Geeto67

Do tell!!!! Ultralight? or full on kit plane? Isn't there a metal supermarket near by? I've never used them but they always come up in my searches for square tube supplies.

not local, but Sean Murphy at SMI knows the e-Quad inside and out. They used to write the tech articles on the E-quad for Hot Rod. Maybe call Sean and see what his turn around is? https://www.smicarburetor.com/

Fair point - but it's weird, you are ok with his almost stream of conscious public statements to the media, but then hugely critical of the media when they publish it. I can't follow that logic Tim, you just want "the media" to be the bad guy. There is a lot to cover, who's fault it that? maybe the person making the public statements? is it negative? yeah Trump says a lot of stuff that is controversial and negative - they just report it because THAT IS THEIR JOB. How is it missing you that he's the source of the negativity? Again, you just really hate that megaphone. Except that he doesn't agree because that's what he did. And honestly let's stop making this about him for a second, he has an economic advisor, and people who are putting together these plans and the paperwork to justify it. The problem is that their work doesn't hold up to any kind of professional economic scrutiny. He's spewing bad information at full volume, because he's getting bad information, because he's pretty shitty at hiring people. Just watch the apprentice: it's not hard to see he's a bad boss. Strong words from someone who calls literally anybody he morally agrees with Turds. I mean, you know you do that right? This isn't news to you that Turds is condescending and insulting and you use it like it is a conjunction. Really Tim, and deep down we both know this, the only turd is you - it's how you feel about yourself and how you see that part of yourself in the rest of the world. I feel sorry for you Tim, weak and sad and frightened by brown people, I mean turds.

We all have side hustles, that's his, I have mine, I'm sure you have yours. I meant his day job, the thing he does for actual money to pay his mortgage and bills and stuff.

Sweet!!!!! 1.535 60ft, I'm guessing you walked it out of the hole and then poured on the coal? It's still pretty respectable, but if you can get more launch traction I think she's got more in her - maybe a 1.4 60 foot and a really low 10's (high 9's) pass? Awesome pass and congrats on the records!

He's not special in that regard. They do that with every president going back to Regan. The difference - Every other President didn't fart in public. There is a longer conversation to be had here about the shift in media and how they used to not report on things of low character and how the attitude changed with the Gary Hart Scandal - but for simplicity's sake, stop pretending like he's getting special treatment - he's not, he's seems to be operating under the "negative attention is better than no attention at all" theory. Well we are talking about loss leader products - for the US sub lines of business are "products". Not everything in goods are loss leader just because of an overall loss. I would rather he not try and fix the losses on steel by penalizing agriculture where we make money - and tariffs do that. You still haven't shown me where it is on the whole not fair. You keep saying "these trade deals" like the whole deal is bad, but really the deal is solid - it's the cheating like china dumping steel at below cost that's not part of the deal that's the problem. So far I have worked in both, what's your point. You are trying to say I don't understand basic economic concepts because I didn't run my own business, and it turns out I have - so now what? I don't understand universal economic concepts because I haven't run a multi-billion dollar small business like our commander in chief has? Is he the only one qualified to understand these concepts? No Tim, the reality is you were trying to be condescending by talking out of your ass and making assumptions. jut stop, it's dumb and I lose respect for you when you say stupid things like this. You put yourself there chief. It's not a personal attack to point out you just flat out don't know what you are talking about. It is also a fact you were being an ass about it, which is convenient because it also happens to be my opinion. But whatever, I didn't know you were going to be such a snowflake about it, I thought you were made of tougher stuff Tim, what happened to "Turds" and all that other hate speech you spew? Your nuts are going to shrivel up just because I called you an Ass? Sad.

