ATM's.......
Aug 23rd 2002, 2:05 pm
#1396
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
[email protected] (Vitaly Shmatikov) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected] >, amp_spamfree
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >The kind of fishing you've been talking about is EXACTLY that, a family with a
> >handful of boats selling to locals, canners, and fishmongers. You live on the
> >freaking cost - and insist that is where you buy fish - ask them.
> They would be a darn big family if they had anywhere close to 78 persons. But
> they don't. They might have a handful of boats, but not a handful of *trawlers*,
> contrary to what you claimed. They are very small-scale, comparing to the
> average fishing operation in Europe (or the US, for that matter). Which is what
> I've been saying all along.
What is the scale of the "average" fishing operation in the US and Europe? I gave
you data that puts it in the 2-4 boat size - real statistics. Now, you tell me
otherwise - or if you think 2-4 boats is large scale...then take a course in
economics.
> Just like in Spain or Portugal, drive up the coast from Mexico to Canada, and
> with the exception of LA and a few wild stretches like Big Sur and Lost Coast, it
> would be nothing but small harbors, small boats, plenty of fresh fish and
> seafood, and quite picturesque, too. Comparing with this, most fishing anywhere
> *is* large-scale, and that includes your average 78-employee UK operation.
No, most FISHING is small scale - what has become large scale is aquaculture. Look
at the industry data if you are so ignorant. The 78-avergae business size includes
three substantial canneries - and aquaculture. Still, with 22000 overall employees,
and almost 300 ongoing concerns, the industry is characterized by a large number of
small competitors - that's the economics definition, not the Vitaly OpEd.
> >> And how does the existence of Macaroni Grill, Fuddrucker's and such contradict
> >> the wide availability of excellent food in America? Do you understand that
> >> (NOT X exists) does not imply (X does not exist)? Or is this one of those
> >> insights limited to junior faculty with a backpack budget?
> >
> >Maybe the dominance of these large chains makes your premise of "wide
> >availability" and "excellent food" a bit tenuous?
> What makes you think they are dominant? On this coast, I don't recall if I ever
> saw a Fuddrucker's, and there is maybe one Macaroni Grill for 50 miles. For each
> chain outlet, there are two ethnic restaurants, a BBQ pit, a taqueria, and more
> good food than you can eat in a lifetime.
Do you REALLY want to debate the statistics? In terms of annual turnover, the
multiple outlet "chain" operations share of the total sales at retail at restaurants
in the US...go ahead, show them not to be dominant. Start with McDonalds, Burger
King and include Friday's, Marconis...and so on.
> >The widely available American restaurant food consists of these large chains -
> >that's what wide availability means - or will Vitaly offer up his own definition
> >of "widely available" to include two men and a boat?
> Widely available means just that - a Hunan restaurant to the right, a Thai to the
> left, a Salvadoran taqueria around the corner, a fish'n'chips down the street, a
> hamburger grill across the way, and an Ethiopean restaurant in the next suburb.
> That's the way it is in most metro areas in the US, with some regional
> variations, of course.
Yep - you redifined widely available to mean local specialty restaurants.
> >> ``Chile accounted for 49 percent of all U.S. salmon imports last year [2000],
> >> up from 38 percent in 1999. According to Chris McDowell of Salmon Market
> >> Information Service, Chile is the leader in salmon imports by a margin of 39
> >> percent over its closest competitor, Canada''
> >>
> >> Which part of it do you not understand?
> >
> >This part:
> >
> >"Most of salmon in the US comes from Alaska, not Oregon..."
> In the context of the discussion of what's available on the docks, yes, most of
> salmon in the US comes from Alaska.
No, it isn't - what's available on the docks in the US is Pacific Salmon from West
Coat fleets and Atlantic salmon from the Atlantic coast fleets. What is available
from Alaska comes in a tin or frozen. Spending 40 -60 days in the hold of a fishing
trawler doesn't make for fresh.
> *You* (not me) brought up salmon and *you* (not me) switched the discussion to
> imported salmon, and then claimed that most of it comes from BC (it doesn't). Why
> would you do that? Beats me.
You started the bit about seafood and how all US salmon comes from Alaska. Hey -
first, your wrong, then you're wrong again, and now you're wrong a third time. That
would be the charm.
In 1999, btw, BC was the principal source of US eaten salmon - and still is the
primary source of fresh whole salmon. Chile has done exceptionally well in providing
an export product - no doubt - but when it comes to sourcing, Chile and BC are fairly
close, and Alaska isn't even on the radar.
> >> What I do know is what I see when I walk into my grocery store. There is
> >> Wonderbread... and then there is the bakery section with 30 kinds of freshly
> >> baked bread.
> >
> >And which gets the most facings and sells the most loaves?
> Around here it would be sourdough and baguettes, which are baked on the premises.
> Folks also seem to like ciabattas from Acme and Il Fornaio (at least I think they
> do, since they are given the most prominent placement, right in the middle of the
> bakery section).
Wonderbread.
> >> There is cheez-wiz... and then there is the cheese section, with 50 or 100
> >> cheeses from all over the world (camembert included).
> >
> >Where do you shop where there are 50 to 100 different cheeses?
> Safeway (you might have heard of them, they own Dominick's) - around 30,
Not 50 or 100 - but 30?
> Andronico's - around 50 or 70,
11 stores in the Bay area - hardly a national chain - it's a specialty store. And
according to their website, they have 350 cheeses from around the world.
> and Milk Pail (a small independent grocery story around here) - over 100.
A single outlet - again, not much of a chain.
So, generally speaking, large chain groceries in the US have a limited number of
cheeses from which to select. My point exactly.
> And no, these are not unique to California. Seattle, New York, Houston, same
> thing. Probably Chicago, too (haven't shopped in a supermarket there since 1994,
> so I can't say for sure).
Specialty stores are not unique to Europe, either. In fact, I shop in a store that
has well over 100 different FRENCH cheeses alone (that would be their specialty). But
the local Sainsbury's selection...compared to the Safeway US selection - you argued
that there's no comparison - I agree, 30 would never do.
