text:
Princeton-specific Programs
A variety of internships, fellowships and summer programs are available to Princeton students and postgrads through various University offices and Princeton-affiliated programs. In addition to browsing the list below, check out this document detailing programs, descriptions and deadlines for the 2017-18 academic year.
Internships for Undergraduates
- Princeton Internships in Civic Service (PICS): Offers Princeton undergraduate students 8-10 week paid, alumni-sponsored nonprofit summer internships in a wide range of national and international organizations in multiple fields including group advocacy, legal services, public policy, environment, health and social services, community development, education and the arts.
- Keller Center for Innovation in Engineering Education: Supports student engineering projects in the community, provides internships, hosts lectures and presents entrepreneurial opportunities.
- Pace Center for Civic Engagement: Presents opportunities to respond thoughtfully to civic problems via direct volunteer service, civic-action break trips, social entrepreneurship, political action, public service internships, fellowships and volunteer teaching and tutoring.
- Guggenheim Internships in Criminal Justice
- Interfaith Internship Program
- John C. Bogle '51 Fellows in Civic Service
- Community Based Learning Initiative: Offers community-based research in courses, as a summer research internship and as part of your junior paper or senior thesis.
- Princeton Environmental Institute: Develops the next generation of leadership by providing outstanding academic programs and opportunities for advanced scholarship, research and civic engagement.
- Princeton University Preparatory Program: A rigorous, academic and cultural enrichment program that supports high-achieving, low-income high school students.
- International Internship Program (IIP): Supports Princeton undergraduates who wish to undertake a summer internship abroad.
- Princeton Program in Hellenic Studies: Encourages all Princeton students to consider study and research abroad.
- Princeton in Ishikawa: Annually offers three internships to former PII students who intern at major organizations.
- German Summer Work Program: Experience German culture in a professional environment. Professional placements offer pre-professional experience.
- Scholars in the Nation's Service Initiative: Sets outstanding individuals on the path toward public service careers in the U.S. government.
- Princeton in France: Offers a variety of jobs in Paris and regional cities. Typical assignments are in banks, museums, PR organizations, hospitals, camps, publishing or multinationals.
- Global Health Program Internships: All internships on this site are pre-approved to fulfill the GHP certificate program's summer research requirement* when completed in the summer after junior year. Unless otherwise specified, positions are open to all Princeton undergraduates.
- Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment Summer Internships: For summer research projects related to the ACEE, particularly for field work and lab research.
- Streicker International Fellows Fund: For undergraduate students interested in carrying out substantive research or educational projects while immersed in a foreign culture.
Postgraduate Fellowships
- Princeton in Africa: PiAf seeks to create a constituency of young people committed to the emergence of Africa as a full partner in the developed world. They offer service fellowships in connection with humanitarian organizations and other agencies serving the African continent.
- Princeton in Asia: PiA sponsors over 165 fellowships in 21 countries and is the oldest and largest organization of its kind.
- Princeton in France: PIF offers a variety of jobs in Paris and regional cities. Typical assignments are in banks, museums, PR organizations, hospitals, camps, publishing or multinationals.
- Princeton in Latin America: Founded in 2002, Princeton in Latin America (PiLA) is a post-graduate fellowship organization aimed at connecting Princeton graduates with worthwhile organizations throughout Central and South America.
- Program in Teacher Preparation: Teacher Prep offers teaching fellowships abroad for the upcoming academic year. Recent Princeton graduates (including graduate students) are eligible to apply.
- Princeton Project 55 Fellowships: Both the PIP and PHP strive to place fellows in substantive paid jobs with public interest organizations that are seeking systemic solutions to critical social problems.
- Pace - High Meadows Fellowships: Places recent Princeton graduates in two-year positions with nonprofit organizations that aim to protect the environment and build environmental sustainability, or that bring an environmental focus to building community capacity and increasing the self-sufficiency of community residents.


text:
Week In Crazyshit 1st week of Sept. 2016 have a nice weekend crazyshitters!
Dave, +10000!!! You should of been doing the WICS from day one. The fucking best man. Great job and congrats to all..
thanks @sbohica
Good job, you have earned a 5th ward hooker. congrats.
Looks like someone has a big fucking man crush on potrostation, and they say Ouch is a fag!
Dave fuckin G doin work
Good job Dave G. Congratulations to the top ten. Batman is lost without his lover Robin.
"""WHAT IN THE MOTHER FUCKING BULLSHITTING FUCK BATMAN!!!""" Dave you have done another excellent job on creating this weeks "Week In CrazyShit."
LMMF"AO, Robert Hallock
the truckingman.
Hey OUCH.. GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU DUMB FUCKING AUSSIE!!!!! DaveG just put your lousy shit to SHAME! And I know your reading this, you bitch ass faggot... Guess what? You lost. ROTFLMMFAO!!!!!! The crew, lol. USA ALL THE WAY! 2ND AMENDMENT ALL THE WAY! "IM LOVIN IT" HaaaHaaa.
Great job davie. I think jay D needs to start buying you empanadas and malta for lunch for now on. Congrats to all the shitters.
Hello I am new kind of new here and this site is pretty awesome, How do I get one of those pictures on my username? I sent one in but it never showed up :( Good job Dave :) Knock it up a notch BAM!
@spiceweaselbam welcome aboard!?!? As for the avatar thing I had the same problem because I'm still trying to figure out CPS!!! And was drunk when I put mine on here? Still don't no how I did it? Anyway welcome aboard!!!
Spiceweaselbam, I would like to welcome you to the MF" SEPOOL THAT IS OUR WEBSITE CrazyShit.com . I hope you will enjoy your time on the website and to welcome you into our family.
Sincerely, Robert Hallock
the truckingman.
I apologise for my grammar error. I should wrote 'MF" CESSPOOL THAT IS' instead of 'MF" SEPOOL THAT IS.'
I'm ...so...honored.
YEAAA... after about a year I finally made the highlight real. I'm elated !