Lots? maybe, but I don't think the majority. He's had probably the lowest running popularity rating of any president in recent history I don't think the Media hates Trump in the slightest - they love him. He's a constant source of ratings and views and income for them. At some point you have to give Trump credit for something: It's not the media's job to filter the shit he says, that's his job (and that's why president's have been so measured in the past - because everything they say is considered newsworthy). All that negative shit printed about him, yeah he said that shit, it's all him. The Media didn't invent "grab them by the pussy" or "Little Rocket Man" - he's actually that ridiculous in real life and it ain't the media's job to make him look less so. Plus because he is controversial, he's bolstered the Op-ed and pundit portion of journalism, and it really isn't Trump or the Media's fault if the Audience can't tell the difference between Sean Hannity and actual news. There is no shortage of reporting and bias on both sides of the isle - but to make it seem like it's the media's fault is kinda like blaming the megaphone at a white supremacists rally for saying racist shit. It Ain't the megaphone, it's who speaking into it. See above. Again, you are blaming the megaphone instead of the person speaking into it.

Is a deficit on goods a bad thing per se? I'm not convinced. As mentioned earlier it can be a sign of prosperity as a lot of luxury goods are imported. Does he have a means of pushing things into the media? seems he just kinda says whatever he wants. If there is an actual plan, it could be working much better than just lying and exaggerating about things that are easily verifiable as wrong or inflated, no? Except where those losses are intentional. Chevrolet loses $9K on every Bolt it sells, but they are Ok with that - the car helps establish their market share in the EV segment. Ford lost money on every Ford GT it made in both generations, Honda loses money on the weirdo cars they still import from Japan, and yet they are all ok with this. Sometimes "losing" money is a strategy because it pays dividends somewhere else. Sure the loses are short term, but so is trade policy - it changes regularly almost every 2 years. Here's the thing, rather than punish US prosperity with Tariffs, why not invest in the industries where we do export to try and make them more efficient? I've had several Tim. I come from small business people. This job I do now, this is the first time in my life I haven't worked for myself or been a part of a small business. But please, tell me again how you can write my biography without knowing a thing about me. Also, you don't exactly run your own business either so you can climb down off that high horse now. Ass.

That's Fair, but then again I don't know that in my family (which is way more liberal than I am sometimes) we talk about Trump all that much or at all. Not a lot of spirited discussion when the room agrees with you. It's only when my batshit crazy uber conservative inlaws visit that we talk about it. The social media/media cycle under Trump has certainly intensified. But I don't think that belongs to any one side - most presidents like to be very measured in their public persona, and here we have a person that isn't doing that, plus regularly picking fights with news outlets, and seems to actually crave the attention whether it is positive or negative. He also empowered a lot of groups that previously just weren't getting any attention - I mean we still had a growing white supremacy problem under Obama (and probably in part because of Obama just by him being the first African American President) but we sure as shit didn't hear that much about them prior to Trump. Personally, I'm an issue-ist. Normally I give two shits about the actual politician, I instead look at their approach to issues and problems and their tactics to solve them, and I am a big fan of partisanship. With this administration I can't help be critical of the person because Trump has this uncanny ability to both completely misunderstand the problem and then execute a poorly planned reactionary solution. It's not a strategy I am comfortable with because it causes a lot of collateral damage. I still haven't figured out whether he actually understands the real issue and is just re-framing it to his own ends, or if he legit only hears what he wants to hear and doesn't do any further investigation. Time will tell though.

How much do you pay attention to the stuff you agree with? It's your opinion man, I don't think you have to justify it to anyone and maybe YOU didn't see much here, but, I dunno, Obama was bad man. I mean they are still talking about him and it's been a while. I mean, just look at Tim - he gets frothy if you just mention Obama's name.