> >> Is Macaroni Grill Italian? If it isn't Italian, what is it?
> >
> >Olive Garden with better wine and higher prices. It is Americanized processed
> >italian cheese food.
> What Macaroni Grill is to Italian food, Hard Rock Cafe is to American food.
> I wouldn't want anyone to learn about Italian food from Macaroni Grill or
> Olive Garden, and I wouldn't want anyone to learn about American food from
> Hard Rock Cafe.
But that is exactly what most Americans know and eat, when they aren't driving
through, that is. Casual dining sales are an almost 50 billion dollar industry in
the US, dominated by about 200 chain operations. The bulk of "restaurant" sales, in
the US, is still held by the fast food providers, the overwhelming majority of whom
are the well known top 5. So when it comes to food, the leadership in terms of total
sales fall firmly on chain/franchise operations, not the local bodega. The "locals"
do outnumber the chains 2 to 1 in terms of number of units, but are big losers in
terms of number of meals served/sold or the dollar volume of business.
> >So Vitaly - getting the backpack cleaned up and the jeans patched for your next
> >passport free trip?
> You betcha. It ain't gonna be passport-free (the passportless interlude in my
> life is long past - it was more of an extended misunderstanding with various
> citizenships),
Which means that you didn't do this passport free travel recently yet had the gall to
post that it is currently possible and then berate me when I said it wasn't? Well,
that takes balls.
You apparently missed the July 1 directive regarding UK immigration procedures. OK,
that's understandable. I was using current information, not 10 year old stuff.
>but off I go, in 10 days. First to New York, then to Paris (Continental Airlines,
>BusinessFirst, hope my 777 will be one of those with new sleeper seats). We
>backpackers like to travel in style. You look doubtful. Shall I fax you my
>boarding passes?
No thanks.
> Anyway, it's been a pleasure talkin'.
Bon voyage. Poor me, I just have a trip to Bologna planned.
amp
news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected] >, amp_spamfree
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >The kind of fishing you've been talking about is EXACTLY that, a family with a
> >handful of boats selling to locals, canners, and fishmongers. You live on the
> >freaking cost - and insist that is where you buy fish - ask them.
> They would be a darn big family if they had anywhere close to 78 persons. But
> they don't. They might have a handful of boats, but not a handful of *trawlers*,
> contrary to what you claimed. They are very small-scale, comparing to the
> average fishing operation in Europe (or the US, for that matter). Which is what
> I've been saying all along.
What is the scale of the "average" fishing operation in the US and Europe? I gave
you data that puts it in the 2-4 boat size - real statistics. Now, you tell me
otherwise - or if you think 2-4 boats is large scale...then take a course in
economics.
> Just like in Spain or Portugal, drive up the coast from Mexico to Canada, and
> with the exception of LA and a few wild stretches like Big Sur and Lost Coast, it
> would be nothing but small harbors, small boats, plenty of fresh fish and
> seafood, and quite picturesque, too. Comparing with this, most fishing anywhere
> *is* large-scale, and that includes your average 78-employee UK operation.
No, most FISHING is small scale - what has become large scale is aquaculture. Look
at the industry data if you are so ignorant. The 78-avergae business size includes
three substantial canneries - and aquaculture. Still, with 22000 overall employees,
and almost 300 ongoing concerns, the industry is characterized by a large number of
small competitors - that's the economics definition, not the Vitaly OpEd.
> >> And how does the existence of Macaroni Grill, Fuddrucker's and such contradict
> >> the wide availability of excellent food in America? Do you understand that
> >> (NOT X exists) does not imply (X does not exist)? Or is this one of those
> >> insights limited to junior faculty with a backpack budget?
> >
> >Maybe the dominance of these large chains makes your premise of "wide
> >availability" and "excellent food" a bit tenuous?
> What makes you think they are dominant? On this coast, I don't recall if I ever
> saw a Fuddrucker's, and there is maybe one Macaroni Grill for 50 miles. For each
> chain outlet, there are two ethnic restaurants, a BBQ pit, a taqueria, and more
> good food than you can eat in a lifetime.
Do you REALLY want to debate the statistics? In terms of annual turnover, the
multiple outlet "chain" operations share of the total sales at retail at restaurants
in the US...go ahead, show them not to be dominant. Start with McDonalds, Burger
King and include Friday's, Marconis...and so on.
> >The widely available American restaurant food consists of these large chains -
> >that's what wide availability means - or will Vitaly offer up his own definition
> >of "widely available" to include two men and a boat?
> Widely available means just that - a Hunan restaurant to the right, a Thai to the
> left, a Salvadoran taqueria around the corner, a fish'n'chips down the street, a
> hamburger grill across the way, and an Ethiopean restaurant in the next suburb.
> That's the way it is in most metro areas in the US, with some regional
> variations, of course.
Yep - you redifined widely available to mean local specialty restaurants.
> >> ``Chile accounted for 49 percent of all U.S. salmon imports last year [2000],
> >> up from 38 percent in 1999. According to Chris McDowell of Salmon Market
> >> Information Service, Chile is the leader in salmon imports by a margin of 39
> >> percent over its closest competitor, Canada''
> >>
> >> Which part of it do you not understand?
> >
> >This part:
> >
> >"Most of salmon in the US comes from Alaska, not Oregon..."
> In the context of the discussion of what's available on the docks, yes, most of
> salmon in the US comes from Alaska.
No, it isn't - what's available on the docks in the US is Pacific Salmon from West
Coat fleets and Atlantic salmon from the Atlantic coast fleets. What is available
from Alaska comes in a tin or frozen. Spending 40 -60 days in the hold of a fishing
trawler doesn't make for fresh.
> *You* (not me) brought up salmon and *you* (not me) switched the discussion to
> imported salmon, and then claimed that most of it comes from BC (it doesn't). Why
> would you do that? Beats me.
You started the bit about seafood and how all US salmon comes from Alaska. Hey -
first, your wrong, then you're wrong again, and now you're wrong a third time. That
would be the charm.