@spiceweaselbam. Your an old member. Are you such a dumbfuck that you can't follow directions? "Derp, I am new kinda new here"!!!! Are you for real. You were able to read good enough to sign up. Another one of Michaels felons.
awesome work bro
Love the 90's softcore porn music. Nice touch
@cyberbu11y its Carlos Santana - Black magic woman in 8-bit
lol @sbohica I like your stuff becaue my buddies and I laugh hard at your posts but you are incorrect. i sent in my picture but it hasn't shown up on the site, I am not sure why. You seem to be very vocal so I am guessing you think you are someone important around here, Yes? I have read the past few weeks comments but have been visiting this site on and off for about 6 months so signed up. you seem to be be think every new member is an old members especially if you don't get along with them. I can tell you this, i am not into fighting people on the internet as I am 26 and not a child, so I guess i'll leave you to it with your problem with other members and go about my day. By the way I am an American and proud of it and I am back home in Cali for a rest before my next tour so i would ask you to show me a bit more respect. Ooh Rah.
@ fistermister:+1 I +1'd to all the top ten commenters. Like most funny people; I'm so full of self-doubt; I'm surprised when I make WIC's.
Ouch is a free spirit that most people (vanilla's is what us swingers call you strait people)will never understand.
^Well isn't that just special! Your problem with your picture is it may not have been sized right. (100x100 pixels max)If it's not the right size,, Jay wont even take the time to smell his own fingers after scratching his balls with your ten dollar membership receipt.
@ goodster: Some men's avatars are bigger then others. Some of the C.S. chicks have bigger avatars then you; sorry. LOL
Good job man! I'm honored to get the cotw! Thanks!
great job Dave and just the right speed this week keep up the good work...congrats to the top 10
@potrostation,, But remember, it's not always the size that matters,, it's more the heat of the meat and the angle of the dangle of the avatar that truly matters.
@truckingman Thanks for the welcome. I will be in town for a few before heading back to work. Although I do love being State Side I do miss my brothers and Sisters. Ohh Rah.
Really sbohica you think that was better than mine and put me to shame? Jesus man grow up and take the hate out of it and evaluate it on it's merits and not the obsessive hate you have for me and you will see mine is actually better and Dave's is almost there. Good Job Dave.
@Spiceweaselbam Preach on!
Uh, why all the repeats? Hurting for vids that bad?
- 00:44 - I think he'll be alright. He just needs to stand up and stretch and go to IHOP for some pancakes.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Attorneys Defect From Staas & Halsey To Form New DC IP Boutique
The new firm, Stein, McEwen & Bui, LLP, opened on December 1 and is fully operational, according to Michael Stein, one of the founding partners.
In addition to the two name partners from Staas & Halsey, the third name partner, Hung H. Bui, was a partner from Arlington, Virginia-based intellectual property specialty firm Antonelli, Terry, Stout & Kraus, LLP.
The firm will offer a wide...
To view the full article, register now.
Try Law360 FREE for seven days
Already a subscriber? Click here to login


text:
Naruto Battle Grounds
Games information:
|Games name: Naruto Battle Grounds
| Try reaching to the end and finish the boss.
Arrow keys to move.
Q to charge chakra.
W to run)while holding arrow keys).
R to teleport.
A to Throw kunai.
S to attack.
F to block.
|Games operational guidelines:
|Add this media to your blog, or website! or shared:
Games image:
New Plays Games


text:
Ever since the infamous summer of 2010, the NBA free agency period has featured almost as many thrills, surprises and twists as the season itself. This year's group of free agents, which is led by Deron Williams, promises to be no different.
Over the past few days, several attempts have been made to sway Williams. Nothing like what people did to lure LeBron James (Really, Cleveland?), but funny nonetheless:
On Tuesday, Williams' 28th birthday, the Nets parked a billboard outside his apartment wishing him well on his big day.
On Thursday morning, Mavericks guard Delonte West made his plea to Williams via Twitter. West tweeted that, with Williams, the Mavericks could "win the western conference no problem." Don't tell that to Kevin Durant.
Williams played golf with fellow free agent and Olympic teammate Jason Kidd on Thursday, and after their round Williams had a little fun with the whole ordeal. Williams tweeted: "Just finished playing East Hampton Golf Club w/ @RealJasonKidd let the speculation begin?????" It already has.
Let's hope this free agency hoopla cools down at some point. Because as we've seen, it doesn't always lead players to make the best decisions.
-- Follow Robbie Levin on Twitter @RobbieLevin.


text:
New Developments in Immigration Enforcement and Compliance provides an authoritative, insiders perspective on the latest immigration laws, trends, and strategies that both clients and counsel need to know. Featuring partners from law firms across the country, these experts analyze the increase in enforcement activity and discuss how to handle investigations and raids, including common triggers, the proper steps to follow, and how to work successfully with government investigators. From compliance manuals and documentation review to self-audits and E-Verify, these top lawyers update readers on the fundamental elements of a successful compliance program and the consequences of non-compliance. Additionally, these leaders reveal methods for controlling costs, assessing the future of immigration reform, and evaluating how the economy is impacting the employment of foreign workers. The different niches represented and the breadth of perspectives presented enable readers to get inside some of the great legal minds of today, as these experienced lawyers offer up their thoughts around the keys to success within this ever-evolving field.Companies who no longer wish to participate in E-Verify can terminate their participation by selecting aRequest ... For specific information on terminating participation in the E-Verify program, see the E-Verify User Manual which can be anbsp;...
|New developments in immigration enforcement and compliance
|- 2010-06-01
You must register with us as either a Registered User before you can Download this Book. You'll be greeted by a simple sign-up page.