Tim, you know how to do simple math right? $26>$17. So we have a net overall trade surplus of $9 Billion with Canada. That means we make money off our deal with them. Tell me how that's bad? The Trump advisors (like Peter Navarro) don't factor services trade in any of their analysis - they literally pretend it doesn't exist. Tell me how that is being big picture, or even intelligent? Furthermore Trump has built his latest Canadian trade policy around the dairy industry and Canadian tarriffs on it, which runs at a surplus for the US, but only accounts for 0.2% of total goods exported. Sure it looks like we are being taken advantage of if you ignore literally all the industries we make money off of canada in trade, but once you do the smart thing a zoom out - we make money. Let's take Mexico, a country where we have an actual trade deficit with. $64.1 Trade deficit on good with Mexico in 2017 and a $7 Billion services surplus with Mexico. Doesn't sound good since we still have a $57 Billion trade deficit, but do we actually? Mexico Reported a $132.4 Billion surplus for the US. What does that mean? Well it means that there are $75.3 Billion dollars in goods and services the US imports from Mexico and then re-exports to other countries. Even though the good originates in mexico, it is treated on paper as a US originated export, which means we don't offset the raw numbers. The US makes an $11.2 billion surplus on stuff it imports from mexico and then exports to other nations. What are these things you ask? how about whole cars, auto parts, produce and agriculture, etc... $11.2 Billion overall surplus to us still doesn't sound like a bad deal to me. https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/americas/mexico What am I missing here Tim, where is the part where we are profitable but somehow still being ripped off? Trump's rhetoric is literally If there is a Deficit we are being ripped off, but in reality he manufactured the deficit by just ignoring other important numbers that play a factor. I would say this is another example of him not taking someone's word for it and just trying something to see what happened, but you know what? the US actually did this before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act Spoiler alert: it had very short run success, but almost tragic long run effects that took almost 30 years or more to undo. But tell me again how the president is doing something "new" that hasn't been tried before.

Whataboutism - classic Russian Propaganda, eh comrade? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

you are the one calling for military intervention so... I love how you assume that they didn't rather than the reality that we threw our weight around. The rest of the world isn't "weak" and I don't hear any world leaders "making excuses". Most of them have gone further than we have in this arena, but without out buy in progress stops. I don't "make" anything complicated. Shit just is sometimes. People aren't out there engineering complexity - it happens organically most of the time. dumb how? costly how? we profited from them. Come on Tim, back it up - don't just say something was costly, show me how it was costly. So far every statement Trump makes on trade and tariffs have been fact checked to be wildly flawed: https://apnews.com/6ffb31982dfd4ea7b4e029d11697a593/AP-FACT-CHECK:-Trump's-bottom-line-stats-on-trade-are-wrong If you are just repeating his rhetoric, then you are repeating his mistakes. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-trump-nixon-analysis/trumps-north-korea-summit-falls-short-of-nixon-goes-to-china-moment-idUSKBN1J812L Is it? I mean, even if we were in the minority of recognition we were still pretty damn effective. North Korea's interests are not aligned with our own - lack of recognition as leverage was a way to get them to come accept their place in the world on our terms (sounds like putting America first - doesn't it?). I think you really overstate the power of the US in the global community, we aren't the 800 lb gorilla we used to be. Start with Mitch McConnell. I mean if you were really committed to this you have to recognize that obstruction and lack of bi-partizanship has been the republican strategy since 2008. Truth is, we had a lot more bipartisan success under Obama than we did in a lot of other presidencies. He's up there with Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, HW Bush, and Clinton. You'll never recognize that though because he's not from your team. He also faced the largest one sided political opposition to bipartisanship in history. There are limits to how much someone is willing to work with you. So far, considering their options, they have been gracious. ok, but do we have to blow up the mutual hand job to get that done? seems unnecessary.... I don't even think you know what his policies are. Honestly I don't think he does either so much of it seem reactionary and based on false or misinterpreted information. I think you just want to see shit explode, instead of the slow crawl of diplomacy. I found this article very helpful for understanding what's at stake here, maybe you will too: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/6/12/17448866/trump-south-korea-alliance-trudeau-g7