In 1999, btw, BC was the principal source of US eaten salmon - and still is the
primary source of fresh whole salmon. Chile has done exceptionally well in providing
an export product - no doubt - but when it comes to sourcing, Chile and BC are fairly
close, and Alaska isn't even on the radar.
> >> What I do know is what I see when I walk into my grocery store. There is
> >> Wonderbread... and then there is the bakery section with 30 kinds of freshly
> >> baked bread.
> >
> >And which gets the most facings and sells the most loaves?
> Around here it would be sourdough and baguettes, which are baked on the premises.
> Folks also seem to like ciabattas from Acme and Il Fornaio (at least I think they
> do, since they are given the most prominent placement, right in the middle of the
> bakery section).
Wonderbread.
> >> There is cheez-wiz... and then there is the cheese section, with 50 or 100
> >> cheeses from all over the world (camembert included).
> >
> >Where do you shop where there are 50 to 100 different cheeses?
> Safeway (you might have heard of them, they own Dominick's) - around 30,
Not 50 or 100 - but 30?
> Andronico's - around 50 or 70,
11 stores in the Bay area - hardly a national chain - it's a specialty store. And
according to their website, they have 350 cheeses from around the world.
> and Milk Pail (a small independent grocery story around here) - over 100.
A single outlet - again, not much of a chain.
So, generally speaking, large chain groceries in the US have a limited number of
cheeses from which to select. My point exactly.
> And no, these are not unique to California. Seattle, New York, Houston, same
> thing. Probably Chicago, too (haven't shopped in a supermarket there since 1994,
> so I can't say for sure).
Specialty stores are not unique to Europe, either. In fact, I shop in a store that
has well over 100 different FRENCH cheeses alone (that would be their specialty). But
the local Sainsbury's selection...compared to the Safeway US selection - you argued
that there's no comparison - I agree, 30 would never do.
> >> Is Macaroni Grill Italian? If it isn't Italian, what is it?
> >
> >Olive Garden with better wine and higher prices. It is Americanized processed
> >italian cheese food.
> What Macaroni Grill is to Italian food, Hard Rock Cafe is to American food.
> I wouldn't want anyone to learn about Italian food from Macaroni Grill or
> Olive Garden, and I wouldn't want anyone to learn about American food from
> Hard Rock Cafe.
But that is exactly what most Americans know and eat, when they aren't driving
through, that is. Casual dining sales are an almost 50 billion dollar industry in
the US, dominated by about 200 chain operations. The bulk of "restaurant" sales, in
the US, is still held by the fast food providers, the overwhelming majority of whom
are the well known top 5. So when it comes to food, the leadership in terms of total
sales fall firmly on chain/franchise operations, not the local bodega. The "locals"
do outnumber the chains 2 to 1 in terms of number of units, but are big losers in
terms of number of meals served/sold or the dollar volume of business.
> >So Vitaly - getting the backpack cleaned up and the jeans patched for your next
> >passport free trip?
> You betcha. It ain't gonna be passport-free (the passportless interlude in my
> life is long past - it was more of an extended misunderstanding with various
> citizenships),
Which means that you didn't do this passport free travel recently yet had the gall to
post that it is currently possible and then berate me when I said it wasn't? Well,
that takes balls.
You apparently missed the July 1 directive regarding UK immigration procedures. OK,
that's understandable. I was using current information, not 10 year old stuff.
>but off I go, in 10 days. First to New York, then to Paris (Continental Airlines,
>BusinessFirst, hope my 777 will be one of those with new sleeper seats). We
>backpackers like to travel in style. You look doubtful. Shall I fax you my
>boarding passes?
No thanks.
> Anyway, it's been a pleasure talkin'.
Bon voyage. Poor me, I just have a trip to Bologna planned.
amp
Aug 23rd 2002, 7:40 pm
#1397
Guest
Posts: n/a
Native citizenship
Dans l'article <[email protected]>, Go Fig
<[email protected]> a écrit :
> In article <[email protected]. com>, "Mxsmanic"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Miguel Cruz" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
>> [email protected]...
>> > Other than the odd nutball, I think that most of these cases are people who want
>> > to be free of US tax/tax reporting obligations.
>> Yes. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world that expects its citizens
>> to report and pay income tax no matter where they reside, and no matter what the
>> source of the income.
> It used to be... when it apllied to me, that after 320 days outside the U.S., that
> income is exempt.
> jay Fri, Aug 23, 2002 mailto:[email protected]
There is income and income. Earned income is given a $75,000 exemption. This is
to aid corporate expats, and this is perhaps where the 320 day provision applies.
On the other hand, unearned income, regardless of its source, is taxable from
penny one. 320 days outside the U.S. does not apply here. Unearned income,
regardless of source, is taxed from penny one, regardless of how long you have
lived outside the U.S.
The only exceptions are really special cases that apply to very few people. For
example, there is a provision in the Franco-American tax treaty that states that if
the pension is a French government pension, and the recipient is a French national
living in France, the Americans cannot tax it. But how many people qualify for this
sort of thing? I have met only two, ourselves.
Donna Evleth
<[email protected]> a écrit :
> In article <[email protected]. com>, "Mxsmanic"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Miguel Cruz" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de news:
>> [email protected]...
>> > Other than the odd nutball, I think that most of these cases are people who want
>> > to be free of US tax/tax reporting obligations.
>> Yes. The U.S. is one of the few countries in the world that expects its citizens
>> to report and pay income tax no matter where they reside, and no matter what the
>> source of the income.
> It used to be... when it apllied to me, that after 320 days outside the U.S., that
> income is exempt.
> jay Fri, Aug 23, 2002 mailto:[email protected]
There is income and income. Earned income is given a $75,000 exemption. This is
to aid corporate expats, and this is perhaps where the 320 day provision applies.
On the other hand, unearned income, regardless of its source, is taxable from
penny one. 320 days outside the U.S. does not apply here. Unearned income,
regardless of source, is taxed from penny one, regardless of how long you have
lived outside the U.S.