Once you have finished the sign-up process, you will be redirected to your download Book page.How it works:


text:
A Game Of Thrones: A Song of Ice and Fire: Book One Summary by Al Marztmill WARNING: This is not the original book qGame of Thrones by George R.R. Martinq.Do not buy this summary if you are lookingfor a full copy of this great book, which can be found back on the Amazon search page. Most people who are familiar with the fantasy genre of literature are already fans of the incomparable George Raymond Richard Martin.It's been nearly 2 decades since the release of his novel, A Game of Thrones and it remains one of the most popular high fantasies in recent memory.Winner of the 1997 Locus Award, A Game of Thrones is an epic tale about Eddard Stark, the ruler of a mystical land known as Winterfell. Eddard, who is also known as Ned to his close associates, has to go and execute a deserter and his sons must accompany him on the journey.The plot thickens when a fellow ruler, King Robert, asks Ned to be the hand to the king, a political position with important responsibilities.King Robert's wife, Queen Cersei, is already suspected of tyranny and when Ned's son, Bran Stark sees her sleeping with her own twin brother, Jaime Lannister, Jaime realizes how dire the consequences would be if the secret relationship is found out. Jaime pushes Ned's son from a towerand the story really gets interesting because Bran survives the fall. With Bran in a coma and a deadly secret in his brain, the struggle toconceal the true level of tyranny and treachery begins. This book has the mile a minute, over the top kind of plot twists that would be expectedfrom a daytime soap opera. This is truly one of the best high fantasy novels in recent memory which is why it has been made into a series for HBO.Any fan of Fantasy should definitely give the eBook of the A Game of Thrones summary some serious consideration because it'sone of the best reads in the genre in recent memory. The shorter summary covers the entire story, it costs less than the full book, and it can be read in a fraction of the time. Scroll up and grab a copy todayA Game Of Thrones: A Song of Ice and Fire: Book One Summary by Al Marztmill WARNING: This is not the original book aquot;Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martinaquot;.Do not buy this summary if you are lookingfor a full copy of this great book, which ...
|A Game of Thrones Summary
|Al Martzmill
|CreateSpace - 2014-02-10
You must register with us as either a Registered User before you can Download this Book. You'll be greeted by a simple sign-up page.
Once you have finished the sign-up process, you will be redirected to your download Book page.How it works:


text:
Serving size: 1 cup
Already have a myDaVita.com account? Sign in to review. If not, register now.
Providing information through this page is strictly voluntary, and any information you provide will be governed by our Website Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. We are not collecting this information in our capacity as a health care provider, and any information we provide through our website is informational in nature and should not be considered medical or professional advice.
This sounds really tasty, but Why is this so high in Potassium? My dad is on 2000mg a day, isn't 596 high? Dietitian comment: If you are aiming for the meal to be 1/3 of his allowance it's definitely a good recipe to include. Add some rice, ginger ale or cranberry juice and vanilla wafers for a meal with about 650 mg potassium. You can use the My Creations feature in DaVita Diet Helper to easily select a recipe and build a meal around it to see the nutrient totals.
Delicious. Enjoyed by all.
Simply outstanding flavor with very little effort.
Get kidney-friendly meal plans with DaVita Diet Helper.Start Today


text:
Yellow female... untamed... Trainable, with a little TLC and patience... May be good as a breeding female...... Hatch date March 14, 2018.$100
Day old ostrich chicks for sale. Straight run chicks only. $300 each Will do deals on 6 or more Can ship at buyers expense$300
Male/Female Coscoroba pair. Very hard to find this breed of swans. Will only sell as a pair.$2,400
Black Swans - 4 months old. DNA sexed and pinioned. Shipping available via Delta Cargo. Buyer to pay for flight and kennel.$600
Black Swan pair, they are a year old. They have been DNA sexed and are pinioned. They are a beautiful pair of swans. Shipping available via Delta…$1,500
4 Year Old Coscoroba Male Swan for sale. This is a beautiful bird! Pinioned, DNA sexed. Shipping available via Delta Cargo. Buyer to pay for shipping…$2,500
Female Black Neck Swans for sale. They are 1 year old, have been pinioned and DNA sexed. $1200. Shipping available via Delta Cargo. Buyer to pay for…$1,200
Cage, toys, and food included. Kiwi and I have not gotten along since we moved from SC, my new job has taken to much time away from him, he needs a more…$1,800
Beautiful, very very tame cockatiels. Salt and pepper or classic, they sing and like to be held. 2 available$125
I Have Coturnix Quail Chicks available $1.50-$3 each depending on age between 3 days & 5 weeks old. Also have Adult Trios $15$2


text:
Just when you think you've got search engine optimization down, Google shakes things up. And in 2016, the search behemoth was busy.
An animated infographic published by digital agency E2M explains Google's algorithm changes and how they affect marketers.
The good news for marketers is that the impact of those changes has lessened over the years, the infographic explains.
But marketers should still understand what happened and why. For example, AdWords placement changes had a big effect on clickthrough rates, the infographic says, and the Possum update in September changed how local results rank.
For more on Google's 2016 SEO updates, check out the animated infographic:


text:
Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. Recognized for Best-in-Class Work-Life Portfolio
Jan 30, 2013, 12:42 EST
PARSIPPANY, N.J., Jan. 30, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Ferring Pharmaceuticals was one of 54 honorees receiving WorldatWork's Alliance for Work-Life Progress (AWLP) 2013 Work-Life Seal of Distinction. The award recognizes both public and private sector organizations from a variety of industries that have shown leadership in workplace strategies and practices to achieve success in work-life effectiveness.
"Ferring values the commitment that our colleagues make to the company," said Aaron Graff, President and COO of Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. "We also know how important it is to establish a Ferring culture which allows us to balance work life with home life, and we are proud to be designated as a national leader in this regard."
Applicants for the AWLP seal were evaluated based on their work-life portfolio, including areas spanning dependent care, health and wellness, workplace flexibility, financial support, paid and unpaid time off, community involvement and efforts to transform organizational culture.
