[OT] Coffeepot temperature

Methinks you're ignoring the point in order to pick at nits. What Larry appears to be saying (Definitely jump in and correct me if I'm wrong, Larry) is the same way I feel: True, the world is full of morons, losers, idiots, and incompetents. But wrapping everybody in padding, locking them in a nice safe box, and putting them up on a high shelf in order to prevent them from injuring themselves is *NOT* the way to cope with the problem. Stupidity *SHOULD* be painful, in direct proportion to the level of stupid being exhibited, up to and including death. Look out for yourself, and let the other idiots cope with their own lives. (and possibly mistakes)

I don't need (or want) "them", whoever that might be, "protecting" me from things that *MIGHT* happen. Protecting me from some *POSSIBLE* harm is not "them's" job. It's *MINE*. Nobody - *ABSOLUTELY NOBODY* - is better qualified to do that job than me. Not you, not the preacher, not the congress-critter I tried to vote out of office at the last election, not *ANYBODY*, under *ANY* circumstances, *EVER*.

And yes, I object vehemently to anyone attempting to appoint themselves "custodian of safety" in my life. As the old line goes, I'm "free, white, and 21". If I want to drive a Pinto, then by god, it's my right to do so, regardless of how dangerous you, or Ralph Nader, or anybody else thinks that choice might be to my continued well-being. It isn't Ford's fault that I got turned into a briquet. It's mine for choosing to drive the darn thing in the first place, and to a leser extent, the imbecile who hit me from behind.

It's a little concept called "personal responsibility for your actions"

- You make the choice to , YOU take the consequences of that activity, whatever they might be. What? You lost an arm? Too bad, so sad. Betcha you aren't going to do that again anytime soon are you? You died while doing said activity? Oh well. Out of the gene-pool, stupid. Your problem, not mine, or Ford's, or the government's. YOURS.

In other words, *BUTT OUT*, and suck up a dose of responsibility for yourself. It's my life, my hide, my responsibility, and my decision - Not yours, or any elected representative's, or Ralph Nader's, or anybody else's.

Right. No styrofoam at home. I'll have to measure the temp just after pouring, for curiosity.

At work, we have paper cups, and these are too hot to carry. So, I double-cup them if I will carry coffee in hand. If I'm staying in the cafeteria I put some ice in the cup before pouring, and carry it on the tray, so it'll be right for immediate consumption.

As I said before, if I did anything, it would be to improve the cups.

Or give people their choice. This is the key issue. Do we deprive a hundred million people because one in ten million cannot handle such a choice?

My wife, the tea drinker, doesn't like microwave-heated water for tea either. She boils the water in a teakettle on the stove.

And I know at least one exiled Englishman that has a real 220-volt teakettle, for which he had a special UK 220 volt outlet installed in the kitchen. I recall that they work something like three times faster than 110 volts.

Joe Gwinn

That's not 700 injuries, that's 700 claims, i.e. the people were p****d off enough and injured enough to sue, and who the lawyers, who were most likely working on a contingency basis, thought had a "slam dunk" case. The actual number of injuries is much [although how much is unknown] higher.

It is one thing to have A problem rise up and "bite you in the a**." It is quite another when you knowingly allow YOUR problem to bite one person after another in the a**. This is like keeping a dog you know is vicious and prone to biting, because he had done it several times before, in your home where you are running a day care center. Think pit bulls.

Uncle George

All accidents that hurt or kill people are horrible, even if the person happens to be line for a Darwin Award.

You wouldn't happen to have an authoritative source for the relative incidence? This is the key - there is only so much time and money in the world, and we should look for the biggest pile of bodies and start there, not with trivial risks. Why? Because if we spend the time and energy on trivia, we won't ever quite get around to real risks, and the total number of significant accidents will be far higher than need be.

Sure. Any damn fool can buy machine tools. All it takes is money, and nobody makes them prove that they have taken a bunch of safety courses and passed some license tests and gotten a pretty bit of parchment. Unlike Stationary Engineers (steam plants) and Professional and/or Civil Engineers (construction). Etc.

If someone buys more machine than they can handle and manages to hurt themself, they are likely to sue alleging that the tool is unreasonably dangerous, and/or that in all those the pages of warnings in the manual, there was nothing that *exactly* fit the specifics.

Jurys tend to feel sorry for the poor slob, and often find for the plaintiff because the defendent is seen as a big rich company that can clearly spare the money, even if the plaintiff is clearly an idiot.