The only exceptions are really special cases that apply to very few people. For
example, there is a provision in the Franco-American tax treaty that states that if
the pension is a French government pension, and the recipient is a French national
living in France, the Americans cannot tax it. But how many people qualify for this
sort of thing? I have met only two, ourselves.
Donna Evleth
Aug 23rd 2002, 11:07 pm
#1398
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> > devil schrieb:
> > >
> > > But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is exactly
> > > that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include Italian and
> > > perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to ask. And
> > > anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
> >
> > The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
> > almost all Spanish.
> Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
> category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset of
> "Hispanic."
That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what? I
filled out the most rescent US (and some previous ones) census form. The short
version, and I don't recall checking a race question at all.
Mika
news:<[email protected]>...
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> > devil schrieb:
> > >
> > > But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is exactly
> > > that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include Italian and
> > > perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to ask. And
> > > anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
> >
> > The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
> > almost all Spanish.
> Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
> category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset of
> "Hispanic."
That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what? I
filled out the most rescent US (and some previous ones) census form. The short
version, and I don't recall checking a race question at all.
Mika
Aug 23rd 2002, 11:18 pm
#1399
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<Pine.GSO.4.44.0208111831510.11174-100000@godzilla4.acpub.duke.edu>...
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, j coulter wrote:
> > "VGC" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected] gy.co-
> > m:
> >
> > > Yes, I would say that all Mexicans are Hispanic and Latin American. Being
> > > Mexican does not have to do with race.
> > And the popular slogan "Viva la Raza?"
> ...is nonsense.
> Alternatively...
> ...is populist ideology put forward as an attempt to resolve the Mexican
> Revolutions many contradictions and open sores.
Which one are you referring to? El grito? 1910? And as opposed to what? Of course
there are plenty of open sores. And why is the situation not like the one in
Argentina or the US?
Mika
> Jon
news:<Pine.GSO.4.44.0208111831510.11174-100000@godzilla4.acpub.duke.edu>...
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, j coulter wrote:
> > "VGC" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected] gy.co-
> > m:
> >
> > > Yes, I would say that all Mexicans are Hispanic and Latin American. Being
> > > Mexican does not have to do with race.
> > And the popular slogan "Viva la Raza?"
> ...is nonsense.
> Alternatively...
> ...is populist ideology put forward as an attempt to resolve the Mexican
> Revolutions many contradictions and open sores.
Which one are you referring to? El grito? 1910? And as opposed to what? Of course
there are plenty of open sores. And why is the situation not like the one in
Argentina or the US?
Mika
> Jon
Aug 23rd 2002, 11:37 pm
#1400
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> >
> > > devil schrieb:
> > > >
> > > > But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is
> > > > exactly that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include
> > > > Italian and perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to
> > > > ask. And anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
> > >
> > > The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
> > > almost all Spanish.
> >
> > Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
> > category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset
> > of "Hispanic."
> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
> more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered most
racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc. Of
course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White" and
"Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you might
be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
> Mika
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
> JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> >
> > > devil schrieb:
> > > >
> > > > But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is
> > > > exactly that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include
> > > > Italian and perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to
> > > > ask. And anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
> > >
> > > The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
> > > almost all Spanish.
> >
> > Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
> > category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset
> > of "Hispanic."
> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
> more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered most
racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc. Of
course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White" and
"Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you might
be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
> Mika
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
Aug 23rd 2002, 11:41 pm
#1401
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
[email protected] (Vitaly Shmatikov) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>, devil <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Ethnic food is not more valuable than Italian stuff *per se*. But it's nice
> >> to have variety: Thai yesterday, Italian today, Fredonian tomorrow. A place
> >> where one can get a variety of different foods is clearly superior to a place
> >> where it's ``a mix of French and Italian influences'' day after day, even
> >> assuming that this mix is good (which it often isn't).
> >
> >I rest my case.
> >
> >It's clear that you have no idea what top quality cooking is about.
> That might be so, but how on earth did you extract it from what I said above?
> I've eaten at my share of 3- (Lucas-Carton, Pierre Gagnaire, French Laundry, Le
> Bernardin), 2- (Jamin - albeit in the post-Robuchon era, Le Bec Fin, Nanao, about
> a couple dozen others) and 1-star places. Most were excellent, some were the
> best gastronomic experiences of my life. But I doubt I'd want to eat at any of
> them every day of the week. There is more to food than stuffed squirrel tails
> with amandes torrefiees. Nothing wrong with a good curry or a bowl of lagman or
> a taco.
> >(And yes, there is top quality stuff. But it is not going to be Thai or Chinese.
> >What you are talking about is your regular going on for food thing.)
> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same everywhere.
> Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and that no matter
> where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I imagine few people
> want to do this every day, and not even because of the price.
OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was your
initial proposition again?
If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the rest of
the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor bad at all. Or
Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color of the plate.
M
news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>, devil <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Ethnic food is not more valuable than Italian stuff *per se*. But it's nice
> >> to have variety: Thai yesterday, Italian today, Fredonian tomorrow. A place
> >> where one can get a variety of different foods is clearly superior to a place
> >> where it's ``a mix of French and Italian influences'' day after day, even
> >> assuming that this mix is good (which it often isn't).
> >
> >I rest my case.
> >
> >It's clear that you have no idea what top quality cooking is about.
> That might be so, but how on earth did you extract it from what I said above?
> I've eaten at my share of 3- (Lucas-Carton, Pierre Gagnaire, French Laundry, Le
> Bernardin), 2- (Jamin - albeit in the post-Robuchon era, Le Bec Fin, Nanao, about
> a couple dozen others) and 1-star places. Most were excellent, some were the
> best gastronomic experiences of my life. But I doubt I'd want to eat at any of
> them every day of the week. There is more to food than stuffed squirrel tails
> with amandes torrefiees. Nothing wrong with a good curry or a bowl of lagman or
> a taco.
> >(And yes, there is top quality stuff. But it is not going to be Thai or Chinese.
> >What you are talking about is your regular going on for food thing.)
> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same everywhere.
> Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and that no matter
> where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I imagine few people
> want to do this every day, and not even because of the price.
OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was your
initial proposition again?
If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the rest of
the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor bad at all. Or
Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color of the plate.
M
Aug 23rd 2002, 11:41 pm
#1402
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<Pine.GSO.4.44.0208111831510.11174-100000@godzilla4.acpub.duke.edu>...
> > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, j coulter wrote:
> >
> > > "VGC" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected] g-
> > > y.com:
> > >
> > > > Yes, I would say that all Mexicans are Hispanic and Latin American. Being
> > > > Mexican does not have to do with race.
> > > And the popular slogan "Viva la Raza?"
> >
> > ...is nonsense.
> >
> > Alternatively...
> >
> > ...is populist ideology put forward as an attempt to resolve the Mexican
> > Revolutions many contradictions and open sores.
> >
> Which one are you referring to? El grito? 1910?
Part of my point.
> Of course there are plenty of open sores. And why is the situation not like the one
> in Argentina or the US?
Neither Argentina nor the US (explicitly) define themselves as constituted by one
Race. They have other means of resolving their own contradictions, and other
populisms--Peronism, the myth of the melting pot, the notion that they have the best
food in the world etc. etc.
> Mika
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
> JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<Pine.GSO.4.44.0208111831510.11174-100000@godzilla4.acpub.duke.edu>...
> > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, j coulter wrote:
> >
> > > "VGC" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected] g-
> > > y.com:
> > >
> > > > Yes, I would say that all Mexicans are Hispanic and Latin American. Being
> > > > Mexican does not have to do with race.
> > > And the popular slogan "Viva la Raza?"
> >
> > ...is nonsense.
> >
> > Alternatively...
> >
> > ...is populist ideology put forward as an attempt to resolve the Mexican
> > Revolutions many contradictions and open sores.
> >
> Which one are you referring to? El grito? 1910?
Part of my point.
> Of course there are plenty of open sores. And why is the situation not like the one
> in Argentina or the US?
Neither Argentina nor the US (explicitly) define themselves as constituted by one
Race. They have other means of resolving their own contradictions, and other
populisms--Peronism, the myth of the melting pot, the notion that they have the best
food in the world etc. etc.
> Mika
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
Aug 24th 2002, 2:15 am
#1403
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:37:14 -0400, JBM <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
>> more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
>She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
>Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
>This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered most
>racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc. Of
>course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White" and
>"Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you might
>be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
But the Lady of Spain shouldn't claim to be Hispanic when applying for a job
in the USA.
************ DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) ***********
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * ******* My typos are
intentional copyright traps ******
>On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
>> more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
>She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
>Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
>This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered most
>racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc. Of
>course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White" and
>"Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you might
>be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
But the Lady of Spain shouldn't claim to be Hispanic when applying for a job
in the USA.
************ DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) ***********
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * ******* My typos are
intentional copyright traps ******
Aug 24th 2002, 5:07 am
#1404
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
JBM wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>>JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:<[email protected]>...
>>>On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>>>>devil schrieb:
>>>>>But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is exactly
>>>>>that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include Italian and
>>>>>perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to ask. And
>>>>>anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
>>>>The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
>>>>almost all Spanish.
>>>Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
>>>category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset
>>>of "Hispanic."
>>That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
>>more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
> She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
> Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
people from Europe as "Hispanic."
OTOH, there is no lythmus test, and as long as consistency is maintained, it's
basically up to the person. So, if your Spanish friend ever emigrates to the US and
feels like classfying herself as native American (or whatever) it's probably OK.
> On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>>JBM <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:<[email protected]>...
>>>On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
>>>>devil schrieb:
>>>>>But the typical definition of "hispanic" at least as used in the US is exactly
>>>>>that, basically equivalent to "Latin" except Latin would include Italian and
>>>>>perhaps French; expecting the word "Iberian" is just too much to ask. And
>>>>>anyway, "Iberian" comes across as more geographic than cultural.
>>>>The implication of 'hispanic' in the US is also 'non-white'. Clearly wrong for
>>>>almost all Spanish.
>>>Not so. The US census (and most forms inviting you to give your race) has the
>>>category "White (non-Hispanic)," which implies that "White" may also be a subset
>>>of "Hispanic."
>>That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who looks
>>more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to check what?
> She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White (non-Hispanic)."
> Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you are both white.
I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
people from Europe as "Hispanic."
OTOH, there is no lythmus test, and as long as consistency is maintained, it's
basically up to the person. So, if your Spanish friend ever emigrates to the US and
feels like classfying herself as native American (or whatever) it's probably OK.
Aug 24th 2002, 7:57 am
#1405
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:37:14 -0400, JBM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> >
> >> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who
> >> looks more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to
> >> check what?
> >
> >She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White
> >(non-Hispanic)." Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you
are
> >both white.
> >
> >This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered
> >most racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc.
> >Of course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White"
> >and "Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you
> >might be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
> But the Lady of Spain shouldn't claim to be Hispanic when applying for a job in
> the USA.
Is it a bit like "1984" (the George Orwell novel) nowadays in the USA? And, just out
of interest, does one have to specify ehnic origin when applying for a job in USA?
JohnT
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 19:37:14 -0400, JBM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On 23 Aug 2002, Mika wrote:
> >
> >> That's strange. So my blonde, blue-eyed (former) girlfriend from Madrid who
> >> looks more "un-hispanic" than I do, but is thoroughly Spanish, would have to
> >> check what?
> >
> >She'd check "Hispanic." You (if you are white) would check "White
> >(non-Hispanic)." Thus you'd check two different boxes even though you
are
> >both white.
> >
> >This situation results because, historically, people in the US have considered
> >most racial categories to be mutally exlusive: you are either white or black etc.
> >Of course, the fight today is for people to be able to check *both* (say) "White"
> >and "Black," or to check some box that indicates mixed racial heritage. Then you
> >might be able to check *both* "White" (and/or "Black" or whatever) and "Hispanic."
> But the Lady of Spain shouldn't claim to be Hispanic when applying for a job in
> the USA.