Some of the specific programs of note offered at Ferring include:
- Wellness initiatives, such as fitness related subsidies, on-site immunization clinics and a branded wellness program
- Opportunities for workplace flexibility (e.g., flextime, phased return-to-work after FMLA-eligible leave)
- Financial support through reimbursement of adoption and tuition expenses and college scholarships for employees' children
- Company-sponsored retirement programs, including a traditional 401(k) match program and a supplemental employer-funded retirement plan
- Community volunteer opportunities
For more details regarding the Work-Life Seal of Distinction, please visit http://www.awlp.org/awlp/seal/index.html. To learn more about the Ferring Pharmaceuticals, visit www.ferringUSA.com.
About Ferring Pharmaceuticals
Ferring Pharmaceuticals is a research-driven biopharmaceutical company devoted to identifying, developing and marketing innovative products in the fields of reproductive health, urology, gastroenterology, endocrinology and osteoarthritis. For more information, visit www.ferringUSA.com.
SOURCE Ferring Pharmaceuticals


text:
The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
15 Points
Modern Autos Lack Efficacy/Efficiency
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
|Voting Style:
|Point System:
|7 Point
|6 years ago
|Post Voting Period
|4,047 times
|Debate No:
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (4)
So if you define "efficacy" in terms of what we, the materialistically obsessed populace wants, then I suppose we are just getting what we asked for. We want a car that will get us to work and not need to be fixed often, but after those concerns are taken care of we are focusing on things like impressing our boyfriends with them. Otherwise, what is the point of putting over-sized engines in cars? Luxury autos are very powerful but there is almost no actual use for this expenditure. I saw my neighbor bringing a new Jeep Cherokee home today and I thought to myself "I don't know of any mountains to climb with that thing in Green Bay..." It's safe to say that that vehicle will never even leave the flat and smooth pavement from which it sits.
The enormous size of today's autos is troublesome. Gas may very well make these unworkable for the poorer crowd, but for the time being there are still a startling amount of SUVs and other large model vehicles on the road. Yes, they are more convenient. But if I wanted to drive a Prius or something similar, I know have to compete on the road with these bohemoths. It certainly makes it much less efficable for me to get a small car and try to save money for myself and help the environment for everyone else. You can't see past these trucks when you pull up to them at a stop (e.g., if you are watching for traffic coming from the left and then an SUV pulls up and you have to just wait until they pass to be able to see again) either.
This is a review of a book by Keith Bradsher titled "High and Mighty: SUVs - The World's Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got That Way." (http://www.elmerfudd.us...). The first set of quotes is from the book, while the second is from the review:
"[SUV owners]" tend to be people who are insecure and vain. They are frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood. They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their neighbors or communities...One of the most primitive human emotions, according to the automakers' researchers, is the urge to be ensconced within the safety of a monster -- one that makes us feel much more powerful than we actually are."
"One of the saddest of Bradsher's conclusions is that SUVs are inadvertently fueling an arms race on the road. As the drivers of non-excessive vehicles experience being blinded by SUV headlights, or crushed by SUV collisions, they are becoming increasingly compelled to purchase SUVs themselves as a matter of survival...As a result, Bradsher argues SUVs increasingly dominate the roadways and it is only a matter of time before they compel drivers who are not insecure and self-hating to purchase their own obese station wagons in order to increase the odds of survival during a collision."
But aren't cars getting more efficient on gas? 30 Years ago, they seemed a lot more efficient than they are now: http://www.mpgomatic.com.... This chart shows the top MPG choices for the years '78-'81. As you can see, none of them drops below 40 mpg and there are lots of very affordable choices in models that I was very familiar with when I was young because they were quite prevalent. Looking at today's numbers tells a different story: http://www.greencarreports.com....
2012 Mitsubishi i = 112 mpg
2011 Nissan Leaf = 99 mpg
2012 Chevy Volt = 94/37 mpg
2011 Smart fortwo electric 87 mpg
2012 Prius - 50 mpg
2012 Honda Civic hybrid = 44 mpg
2012 Toyota Prius V = 42 mpg
2012 Lexus CT 200h 42 mpg
2011 Honda Insight = 41 mpg
2012 Ford Fusion hybrid/Lincoln MKZ= 39 mpg
At first it's like WOW! 100s, 90s... we sure have come a long way! But as you really look at the list, it's not that impressive. These cars aren't efficient GAS cars, they are only this efficent because they are electric/hybrid! NYC had an entire fleet of electric cars and the infrastructure to charge them - in the 19th century (http://www.todayifoundout.com...)! So for us to look at this list of 21st-century autos and feel good that they are finally figuring out how to integrate that technology is pretty ridiculous. The 5th ranked car, the Prius, wouldn't even be at the top of the list in 1981.
The bottom five of the list would be somewhat competitive with the older cars, but they can't do it with gas alone. Most importantly, the older list comprises ECONOMICALLY PRICED cars, while the newer list is almost all expensive electric editions of luxury brands: we are not going to be seeing the streets flooded with these models to help the poor like we did in the late '70's/early '80s with Rabbits and Omnis. None of these cars are affordable in the least, and the tenth-ranked auto (Focus hybrid) wouldn't even have qualified for the older list at <40 mpg.
So if every other car is <40 mpg today, that means that we basically have no ability to purchase efficient autos like we did in the late '70s. This is almost beyond belief.
Comparing something with the technical nature of an automobile to it's predecessor of three decades prior is like comparing how we build wooden houses to the pre-colonial days. There is absolutely no excuse for this pathetic decline in efficiency.
One last point I'd like to bring up is how difficult and costly cars are to maintain nowadays. Last year the blower motor went out in my Buick (I won't drive anything smaller because in Green Bay people love to drive trucks) and I was lucky enough to know a mechanic who rebuilt the motor for me with some spare wiring and electrical tape. The job was quick, easy, and inexpensive. Yet, had I not known him, I would have had to bring the car into a shop where I would have been absolutely gutted by the mechanics there. They would have insisted I buy a brand-new part and have them install it, which would have been in the triple-digits as far as cost.