If this happened only rarely, it wouldn't have much of a general effect. But what's happening is that companies across the board are stopping making things deemed too dangerous for the average citizen, or selling only to industry, because a sympathetic jury doesn't really care about the facts or the law.

At my company, we have precisely such a training and exam system, because too many factory people were getting themselves chopped up, and these are mostly full time employees with experience. Suits weren't the issue, because Workman's Compensation applies, but still the injury rate was too high, so everybody in the company was sent in for mandatory safety training.

Joe Gwinn

Don Bruder offers:

appears to be saying (Definitely jump in and correct me if I'm wrong, Larry) is the same way I feel: True, the world is full of morons, losers, idiots, and incompetents.<

I see you highly value your fellow citizens. Nothing like a crippled moron joke, right Don? Anyone not, at least, your equal deserves your scorn, right? If they can't keep up, let them suffer, right? I guess your quote (Stupidity *SHOULD* be painful,) is your motto right? Would this thought be somehow included in your religous convictions? If so perhaps you'll share that information with us.

tried.....If I want to drive a Pinto, then by god, it's my right to do so, regardless of how dangerous you, or Ralph Nader, or anybody else thinks that choice might be to my continued well-being. It isn't Ford's fault that I got turned into a briquet. It's mine for choosing to drive the darn thing in the first place, and to a leser extent, the imbecile who hit me from behind.<

I agree you would be silly to do such a thing NOW. But no one expected it THEN. I don't imagine, if something went wrong with your NEW car you'd even bother to complain. Please take a moment to investigate before you make-up your mind. Recently I purchased a car that had brake and instrumentation problems the new car dealer couldn't resolve (electronics), but because the problems were intermittant the dealer claimed there was nothing wrong (ever heard that before?). Thanks to the "Lemon Law" here in CA the manufacturer was forced to take it back. What would YOU have done?

incidence? This is the key - there is only so much time and money in the world, and we should look for the biggest pile of bodies and start there, not with trivial risks. Why? Because if we spend the time and energy on trivia, we won't ever quite get around to real risks, and the

total number of significant accidents will be far higher than need be.<

If you're interested go look up the information. But, using your logic, we shouldn't have prisons because each inmates actions only affect a few, right; why waste the money, right? Or maybe you can see the slippery slope that puts little kids back in the coal mines. Or can you?

because too many factory people were getting themselves chopped up, and

these are mostly full time employees with experience. Suits weren't the issue, because Workman's Compensation applies, but still the injury rate was too high, so everybody in the company was sent in for mandatory safety training.<

So are you saying this was a good or bad thing as it seems your company/government was taking the place of your parents. Are there fewer "factory people....... getting themselves chopped up"? I hope so; even if they felt demeaned somehow.

dennis in nca

I"m seeing a lot of "my way is righter" from both directions......

Don, how about you and the gummint and the litigators protect those who need protecting and have no one else to protect them, and let the rest of us do whatever the hell we want provided that it doesn't endanger or harm another?

Some recourse to torts should definitely exist, but we are way the hell overboard with that in this country.

I was under the impression that's exactly what I was saying...

The government - *ANY* government - is not my mommy. I don't need or want it "protecting" me from the big-bad world. I'm a big boy now - old enough to make my own decisions regarding what is or isn't too dangerous for me to be doing, thank you very much. I'm also the *ONLY* human being on the planet qualified to judge whether something is or isn't too dangerous for me to attempt. Not the government, not Joe Blow down the street, not *ANYBODY* but me has the qualifications to be making that decision for me.

Gawd, ain't THAT the truth...

So I should have to take a course and get a license to buy a chainsaw? Thanks a lot!

That's been going on for years. A person smart enough to use stuff safely is also smart enough to figure out a (legal) way to buy it at a fair to good price. One method I use is to appear in person to make the purchase. They seem to quickly become comfortable that I know what I'm doing well enough to use the product responsibly. They ask friendly helpful questions. I do my homework if any is indicated. If I don't know an answer, I'm honest about that: "tell me more about that, please!" That in itself indicates a responsible attitude. If I really didn't have a clue, I wouldn't blame them for throwing me out; I'd do the same if I were they.