Well, the "Fuck the rest of the world" and "kill them all and let god sort em out" attitude which seem to travel with your nationalism are kind of that dumb tough guy bravado so...yeah. Would, have, and did. I'm not saying that the US doing that was right - but it's what been done up to this point. You were saying that the others had an opportunity because the door was open and I was saying yeah but we were a pretty big bouncer standing in front of that door. I don't know what point you are trying to make now other than to just spout false equivalent gibberish - But if you are asking if foreign diplomatic policy is handled differently than domestic policy, the answer is yes they are different things that have different approaches and different complexities. Oh that's right, you also refuse to believe that things are complex so... Well, those tactics have to have some teeth do they not? Look at this big picture, not just the summit in isolation. We've pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord, We Pulled out of the Iran Deal, we imposed tariffs on our strongest allies and then called them weak and dishonest, and now we are going against a mutually agreed to course of action that we proposed, set up, and got our allies to agree to. Frankly, why would our allies back us on the continuing course of action of sanctions if it isn't in their interest anymore? What's the leverage? The greatest value the US had in the global arena was it's reputation - we made deals and we stuck to them, we proposed initiatives that benefited everyone - and the summit is the latest in a long line of erosion of that reputation. Make no mistake, we need that reputation, being seen as unstable is not a good look for US. Yeah but that doesn't mean you get to ignore the middle part where we used the debt market as a way of coaxing an alliance out of an otherwise reluctant world power. At this point China's strength is tied to American prosperity, but if we weaken to the point where they get leverage - then they can hurt us and surpass us. As long as we were strong they were strong, and our weakness was their weakness. Uncoupling that means that they could surpass us - something they couldn't do when they needed us to grow their economy. By the way, they are still a long ways off from "surpassing" us. We look at them as this looming world power, but they can't even sort our civil engineering in a lot of their infrastructure. They need us a lot more than we need them, and I for one would like to keep it that way. If the collective world powers (what we used to call an alliance) don't recognize the legitimacy of a regime to rule the country, it has many specific ramifications. The private companies of those countries can't do business with your nationals or government, you don't get to participate in the UN, the Olympics, attend summits, etc. The US not recognizing North Korean Sovereignty and Kim Jong Il's assertion to soverign rule is a big deal. To date, North Korea has managed to get 93 nations to recognize it's rule - enough to get it a seat at the UN and open diplomatic relations and trade with those countries - where by our sanctions are the only bar to trade. And our failure to recognize the nation is the primary reason we can write such broad ranging sanctions. Recognition is our biggest bargaining chip with NK Although he hasn't reversed the US's official position yet - where his predecessors have stopped short and he hasn't in in his statements and actions with North Korea. In the past the US would act through Sweden in any matters involving North Korea, putting an agent between us and them. Whether we like it or not - diplomatic recognition can be established through implication, not just political act. The visit of a head of state, the signing of a bilateral treaty, negotiations of trade, can all create a de-facto recognition of sovereignty. Usually the state has to proclaim that those acts do not constitute recognition before hand, something Trump has not explicitly done. The fear here is that due to his absolute inexperience and incompetence coupled to his desire for personal recognition, Trump may "accidentally" give away the US's biggest bargaining chip without getting anything in return. Also, if it does happen, our alliances with Japan and South Korea will weaken significantly. understand now? Nope, bullying by the US in diplomatic relations isn't new. But bullying isn't what trump brings to the table. What he brings to the table is actually the opposite - in trying to be a bully he may have undermined the leverage that allowed us to act as one in the first place. That's the "new" thing he brings to this - plowing through the china shop like a bull driving a bulldozer and not understanding that the china inside is fragile. Is it really "taking in the ass"? The concerns Trump has, while somewhat legitimate, aren't exactly the kind of thing to nuke the whole deal over. I don't think this is taking it in the ass, I think of it more as mutual jerking off where we lubed our hand and they didn't lube theirs - we are still getting jerked off either way, but probably not as pleasant as we like. I think you are kinda inflating the problems he is trying to address to somehow legitimize his actions, when really he is remodeling your kitchen with a hand grenade. I am pretty sure the entire staff of the white house would disagree with you. But he def has People - they are those in the republican party who sold out their values and felt it was more important to go along with him rather than resist, or as I like to call them "The Republican Party". And yeah there is a lot of resistance to his "policies" because some of them are just freaking awful. Like bad for everyone awful. If you see your kid trying to burn the house down, you don't wait for the fire department to put out the blaze, you take the matches away. It's not corruption to stop an inexperienced person from making professional mistakes - it's common sense.