Have you looked at the dashboard in your new car? Have you tried to figure out where it comes apart? Try it once and then let me know how to do it. Your entire dash is probably one piece that covers the entire section from the driver's door to the passenger's door, and without special knowledge and tools you won't be able to work with it. When I was younger, cars were simpler to work on. I changed the stereo in my '89 Firebird by simple getting a screwdriver and undoing the screws that were in plain site right in front of me. Cars are incredibly difficult and complex to work on nowadays, while delivering even worse efficiency. Parts are so varied and specialized that almost everything you need must be specially ordered for that exact make/model/year, which drives the cost of buying these parts through the roof. We could very easily have much more efficient cars which are easy to work on with universal components that are prevalent and cheap, all while delivering superior gas-mileage. But we don't.
The Resolution
Thanks to Pro for proposing a great topic, He echoes complaints we often hear these days, to the effect that there is something wrong with modern cars.
Cars are now the best they have ever been. "Go back about 20 years and the number of cars delivering 40 mpg or more was greater than what we're seeing today. Those cars, however, were lighter and did not include weight-adding safety features we take for granted today including front and side airbags, traction control and antilock brakes. Many of today's cars are delivering the best of both worlds: excellent fuel economy and the safety features consumers appreciate." http://www.autotrends.org...
The Toyota Prius is a mid-sized five passenger car that consistently gets 50 miles per gallon under both stop-and-go city driving and long trips. It does so by using hybrid technology that reuses the energy of braking, having a continuously variable transmission for efficiency, and having the lowest aerodynamic drag coefficient of any mass-produced car. It can be bought new for well under $30,000. http://en.wikipedia.org... It is extremely reliable. So what's the complaint?
Cars do have bad periods. Cars of the early 1970s were less reliable and had less power than the cars of the 1960s. That was a consequence of pollution standards. So is something like that the nature of my opponent's current complaint? Not as far as I can tell. Cars are consistently better now than they were in past years.
The complaint, as far as I can determine, is not that modern automobiles are no good, but rather that people do not always buy them according to the values that my opponent would like. Pro cites cars being bought to impress others, cars bought with more power than Pro thinks people need, and especially there are too many Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs). That's a complaint about vehicle owners, not a complaint bout the vehicles. Pro's standards are by no means objective or universal.
The resolutio fails because the present market includes cars that suit every reasonable requirement for efficacy and efficiency.
Why aren't all cars lime yellow?
Things claimed to be objective standards are really value judgements. Nearly everyone would like a car that is safe, economical, comfortable, beautiful, and low polluting, when it gets to tradeoffs among the various attributes, it's reasonable for individuals to make different choices.
Scientific studies have determined the safest color for vehicles. http://kochvillefire.com... It is a lime yellow, the obnoxious color corresponding to the peak color sensitivity of the eye. It's used for fire trucks http://www.flickr.com... and occasionally for cars http://motoring.friday-ad.co.uk... A further improvement is to use fluorescent lime yellow. Fluorescent colors convert ultraviolet light to visible light, so it produces more light than the incident visible light.
Objectively, fluorescent lime yellow is the safest color. The technology is available to paint every car that color. So why are so few cars lime yellow? It is because few car buyers put so large a premium on safety. Aesthetics has value. A world full of fluorescent cars would only please a very few safety fanatics. The rest of us are willing to take a small incremental safety risk.
People buy cars of all types for frivolous reasons, but many people buy SUVs to meet genuine needs, People need to haul stuff around. That's why station wagons were once so popular. People have large families with children and dogs. They tow boats and trailers. In rural areas, they haul quantities of supplies from distant towns. They live in mountains, in places with bad roads, and in places with heavy winter snow.
I live in California where the land is flat, there are good roads, and it never snows. However, there are mountains about two hours drive to the east with ski areas that get several hundred inches of snow per year. Lots of avid skiers live here in the flat lands and head up to the land of chains-required regularly. An SUV is a reasonable choice for them, usually as a second car.
I have a friend with back problem, something to do with a pinched nerve. After some experimentation, he found that the chair-like posture of SUV seating suited him well, and the pain he endured from conventional car seating disappeared. He lives in Florida, where snow and mountains are notably absent. Tall people need the extra height of an SUV.
Many SUVs have evolved so as to be more like cars. One auto reviewer noted "Many compact SUVs have become so car-like that I was surprised to encounter the seating position of a conventional SUV in the new Sorento. You sit high relative to the instrument panel, and the windshield is upright by current standards." http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com...
Pro cites an out-of-date book on SUV safety. Ten years ago, SUVs were more subject to roll-over accidents than regular passenger cars, but that's now been fixed with improved deign.
The Institute for Highway Safety reports that, thanks to electronic stability control in SUVs,
"someone driving a 2009 model year car is almost twice as likely to die in a rollover accident as someone driving a 2009 model year SUV. .. More stable car-based SUV designs have also played a role in decreasing SUV rollover death rates," http://money.cnn.com...
considering all types of accidents, "Adjusted for number of registered vehicles, and only considering those vehicles 1-3 years old, SUVs are now far safer than passenger cars overall. For 2009, there were 39 occupant deaths per million registered SUVs—versus 82 for cars, and 94 for pickups." http://www.thecarconnection.com...
A person driving an SUV is safer than a person in a regular car. That means that concern over safety is a valid reason for buying an SUV. SUVs are better than cars in dealing with poor road conditions, like mountain snow or flooding. Weight, wheel base and heavier construction provide better traction and passenger protection.
Fuel Economy
The fuel efficiency of both cars and of light trucks and SUVs has risen slowly since 1965. http://en.wikipedia.org... Cars went from about 14 to 23 mpg, and the SUV/light truck category from about 10 to 17 mpg. The US government sets fuel standards. "The [2002] standard is 27.5 mpg for passenger automobiles and 20.7 mpg for light trucks, a classification that also includes sport utility vehicles (SUVs).." http://www.policyalmanac.org.... Vehicles last about 20 years, so the fuel economy will continue to rise for another ten years as old vehicles are replaced with new ones.