Is it a bit like "1984" (the George Orwell novel) nowadays in the USA? And, just out
of interest, does one have to specify ehnic origin when applying for a job in USA?
JohnT
Aug 24th 2002, 8:58 am
#1406
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
In article <[email protected]> , Mika
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same
>> everywhere. Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and that
>> no matter where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I imagine
>> few people want to do this every day, and not even because of the price.
>OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was your
>initial proposition again?
Certainly my initial proposition had nothing to do with the top end, which is
indeed about the same everywhere (did I ever say anything to the contrary?). But I
doubt many people want to eat three meals a day from a 3-star restaurant. I enjoy
French Laundry and Lucas-Carton as much as the next guy, but the food universe does
not end (or begin) with 50-dollar plates of foie gras.
I was just making a simple observation - which is obvious to anyone who lived both
in Europe and America - that, on average, food is much better in America. Not so
much in terms of quality (which is sometimes decent in Europe as long as you stick
to the local food), but in terms of variety. In America you get both American food
*and* cuisines from all parts of the world, whereas in Europe if you want to eat
well, you are limited to local cuisine and, in countries that used to have
colonies, ex-colonial stuff. Huge chunks of Asia and all of Americas are simply
absent from the gastronomic map of Europe, so to speak.
>If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the rest of
>the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor bad at all.
>Or Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color of the plate.
Neither comes close to America in terms of variety. I haven't been to Malaysia,
but I suspect if you feel like having pot au feu for dinner, or a Persian kabob, or
a chile relleno in Malaysia, you'll be up the creek without a paddle. Although I
am sure local food is excellent, and quite sufficient if you are just passing
through the place, not living there.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same
>> everywhere. Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and that
>> no matter where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I imagine
>> few people want to do this every day, and not even because of the price.
>OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was your
>initial proposition again?
Certainly my initial proposition had nothing to do with the top end, which is
indeed about the same everywhere (did I ever say anything to the contrary?). But I
doubt many people want to eat three meals a day from a 3-star restaurant. I enjoy
French Laundry and Lucas-Carton as much as the next guy, but the food universe does
not end (or begin) with 50-dollar plates of foie gras.
I was just making a simple observation - which is obvious to anyone who lived both
in Europe and America - that, on average, food is much better in America. Not so
much in terms of quality (which is sometimes decent in Europe as long as you stick
to the local food), but in terms of variety. In America you get both American food
*and* cuisines from all parts of the world, whereas in Europe if you want to eat
well, you are limited to local cuisine and, in countries that used to have
colonies, ex-colonial stuff. Huge chunks of Asia and all of Americas are simply
absent from the gastronomic map of Europe, so to speak.
>If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the rest of
>the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor bad at all.
>Or Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color of the plate.
Neither comes close to America in terms of variety. I haven't been to Malaysia,
but I suspect if you feel like having pot au feu for dinner, or a Persian kabob, or
a chile relleno in Malaysia, you'll be up the creek without a paddle. Although I
am sure local food is excellent, and quite sufficient if you are just passing
through the place, not living there.
Aug 24th 2002, 9:54 am
#1407
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
In article <[email protected] >, amp_spamfree
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Widely available means just that - a Hunan restaurant to the right, a Thai to
>> the left, a Salvadoran taqueria around the corner, a fish'n'chips down the
>> street, a hamburger grill across the way, and an Ethiopean restaurant in the
>> next suburb. That's the way it is in most metro areas in the US, with some
>> regional variations, of course.
>Yep - you redifined widely available to mean local specialty restaurants.
Widely available means that people who live in big metro areas in America have
choices in food that the average European cannot imagine. American food, Asian
food, European food, African food, everything from basic BBQ to top-end French
cuisine. You are obsessed with the fact that there are tons of fast-food outlets
and Olive Garden-type places. You are welcome to eat there, if that's your fancy.
I'll stick to what's widely available - Thai, Californian, Mexican, Persian, etc.
>You started the bit about seafood and how all US salmon comes from Alaska.
Most US salmon certainly comes from Alaska. Most salmon *imported* to the US comes
from Chile. You seem to have trouble accepting either of these facts. *shrug*
One of these days you'll learn that facts are facts, and you are better off
accepting them even when you are wrong rather than living in a fantasy world.
>> Around here it would be sourdough and baguettes, which are baked on the
>> premises. Folks also seem to like ciabattas from Acme and Il Fornaio (at least
>> I think they do, since they are given the most prominent placement, right in the
>> middle of the bakery section).
>Wonderbread.
You are wrong. What else is new?
>> Safeway (you might have heard of them, they own Dominick's) - around 30,
>Not 50 or 100 - but 30?
Oh, excuse me, I was averaging the places where I typically shop for groceries.
And it's not like I went there and counted, for all I know, there might be 50 or
more at Safeway. The cheese section is quite big.
>> Andronico's - around 50 or 70,
>11 stores in the Bay area - hardly a national chain - it's a specialty store.
They call themselves a ``grocery market'' and are indistinguishable from a
supermarket. We discussed Andronico's before. There are local equivalents all
over America. Whole Foods (good cheese, if a bit pricy) is national. Trader Joe's
(lots of cheese, selection is a bit quirky) is national.
>And according to their website, they have 350 cheeses from around the world.
What, 350 cheeses? But that cannot be - there is no good cheese in American
supermarkets. Surely you mean 350 varieties of Cheez-Wiz.
>The "locals" do outnumber the chains 2 to 1 in terms of number of units, but are big
>losers in terms of number of meals served/sold or the dollar volume of business.
This makes perfect sense, because they are cheaper and smaller. And who do you
think dominates the <insert local currency> volume of business in Europe?
Taillevent? Or local restaurants that, as far as quality is concerned, are
somewhere between Hardee's and Sizzler?
It's been interesting to observe how you try to squirm away from the issue. You
started off by claiming that American food is a ``slab of meat on the grill, a
bucket of fries,'' then seemed to grant that all over America, there are tons of
places serving excellent local food, Szechuan food, Lebanese food, Ethiopean food,
but now they don't count, because they are ``local specialty restaurants,'' not big
chains. Frankly, who cares? I wish Europe had half the variety of ``local
specialty restaurants'' that you'll find on any corner in America.