I've been buying stuff for years from "industry only" distributors. I bought a device just last week that three dealers told me were only available to licensed ... uh...users. Fooey. I don't need a license to apply it for my own use, and there's no way I'd install one for somone else without having applicable liability insurance -- which is part of why a "licensed user" would mark it up significantly.

I can assure you that the cost of that litigious crap is already built into the prices. I've read that half the cost of a ladder is for legal contingency. I know -- but won't quote sources -- that the cost-to-distributors of a propane valve nearly identical to a similar n.g. valve is significantly higher. Guess why?

Welding suppliers now charge haz mat fees on nearly everything, including oxygen. (I wonder if hospitals get charged hazmat on oxy?)

Responsible management and a good idea. Better management would have done that before people were getting hurt.

I was too but I wanted to check.

The conundrum here is who decides who needs protecting from whom, who decides that, and how might that be done without encroaching on the liberty of competent contributors. Getting this right would at least require the arbiter to consistently and correctly discriminate between the truely needful and artful parasites. The gummint is demonstrably poor at this and tort litigators demonstrably don't care either way as long as they get their third of the action.

Social responsibility starts with what you give, not with what you exhort others to give or aspire for power to take from them to give to others as you see fit.

That's rather naive. If they had no legal standing they would not have to pay taxes. Corps are simply legal entities that do business as an individual or partnership might do while separating the business identity from the personal identities of any particular individuals.

That is absurd. There are many responsible corporations, some of which ( often privately held) place employee welfare as job 1. A corp must profit to survive just as an individual tradesman must, and they're able to do that with competence and fair business practice without compromise of job 1.

The evil is where there is acceptance that "greed is good", which is no different from the "me first" attitude you embrace, is also practiced by corporate management. They're just better at it than you are. Much better. Invest in them or work for them, lose yer ass, eatyerhawrt out toughshit GI. Pick yer pony, take yer ride, whine when your "me first" gets stomped by the bigger dog.

So how are you different from the corporations you villify other than you're not nearly as good at it?

Forgot to mention that a publicly-held corp's shares are traded on a public market. That offers the opportunity (and risk) for investors to buy shares in the corp to participate in the corp's success (or failure) with no active participation or contribution other than investment, said investor hoping for better ROI than guaranteed ROI on bonds or bank CD's. Investment in shares supplies capital for the corp to use for growth, rather like a bank loan but without specified interest rate. It might also be skimmed by greedy corp managers with a shell game re Enro and Tyco. Those run-ups were fed by public greed that the feeders artfully expoited. Bidness is bidness, greed is "in", tough shit if you're tactically-deficient in this terrain yelping "me first".

Privately-held corps work a bit differently, but I think your hard-on is is with large publicly-held corps so the point is moot.

On 16 Jan 2006 15:59:00 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, "rigger" quickly quoth:

Now you want to fault laddder manufacturers for stupid people tricks? Ladders have a rating that I see exceeded all the time. The ladder labels (they need labels?) say "DON'T STAND HERE" on the top. That is often covered by both feet of the Darwinian Candidate.

If a ladder fails to support the rated weight, the mfgr is at fault and they should pay the price. BUT, have you seen the stupid crap people try on ladders? They don't clean the junk beneath the feet of the ladder, put them on inclines, put extension ladders too vertical, don't open a-frames fully and lock the stays, etc. It's ridiculous. The American (world) people and manufacturers shouldn't have to pay for that type of injury. Let Darwin have these fools.

I was smack dab in the middle of that at the time, Dennis. I worked for a Ford dealer at the tie and actually installed some of those nylon guards. Later, after an accident while using a tow truck dolly system, I had to give up my Scout and get into a smaller car with power steering and auto trans. I ended up in a little Pinto which never crashed and burned.

Liberal ideas, then.

Because I don't want to live elsewhere. I want to live here in the USA under sane laws, not nanny laws like the EU is ending up with. Eek! You want us to adopt those. Why don't YOU move? You'd love it there where it's impossible to hurt yourself.

That's the idea I was trying to get across to you. Do your own thing and don't f*ck up other people's lives with it. If you want tighter rules which "keep you safe", do it on your own time and money, _not_ _ours_! Get people to buy a frackin' clue!

Where'd that come from? No, skin color makes no difference to me. I dislike that type of Liberal thinking no matter the color of the person's skin.

Yes, those are bad people.