here is how worthless NK's promise of denuclearization actually is: https://www.wired.com/story/north-korea-summit-denuclearize-history/ It's nice to know we got "something" for the national security we gave up in the region. And by "something" I mean nothing of value at all.

Government executions (that we know about) in North Korea are a horror show. Jang Song Taek, Kim's uncle by marrage, as well as his aides and one nephew were executed by being burned alive with a flamethrower in 2013 (there are differing accounts as to whether he was also shot with an anti-aircraft gun while still burning). NK's firing squad uses machine guns and public executions by firing squad happen in a stadium. Hanging and decapitation round out the more popular ways people are publicly executed in North Korea. And that's before we talk about the gulags for political prisoners, the forced abortions, the killing of infants as punishment, etc... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/world/asia/north-korea-human-rights.html

Nobody here is claiming to be righteous. It's not a personal attack, it's a statement of fact: you don't value global credibility or diplomacy. It's ok, you are an "America First" Nationalist so I don't expect you to value it, but I am often surprised that you talk like it doesn't exist - and that's just a jump I can't follow. Has it? up till now the US has been the dominant force in global diplomacy, I don't think the door has been open because nobody has been willing to risk the US sanctions. We have done everything from officially restricting trade to boarding civilian merchant ships going from NK to other countries in the past - ain't nobody wanted to risk that kind of attention. I don't think they will as readily fall in line now. I can't take you seriously when you make statements like this. China's first interest is China, that much it true, but much of it's interests are aligned with the US's interests because of how much money they have floating in our economy. China will back North Korea only where it's interests align as well, and honestly China's interests align with us more often than they do with North Korea. You can see this in every US sanction China agreed to abide by and every UN resolution against NK they backed. Whether you like it or not, China and the US have a quasi co-dependent economy. We care very much about them buying Bonds and securities and they care very much about the money they spend on those things and what's coming to them, and in the past failing to uphold those sanctions hurt them - but if the US is legitimizing North Korea, then how much will not holding up those sanctions really hurt their position? Well, because we are the cornerstone of the global banking system, the cornerstone of global trade, the largest marketplace for a lot of foreign countries' goods. So yeah, they didn't want to fuck with us because doing so fucked with their money. And we had a pretty much 0 tolerance for dealing with NK. Being on the outside of the banking system alone is a huge problem. Just ask Russia. It's not so says me, you don't have to take my word for it - it's a matter of public record. It's not a sign of respect when your allies come out of a meeting with you and shit talk your plans and policies. But more than that - he doesn't even have consensus of his own people. Whenever he tries to blow something really bad up congress or his own advisors come out of the woodwork to talk him down off the ledge.

Actually Tim, it kinda does. It never fails to surprise me that for someone who tries to talk as tough as you do, the concept of credibility on a global stage eludes you. Notwithstanding how much Trump has damaged the US's in the last year, the US as a nation talking to NK opens the door for other nations to do the same. Refusing to associate with NK was leverage in our diplomatic interactions with China. So yeah, Trump having a conversation with NK means that China doesn't have to be as careful in it's dealings with NK as it did in the past. What do you know about how his people view him? NK has an iron curtain up, and the only people we hear from are the defectors. Plus, how much does it matter to dictators what their people think of them? NK's been "Starving" since the 1950's. We've seen 3 different leaders come and go since then (Kim Il sung, Kim Jong il, Kim Jong Un), and they haven't starved to death yet. They are prepared to stay in the hole and keep going longer than we are able to sweat them out. The black market is thriving because of their efforts currently - so whether the people are starving or not, the regime isn't in a bad place. To put it in language you'll understand: by the US not recognizing his regime, they were on the US's shit list - and our allies had to tread very lightly or not at all in their dealings with them. Now, even if we say they are on our shitlist, the ROW isn't going to really worry as much about their dealings because they can just say "well we are exploring options, just like you did". Get it? We aren't doing shit and you know it. Any threat toward a nation by the US is an empty promise, and action is going to be seen as a joke because our leader is seen as a joke. Is something radical, even if it blows up in our faces preferred to the slow march of diplomacy? Why?