>Which means that you didn't do this passport free travel recently yet had the gall
>to post that it is currently possible and then berate me when I said it wasn't?
>Well, that takes balls.
What takes balls is your repeated attempts to post nonsense about things you know
nothing about, like my travel budgets and passport-free entry to the UK. Of
course, it's currently possible. I know lots of folks who either don't have
passports (often because they arrived to the US as refugees) or their passports are
from countries they don't care to be associated with. They all file their I-131
with the INS, get a reentry permit or a refugee travel document, get a visa from
the consulate and enter the UK without a passport.
>You apparently missed the July 1 directive regarding UK immigration procedures. OK,
>that's understandable. I was using current information, not 10 year old stuff.
You were just trying to bullshit your way, pardon my French, through issues
you have no clue about. One can still enter the UK without a passport
provided one has an appropriate travel document. Forget US-issued travel
documents for the time being. Go to the website of the home office's
immigration and nationality directorate
(www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk) and
search for ``home office travel documents'' See? UK *itself* issues
stateless documents and certificates of identity, which permit entry to the UK
without a passport.
>Bon voyage. Poor me, I just have a trip to Bologna planned.
Patched your jeans, backpacker?
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Widely available means just that - a Hunan restaurant to the right, a Thai to
>> the left, a Salvadoran taqueria around the corner, a fish'n'chips down the
>> street, a hamburger grill across the way, and an Ethiopean restaurant in the
>> next suburb. That's the way it is in most metro areas in the US, with some
>> regional variations, of course.
>Yep - you redifined widely available to mean local specialty restaurants.
Widely available means that people who live in big metro areas in America have
choices in food that the average European cannot imagine. American food, Asian
food, European food, African food, everything from basic BBQ to top-end French
cuisine. You are obsessed with the fact that there are tons of fast-food outlets
and Olive Garden-type places. You are welcome to eat there, if that's your fancy.
I'll stick to what's widely available - Thai, Californian, Mexican, Persian, etc.
>You started the bit about seafood and how all US salmon comes from Alaska.
Most US salmon certainly comes from Alaska. Most salmon *imported* to the US comes
from Chile. You seem to have trouble accepting either of these facts. *shrug*
One of these days you'll learn that facts are facts, and you are better off
accepting them even when you are wrong rather than living in a fantasy world.
>> Around here it would be sourdough and baguettes, which are baked on the
>> premises. Folks also seem to like ciabattas from Acme and Il Fornaio (at least
>> I think they do, since they are given the most prominent placement, right in the
>> middle of the bakery section).
>Wonderbread.
You are wrong. What else is new?
>> Safeway (you might have heard of them, they own Dominick's) - around 30,
>Not 50 or 100 - but 30?
Oh, excuse me, I was averaging the places where I typically shop for groceries.
And it's not like I went there and counted, for all I know, there might be 50 or
more at Safeway. The cheese section is quite big.
>> Andronico's - around 50 or 70,
>11 stores in the Bay area - hardly a national chain - it's a specialty store.
They call themselves a ``grocery market'' and are indistinguishable from a
supermarket. We discussed Andronico's before. There are local equivalents all
over America. Whole Foods (good cheese, if a bit pricy) is national. Trader Joe's
(lots of cheese, selection is a bit quirky) is national.
>And according to their website, they have 350 cheeses from around the world.
What, 350 cheeses? But that cannot be - there is no good cheese in American
supermarkets. Surely you mean 350 varieties of Cheez-Wiz.
>The "locals" do outnumber the chains 2 to 1 in terms of number of units, but are big
>losers in terms of number of meals served/sold or the dollar volume of business.
This makes perfect sense, because they are cheaper and smaller. And who do you
think dominates the <insert local currency> volume of business in Europe?
Taillevent? Or local restaurants that, as far as quality is concerned, are
somewhere between Hardee's and Sizzler?
It's been interesting to observe how you try to squirm away from the issue. You
started off by claiming that American food is a ``slab of meat on the grill, a
bucket of fries,'' then seemed to grant that all over America, there are tons of
places serving excellent local food, Szechuan food, Lebanese food, Ethiopean food,
but now they don't count, because they are ``local specialty restaurants,'' not big
chains. Frankly, who cares? I wish Europe had half the variety of ``local
specialty restaurants'' that you'll find on any corner in America.
>Which means that you didn't do this passport free travel recently yet had the gall
>to post that it is currently possible and then berate me when I said it wasn't?
>Well, that takes balls.
What takes balls is your repeated attempts to post nonsense about things you know
nothing about, like my travel budgets and passport-free entry to the UK. Of
course, it's currently possible. I know lots of folks who either don't have
passports (often because they arrived to the US as refugees) or their passports are
from countries they don't care to be associated with. They all file their I-131
with the INS, get a reentry permit or a refugee travel document, get a visa from
the consulate and enter the UK without a passport.
>You apparently missed the July 1 directive regarding UK immigration procedures. OK,
>that's understandable. I was using current information, not 10 year old stuff.
You were just trying to bullshit your way, pardon my French, through issues
you have no clue about. One can still enter the UK without a passport
provided one has an appropriate travel document. Forget US-issued travel
documents for the time being. Go to the website of the home office's
immigration and nationality directorate
(www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk) and
search for ``home office travel documents'' See? UK *itself* issues
stateless documents and certificates of identity, which permit entry to the UK
without a passport.
>Bon voyage. Poor me, I just have a trip to Bologna planned.
Patched your jeans, backpacker?
Aug 24th 2002, 2:01 pm
#1408
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, devil wrote:
> I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
> people from Europe as "Hispanic."
Goodness. If the Spanish aren't Hispanic, then where are we? Though I see your
point. Such forms should probably suggest "Hispanic American" rather than
"Hispanic." I think that my Spanish friends in the US used to check "Hispanic."
Though I doubt that checking a box alone makes one eligible for affirmative
action benefits.
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
> I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
> people from Europe as "Hispanic."
