an article posted in
>Consumer Reports that Mexican produce had substantially *lower* levels
>of pesticide and defects than US produce, across a wide variety of
>classes.  (The ones that stood out in my mind were Lettuce, and Melons -
>but there were about a dozen mentioned in the article).
>
>I've been living here (MX) for the last 16 years, and I can say without
>exaggeration:  The locally available produce is an order of magnitude
>better (and cheaper) than anything I could get even in the snootiest
>SFBA store (looking askance at YOU, Whole Paycheck).

That's not at all surprising.  Although the markets (I'm thinking
downtown Mazatlan) aren't appealing to some snooty americans.

>
>[Actually -- the Nob Hill in Campbell was my preferred grocer when I
>lived there]

Nob Hill was purchased by Raley's a few years ago, but they've kept
the name (and the existing stores, for the most part) and the quality.
They did finally introduce a loyalty program (which I decline).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#162319

From	jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date	2016-04-12 12:47 +0000
Message-ID	<PM00053048EE8DE2A7@aca41e19.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to	#162267

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2016 at 4:32:24 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> Eliminate the subsidies for sugar and hfcs.   This is in line with rw
>> thinking, if not current practice in the political sewers.
>
> Eliminate all agricultural subsidies.  Many of them were created
> in a very different economic climate, and today they are no longer
> necessary.

Are you sure they're no longer necessary?  Or do they just seem
to be unnecessary because they are working.

>
> However, I am uncomfortable with the fact that today we import a
> lot of foods instead of using domestic sources.
>
That's the futures market.  It does odd things.  One year I was
buying Australian oranges and my friends in Australia were buying
US oranges.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →

csiph-web

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Contents

#162349

#162376

#162405

#162409

#162445

#162254

#162256

#162258

#162264

#162267

#162270

#162279

#162283

#162306

#162322

#162344

#162350

#162604

#162666

#162319