years ago, someone told me the people working the phones make a commission every time they sell you a package or an upgrade. Hence their incentive to give you existing promotional rates - they could cancel your existing service, make it look like in the system you cancelled, then sign you up for a new package starting the clock over again and collect the extra pay by making it look like they sold you a retention package. Word is that spectrum discontinued this practice of paying commissions on retention packages for calls in (they still do outbound retention calls if you actually cancel your service) which is why the phone people have suddenly become less willing to negotiate. In person sales I don't think are compensated the same way. Keep in mind this is all hearsay, but it seems consistent to me - the best deals I have always gotten by showing up on a Saturday with my equipment and talking to a real person.

I think I cracked the code to the Trump strategy. If it hasn't been done before, or people thought it was crazy before - do it. I'm not making a joke, I literally believe that this is his strategy: Try something different without regard to whether it was a good idea or not, and esp without regard as to whether you were one of the people saying it was a bad idea as a way of taking pot shots at Obama. Rather than understand why people tell you something is bad, do the bad thing and see if they are right. Basically, fuck up the status quo and see what happens, who knows maybe he'll get lucky and something good will. Maybe it's ok we don't have North Korea as an enemy for a while...I mean, there is always Canada... I will say this, at some point we either had to recognize the Kim Regime or sponsor it's over throw. The long game wasn't working in our favor. However, if it is recognized on the world stage, then North Korea could potentially be held to the higher standard and be more vulnerable to public pressure from other nations. In other words, rather than a violent bloddy revolution, Kim could show up to the general assembly at the UN and find himself being lead into the Hague to stand trial for human rights violations.

Some of that happened to me. I don't get the ears on fire or the snot, but I am pretty sure I drank a quart of milk about 30 minutes after eating it, and I pretty much couldn't taste anything for the rest of the day. I look at eating superhots raw the same way I look at anal sex - you have to draw the line at how much shit you are willing to put up with. Up until I ate it I had drawn the line at Habaneros raw just because I had a piece of Ghost Pepper that was unbearable (like eyes watering unbearable).

The phone people really aren’t the best people to be talking to when it comes to rate negotiation. Go to the store in person, complain about slow service, and tell them you are considering switching. it helps if you bring your box with you because sometimes they will switch it out if it is outdated. It’s never failed to get me a rate reduction plus extra services.

It's not as bad as you think. I ate a Reaper raw at cars and coffee a while ago, someone has footage of it. The worst part isn't the eating it, it's the burning shits you have for about a day afterwards. wife planted some Hatch and Anaheims in our backyard last weekend. Nothing super hot, just something to cook with since being a texan she cooks a lot of tex mex.

I just meant, don't spike the ball. yeah Texas in general just seems to have bigger houses in general for the money. My In-laws live in Allen and their home was about $300K in 2006 and near twice the size of anything in Cbus now at the same price. Also, Tx houses may lack basements but a lot of them have attics. Trade moist cold things in storage for things heat damaged and dried out.

I know what you meant, it's just the lighting on the pic, the car shows a fender to a pillar seam in real life fully assembled. You can kind of see a shadow of it on the drivers side of your pic. One thing I will note, the seam is higher up on the A piller than I was expecting, it's not at the base of the windshield, but an inch or so up from that.