The average vehicle is driven only about 12,000 miles per year, which makes fuel cost a secondary issue. http://www.project.org... The average price of gasoline for the past year is about $3. http://fuelgaugereport.aaa.com... A car getting 25 mpg will use $1440 worth of gasoline. At the Truck/SUV mileage of 17, fuel cost rise to $2118, an extra $677. The total cost of driving a medium sedan 12,000 miles is $7440. Compared to the $7440 basic cost, paying $677 for the low mileage of an SUV, or saving $1059 with a 50 mpg Prius is still marginal compared to he other costs. Buying a more expensive car adds to the depreciation and insurance, but that applies whether the expensive car is an electric vehicle or an SUV.
Today's cars are excellent.
What's important is that there are cars available that provide the combinations off features so that each buyer gets what he wants. People are not foolish for wanting SUVs, nor are they foolish to want small economical cars.
The resolution is negated.
Are the cars of today safer? Sure, if I was about to be rear-ended by an SUV I'd rather be driving a Ford Excursion than a Dodge Omni, but this sense of "safeness" merely reflects the size of the car. By creating cars that are big and heavy, we are creating a slippery-slope where people must continue to buy bigger in order not to get squashed like ants. Provided cars don't have obvious faults, like sending metal fragments into the cab during a crash, the biggest factor in safety are the drivers' actions, not the features in the vehicle. We are downplaying the drivers' actions however, because they are not profitable, while safety systems are.
Prius: $30,000 is about three to ten times as much as one would like to pay for a car of this design. As "green" as I am, I won't be buying a Prius any time soon, because I'd have to take out a huge loan to buy it and I'd be paying it off for a decade or so. We could be offering the people very inexpensive brand-new vehicles that outperform the prius even without the hybrid component for a fraction of the cost. A car like the Omni which doesn't have all the electronic gadgets, touch-screen navigation, foot-massager, and the incredible overhead involved in designing and marketing a brand-new product every 36 months could be created using parts that don't change every few years to keep the cost down. It could be designed to be easy to work on and maintain using normal tools, without needing computer diagnostic equipment and special training for each brand. While Con presents the Prius as a practical alternative for cost-savvy consumers, I see it simply as another needlessly extravagant and expensive piece of junk that allows people to flaunt being green as opposed to flaunting the normal automobile traits (i.e., power, sleekness, options). Surely, someone like RoyLatham can appreciate the haughtiness of the left-wing university professor or EPA regulator that drives the Prius just to turn their nose up at the rest of us. Suffice to say, the Prius is not the sustainable alternative that the people need from the automobile industry. It is just the latest step they have taken to make a profit while not giving us any real alternatives for sustainability (either environmentally or economically).
Lime yellow: an interesting point, but I don't see a car's color being as integral to safety as other factors like weight.
Con's appeal to utility (the "U" in SUV) is called into question by the fact that most people don't live by mountains yet still buy SUVs anyway. Seriously - of all the SUVs you passed on the road today, how many of them actually needed them for their performance? Again, if cars were smaller, the whole safety issue wouldn't be half as bad. An Omni might spin out in the snow easier than an SUV, but if you are driving it at safe speeds then the impact won't be all that harmful to anyone you hit and your crash isn't likely to be a spectacular explosion like if you were in an SUV. A pile-up of Omnis on the highway isn't likely to kill as many people as it would if they were SUVs.
As far as tall people are concerned, cars can be made to have increased leg-room without resorting to the SUV model. Omnis could be made without back seats so that there is a lot more room, for example. Your friend with the bad back represents a large group of people, those with disabilities of one sort or another, which also should be taken into account. I don't believe he should be forced to drive an Omni, but there could be slightly taller models of small vehicles that could accomidate him without the need for gas-guzzlers. Your friend should know that by getting a taller vehicle he is causing society a detriment; it will be harder to see around his larger vehicle, it will be larger and more awkward to control, it will be heavier and cause more damage in a crash, and the lights and grill will probably be higher as well. Logically, he should make an effort to minimize his time on the road, just like I should minimize my time on the road while I'm on these vicotins.
I have no problem with people who haul lots of things using trucks. I do have a problem with every Tom, Dick and Harry owning a truck without actually taking advantage of its utility. Trucks shouldn't be used for every-day transportation.
SUV roll-over may be minimized these days, but the picture of that beast on the top of Con's citation doesn't make me feel any better. I'm more concerned about the safety of those NOT in the SUV than I am about the individuals within the SUV. Could you imagine getting into a crash with that thing? If you weren't also protecting yourself by being within an aircraft-carrier sized truck yourself, then that big shiny grille would be right in your face as it crushed your puny car like a tomato. The driver of the SUV would be safe and sound ABOVE the action in the cock-pit, looking down at you in contempt for not having made the investment in a large-enough vehicle to protect yourself. But I suppose if you can't afford one of them then you aren't technically as productive and important as the SUV driver, so that meshes quite nicely with the right-wing/libertarian philosophy.
Con then cites the death rates of SUVs versus cars - fitting. The obsolete article I cited was complaining about how you need to buy larger to protect yourself, and this only seems to cement that point.
Con's figures regarding gasoline prices don't take into account externalities like pollution/global warming, energy usage/independence, or the continually rising price of gas. Of course this type of thinking is always different for the two of us, while I think collectively and he thinks individualistically.
I claimed: (1) contrary to the resolution, there is nothing wrong with today's cars, Pro's complaints are about choices that people make in buying them; (2) there is no objective criteria for "best" in a car, so Pro's choice of "best" cannot be justified; and (3) people make reasonable choices overall based upon their needs. I pointed out that SUVs are safer by a factor of two than ordinary cars, and it's reasonable for people to make safety a priority concern. It's also reasonable for people to want a vehicle for hauling stuff and to value comfort. I think Pro failed to refute any of these points. He left most of them unaddressed.