Not convinced, and I'm quite aware, thanks. So, you're saying that you would have caught the original engineering oversight in the Pinto? An oversight (problems caused by 35+ mph rear-end collisions don't figure into the engineering drawings) is just that. Our legal environment provided the rest. A legal system spurred on by people like you, who think that people should be safeguarded from themselves at everyone else's expense. I believe in people taking personal responsibility. We'll doubtless ever agree, but I couldn't let your statements go by unhindered.

Well, I got screwed on a paint job by Ford. The primer was bad and they wouldn't repaint the whole thing, just the top. The dealership said it would cost another $800 to do the vertical surfaces. The average cost of paint jobs back then was $400 for a complete. I'd like to punch their corporate mouths for the thinking behind that. I wrote letters instead...to no avail. C'est la guerre, non?

Not even close. G'night, Gracie. (This sig fits me. ;)

-------------------------------------------- -- I'm in touch with my Inner Curmudgeon. --

Comprehensive Website Development ============================================================

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:57:31 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, Don Bruder quickly quoth:

You're right on the money, Don.

Nader got the Corvair off the road and left much more unstable VW bug on the road. Great going, Ralph. I'm surprised the insurance companies haven't responded to that one. VW bugs and buses burn up all the time WITHOUT an accident causing it, yet 'they' go after the Pinto.

AMEN!

-------------------------------------------- -- I'm in touch with my Inner Curmudgeon. --

Comprehensive Website Development ============================================================

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 04:07:58 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, Don Foreman quickly quoth:

With expenses, it's closer to -half- the action.

Bravo, Don.

So, do you think we'll see a list from Dennis? (Well, Dennis?) My social responsibility starts with telling or showing folks how to do something safer when they're doing "stupid people things." and saying "Do as I say, not as I do." when I pull 'em myself. ;)

-------------------------------------------- -- I'm in touch with my Inner Curmudgeon. --

Comprehensive Website Development ============================================================

Even if it's a factor of ten higher (the usual rule of thumb), it's still one per million cups.

Hmm. This isn't the example I would have chosen if I were you. The problem rate with Pit Bulls is *far* higher than one in ten million, and (unlike coffee cups) Pit Bulls actively go for the kill. So far, there have been no reports of a coffee cup slipping the leash and mauling some passing innocent.

Joe Gwinn

I sure hope not, but I think you see my point.

I'm not suggesting that such licensing would be a good idea. Basically, I'm saying that we should be careful about what we pray for.

I agree.

Ditto. And I've bought my share of industrial-only stuff.

Cost in dollars is only part of the problem. The bigger problem is when useful things become unavailable because the liability risk makes it unprofitable to manufacture the item. The unpredictability of such judgments causes the insurance companies to price liability insurance very dear.

I bet they do. An oxygen-fed fire is pretty fierce.

Agree. What happened was that some years ago we got a new CEO who came from a different industry, and he knew from that industry that our injury rates were higher than necessary. So he fixed the problem.

Joe Gwinn

Don Bruder explains all: (paraphrased)

Me good, me big, go away with your higher ideals. Me don't need them, me big. Others small, maybe get eaten. That good. Me no share food.

Did I get that right? Did I miss anything? Oh, what the heck, one more "me big" for good luck.

How much we know at 20. Maybe time will make a difference.

dennis in nca

Which I find wrong due to the fact that the "artificial person" that is the company has (or does a damn good job of appearing to have) more rights than actual "natural humans". It is my considered opinion that such fictitious entities should be stripped of *ALL* of the advantages they are currently given over individual "real people", and left only the responsibilities - Exactly the opposite of what appears to be the current situation.

What's absurd is the fact that the pseudo-person called "Company X" consistently appears to have more rights than me, and consistently gets handed a slap on the wrist for stuff that would put me behind bars for years if I were to attempt even *HALF* of what they get away with.

That would be one man's opinion. One which I've seen preious little evidence of outside "Mom's Diner" level operations.

*I* am an actual human being that can be spoken to face to face. They are an artificial construction of greed, bullshit, political favor, and wind that's impossible to get a handle on, let alone an answer from, yet have, or at least appear to, more rights and fewer responsibilities than an actual person.

However, we're veering from the initial premise, which is/was "who decides what's safe, and for whom?".

To get back to that concept from our little side-excursion to digression-ville, my stance is that the only person qualified to decide what is or isn't too dangerous/unsafe is the person doing the deciding. NOt the government, not Ralph Nader, not anybody or anything other than the person contemplating the activity.