Goodness. If the Spanish aren't Hispanic, then where are we? Though I see your
point. Such forms should probably suggest "Hispanic American" rather than
"Hispanic." I think that my Spanish friends in the US used to check "Hispanic."
Though I doubt that checking a box alone makes one eligible for affirmative
action benefits.
Take care
Jon
--
Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester [email protected]
http://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
Aug 24th 2002, 3:24 pm
#1409
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
Aren't people from Spain and Portugal called Iberians? Hispanic, to me at least,
means someone or the culture of Spanish speaking people in the Americas.
"JBM" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:Pine.GSO.4.44.0208240958040.1961-100000-
@godzilla1.acpub.duke.edu...
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, devil wrote:
> > I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
> > people from Europe as "Hispanic."
> Goodness. If the Spanish aren't Hispanic, then where are we? Though I see your
> point. Such forms should probably suggest "Hispanic American" rather than
> "Hispanic." I think that my Spanish friends in the US used to check "Hispanic."
> Though I doubt that checking a box alone makes one eligible for affirmative action
> benefits.
> Take care
> Jon
> --
> Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
> Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester
> [email protected] http-
> ://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
means someone or the culture of Spanish speaking people in the Americas.
"JBM" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:Pine.GSO.4.44.0208240958040.1961-100000-
@godzilla1.acpub.duke.edu...
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, devil wrote:
> > I would have thought that affirmative action regulations would not have included
> > people from Europe as "Hispanic."
> Goodness. If the Spanish aren't Hispanic, then where are we? Though I see your
> point. Such forms should probably suggest "Hispanic American" rather than
> "Hispanic." I think that my Spanish friends in the US used to check "Hispanic."
> Though I doubt that checking a box alone makes one eligible for affirmative action
> benefits.
> Take care
> Jon
> --
> Jon Beasley-Murray Literature Program, Duke University
> Spanish and Portuguese Studies, University of Manchester
> [email protected] http-
> ://www.art.man.ac.uk/lacs/
Aug 24th 2002, 3:43 pm
#1410
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: ATM's.......
"Vitaly Shmatikov" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]> , Mika
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same
> >> everywhere. Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and
> >> that no matter where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I
> >> imagine few people want to do this every day, and not even because of the
> >> price.
> >
> >OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was
> >your initial proposition again?
> Certainly my initial proposition had nothing to do with the top end, which is
> indeed about the same everywhere (did I ever say anything to the contrary?). But
> I doubt many people want to eat three meals a day from a 3-star restaurant. I
> enjoy French Laundry and Lucas-Carton as much as the next guy, but the food
> universe does not end (or begin) with 50-dollar plates of foie gras.
> I was just making a simple observation - which is obvious to anyone who lived
> both in Europe and America - that, on average, food is much better in America.
> Not so much in terms of quality (which is sometimes decent in Europe as long as
> you stick to the local food), but in terms of variety. In America you get both
> American food *and* cuisines from all parts of the world, whereas in Europe if
> you want to eat well, you are limited to local cuisine and, in countries that
> used to have colonies, ex-colonial stuff. Huge chunks of Asia and all of
> Americas are simply absent from the gastronomic map of Europe, so to speak.
> >If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the
> >rest of the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor
> >bad at all. Or Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color
> >of the plate.
> Neither comes close to America in terms of variety. I haven't been to Malaysia,
> but I suspect if you feel like having pot au feu for dinner, or a Persian kabob,
> or a chile relleno in Malaysia, you'll be up the creek without a paddle.
> Although I am sure local food is excellent, and quite sufficient if you are just
> passing through the place, not living there.
Jesus, man when are going to start reading what people have posted here? In
Amsterdam, I can eat in restaurants from as many as 100 different nationalities, the
vast majority of which are not former NL colonies. Some of these restaurants are
excellent, some are good, some are not so good, some are bad. Just as in New York or
San Francisco.
Sjoerd
> In article <[email protected]> , Mika
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I *am* talking about the regular food thing. The top end is the same
> >> everywhere. Shell out $300, and you'll be eating truffle-studded this and
> >> that no matter where you are, in Moscow, Hong Kong or Oakhurst, Calif. But I
> >> imagine few people want to do this every day, and not even because of the
> >> price.
> >
> >OK, so the top end is about the same about anywhere in the world. Now what was
> >your initial proposition again?
> Certainly my initial proposition had nothing to do with the top end, which is
> indeed about the same everywhere (did I ever say anything to the contrary?). But
> I doubt many people want to eat three meals a day from a 3-star restaurant. I
> enjoy French Laundry and Lucas-Carton as much as the next guy, but the food
> universe does not end (or begin) with 50-dollar plates of foie gras.
> I was just making a simple observation - which is obvious to anyone who lived
> both in Europe and America - that, on average, food is much better in America.
> Not so much in terms of quality (which is sometimes decent in Europe as long as
> you stick to the local food), but in terms of variety. In America you get both
> American food *and* cuisines from all parts of the world, whereas in Europe if
> you want to eat well, you are limited to local cuisine and, in countries that
> used to have colonies, ex-colonial stuff. Huge chunks of Asia and all of
> Americas are simply absent from the gastronomic map of Europe, so to speak.
> >If you want to compare the "low" end, I'll take Thailand or Mexico over the
> >rest of the world any day. Best street food, dirt cheap. And neither dirty nor
> >bad at all. Or Malaysia. I'll try any place where I pay according to the color
> >of the plate.
> Neither comes close to America in terms of variety. I haven't been to Malaysia,
> but I suspect if you feel like having pot au feu for dinner, or a Persian kabob,
> or a chile relleno in Malaysia, you'll be up the creek without a paddle.
> Although I am sure local food is excellent, and quite sufficient if you are just
> passing through the place, not living there.
Jesus, man when are going to start reading what people have posted here? In
Amsterdam, I can eat in restaurants from as many as 100 different nationalities, the
vast majority of which are not former NL colonies. Some of these restaurants are
excellent, some are good, some are not so good, some are bad. Just as in New York or
San Francisco.
Sjoerd