Pro claimed that the relative safety of SUVs is a slippery slope that leads to larger and larger vehicles. That's not true because it assumes that safety mostly depends upon the relative size of colliding vehicles. Having all small cars does not help cars colliding with trees, utility poles, animals, road debris, or highway structures. http://en.wikipedia.org... Only a larger vehicle helps, because a larger vehicle has a greater "crush depth" -- more metal to fold up and absorb the shock. Moreover, having small cars des not reduce the number of trucks. In fact, because people cannot carry their own stuff, there would have to be many more delivery trucks. Having all small vehicles also does not help if two vehicles collide head on. The momentum of both is reduced to zero at the same rate as if one hit fixed object.
Larger vehicles are better able to cope with poor road conditions. Higher ground clearance avoids more road debris and snow accumulation. Larger wheelbase provides better stability. Higher weight improves traction.
The point of noting that lime yellow is the safest is that safety is not an absolute preference. It costs nothing extra to paint cars that obnoxious color, but people rarely do it and politicians don't have the nerve to mandate it. Safety is traded off against aesthetics.
SUVs are safer, more comfortable, and can carry more stuff. That doesn't mean they are best for everyone. Small cars are more economical, easier to maneuver in tight spaces, and take less parking space. What is important to an individual all depends on the individuals circumstances. Consequently, the resolution that "Modern Autos Lack Efficacy/Efficiency" is false. The market provides a great variety of designs to well suit a variety of user needs. Pro claimed that user desires for SUVs and the like were frivolous extensions of ego, but I've shown that they provide practical safety, comfort, and utility.
American cars are built in a very strong regulatory environment. including the "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Regulations to which manufacturers of motor vehicle and equipment items must conform and certify compliance." http://www.nhtsa.gov... Pro argues that safety standards should be substantially reduced, He argues, " Instead of loading our vehicles with more and more safety "devices," it makes a whole lot more sense simply to slow down a few mph and pay more attention to what you're doing. The biggest factor in accidents is speed and attentiveness, not whether or not the vehicle was souped up with traction-control, ABS, etc." His assertion is not supported by evidence. I don't doubt that if all other things ere equal that going a few miles per hour slower would be safer, however the question is whether the safety increase from going slower is as important as that from safety devices.
The US had a period of government mandated 55 mph speed limits. Yes, it was 55 mph even on interstate highways. The law was enacted in 1974, eased in 1987, and ultimately repealed in 1995. http://en.wikipedia.org... It produced a 1% savings in fuel consumption. When the law was imposed, the traffic fatality rate indeed dropped, from 4.1 to 3.5 deaths per hundred million miles driven. http://www.saferoads.org... However, when the speed limit was raised to 65 in 1987, the fatality rate dropped slightly from 2.4 to 2.3, and when it was abolished in 1995 in dropped slightly again, from 1.73 to 1.69. Currently, the fatality rate is 1.13, the lowest in history. http://money.cnn.com... In 192. When cars were quite slow, the fatality rate was 24. The dramatic long term decline in fatalities cannot be due to decreased speed, it must be due to safety improvements in roads and vehicles.
A study by the Highway Safety Institute concluded that from the mid 80s to mid-90s, improved driver awareness and seat belts compensated for vehicles being lighter, but ".. in the late 90′s actual driver fatalities continued to decline, and beginning in 1998 the actually number of fatalities dipped below what would have been expected if cars were built the same way they were in 1985. The authors suggest that the dip below expected levels signifies that vehicles are safer now than they were in the 1980′s and 90′s. They cite the fact that average vehicle weight has increased from 2,838 pounds in 1993 to 3,383 pounds in 2003. The authors also cited increased safety standards for SUVs and minivans, both still popular with American drivers but now less likely to roll over under certain crash conditions." http://tinyscience.wordpress.com...
Pro's argument is akin to, "We should spend less money on fire protection, because if people were more safety conscious it wouldn't be needed." Well, people are not more safety conscious.
Pro asks, "Seriously - of all the SUVs you passed on the road today, how many of them actually needed them for their performance?" I think most people buy SUVs with some legitimate need in mind, but I don't doubt that some buyers could meet their needs more cheaply with a minivan. A 2005 comparison found an SUV cost about $7000 per year, versus $6000 for a minivan. http://www.nctr.usf.edu... That's a relatively small difference in return for a buyer getting what he wants. Moreover, the minivan is just as good for carrying people or cargo, but it's not as good for bad roads or towing trailers.
Why do people buy expensive electric cars? A basic Tesla roadster costs $109,000, despite heavy government subsides. http://en.wikipedia.org... There is no economic or safety reason. It does nothing functionally that an ordinary car does not do more cheaply. Electric cars are fueled primarily by coal, since that's what generates half the electricity. It make no objective sense, but people do it for the prestige they associate with it.
I don't blame Tesla buyers or SUV buyers for buying what they want. Even more remote is the idea that there is something wrong with the vehicles themselves, the subject of our resolution.
Pro argues that present vehicles are too large and expensive. This implies that the government standards responsible for the cost should be revoked. I think there is a good argument that if people want to increase their risk of death or injury in return for having a cheaper car they ought to be allowed to do so. There is good counter argument in terms of the public costs for emergency services and for very long traffic delays in investigating fatal accidents. However, that argument is resolved, it doesn't mean that today's cars are ineffective or inefficient. They function perfectly well give the design constraints for safety that are imposed. Removing those constraints is a separate debate. In that debate, the safety requirements must be acknowledged as being effective.
New cars are always more expensive than we'd like. An eight year old Prius in excellent condition cost $7215 according the Kelly Blue Book. http://autos.aol.com...
Pro makes many unsubstantiated assertions, all of which I deny. My contentions stand.
The cheapest car you can buy as of a few months ago is a full five orders of magnitude in terms of dollars. We should be at four for what our technology is apparently capable of. You can't blame the consumers when they never have the option for the really cheap car. Whether you blame the public or private sector for this is irrelevent - someone is screwing us badly. It doesn't take ten thousand dollars to make a box with wheels with a motor; Con is no doubt going to complain that we need to keep investing in r&d to keep safety and efficiency high but this is horse manure because that research should be complete by now. R&d at this point is just to keep the looks sleeker and the onboard electronics fancier and we should have had the option all along to buy super-inexpensive vehicles using proven pre-existing designs.
(2) No objective criteria for "best." All the criteria discussed so far are objective enough, not the least of which price.
(3) The biggest reason for needing a big car for safety is to protect against other big cars. Without big cars, everyone would be safe enough in little ones. If everyone drove bicycles nobody would feel the need for safety of owning an SUV, but if other people started driving SUVs down the bike paths then all of a sudden that need would become apparent. Sure, bikes don't go as fast as cars, but light-weight vehicle going 35 mph would be relatively safe with little more than a metal frame around the driver to protect them.
Large truck traffic is relatively minimal and these vehicles are not difficult to maneuver away from, unlike SUV traffic which is numerous and just as versatile on the road as you are. Con proves my slippery-slope argument by citing the saftey from trees/poles etc: we want to be safer from these collisions, so we get bigger vehicles to do it! The logical course of action to reduce risk in these instances is to slow down, not get bigger vehicles. Also, smaller vehicles do in fact help in head-on collisions.
There is no safety factor a larger vehicle provides that also isn't achievable by just slowing down. If laws concerning traffic were changed to put people with heavier vehicles at higher risk of fault in collisions, we could balance off the risk so that there would be no incentive for buying big to be safe. Small enough cars should be able to bounce around and hit each other quite a bit with no damage at all even under bad conditions, if you think about it, because there isn't enough weight to do any damage.
"I've shown that they provide practical safety, comfort, and utility."
If cars were smaller then safety would be easier to achieve because vehicles wouldn't cause as much damage upon impact. Safety is only truly achieved by reducing speed. Comfort and utility are secondary concerns.
The only main factors from a physics standpoint in a collision are speed and mass. All the other factors like crumple-zones, side-impact airbags, crash-detection sensors, and all that jazz are just to help make auto companies more money to make you feel safer while delivering you a big dangerous auto to go kill someone with. If we sold small, inexpensive vehicles and sacrificed speed in every instance where safety was a concern, there would be no need for these expensive pseudo-safety measures. In a sense he is right in this instance that it is the choice people make, but it's hard to just blame the consumers in an economy like this because everything is so waxed over in advertising, manipulative culture, regulations, and ultimately the lack of a viable alternative to set a new standard. We are all suffering with unsafe highways because of these vehicles and the remedy is so simple and so easy, yet we are not allowed, for one reason or another, to not make the change we need to small, safe, efficient vehicles that will save our wallets as well as our heads in crashes.
We don't have "needs." If we can't afford these vehicles, which we can't from both an economic and environmental standpoint, and they aren't safe, then all our other needs are secondary and we should re-evalute them.
Having a cheaper car does not give you a more dangerous car. It theoretically gives you a safer car because it is smaller and lighter. We can achieve a harmony of efficiency and safety at a cost-threshold somewhere in the range of a few thousand-dollars without paying 10-20 grand for a fancy automobile with onboard electronics, aggressive marketing and sales, and all the bells and whistles that come with it.
Thanks to Pro for an interesting debate. We discussed issues that are not the usual subjects of debate on this site.
Pro argues that a new car ought to cost about a thousand dollars. He references the lowest cost new car at $9985 and says they ought to be an order of magnitude, i.e., a factor of ten, cheaper. Pro gives no evidence to support his conjecture of how much a car "ought" to cost. He cites no expert opinion and no examples of cars from anywhere in the world -- cars manufactured free of American regulations-- that come close to meeting his claim. He offers "an argument from incredulity" http://rationalwiki.org... saying his claim follows from "what our technology is apparently capable of." The raw materials to build a car cost more than $1000, and there is a lot of work to making an engine, transmission, a frame, wheels, seats, and the rest of a vehicle. Lacking expert opinion or examples, Pro might have suggested how his claim could be met, but he did not.
Pro argues that it shouldn't cost much to put a box on wheels. True, but that would not be a car. We expect US cars to be able to travel on modern highways, keep up with traffic, and carry at least a couple of people and some goods. There are mass produced scooters that are motorized and come close to the thousand dollar mark, although most are not that cheap. A Vespa scooter than gets 70-75 mpg and has a top speed of 59 mph is priced at $4499. http://www.vespausa.com... They are not cars.
It's remarkable that a fully functional car meeting US safety standards is available for $9985. Many people cannot afford a new car, but many also cannot afford a new house or any of many other expensive things. That's not an an argument that there must be some magical way to make any particular thing cheaper. It was not until my third used car that I could finally afford one that cost more than $200. It never occurred to me that new cars were supposed to be dirt cheap.
Pro claims, "R&d at this point is just to keep the looks sleeker and the on board electronics fancier." There are more than twenty independent car manufacturers spread around the globe competing in international markets, To compete, manufacturers are doing everything they can to reduce costs. There is an emerging market for very low end vehicles that have no electronics or air conditioning, and are not suitable for US roads or winter driving conditions. "Car manufacturers, of course, have always sought to cut costs and pack more value into each new-model generation to stay competitive. But now, emerging markets like India offer cheap engineering, inexpensive parts-sourcing, and low-cost manufacturing. For its new car, for example, Tata should be able to slash the cost of the engine to about $700, or 50% lower than a Western-developed equivalent, says one consultant close to the company." http://www.businessweek.com...
What is best?
Pro argues that we have been arguing objective criteria, and cites price as objective criteria. No, that's just one attribute that a buyer weighs along with utility, performance, reliability, safety, appearance, and whatever else the buyer values. Most of the capabilities have objective measures like cargo capacity, horse power, and crash test results. If price were even the dominant factor, then the cheapest cars would be the best selling, and they are not. Pro bemoans the large numbers of SUVs that are sold. That admits that price is not the most important factor for those buyers, who could have chosen anything cheaper and did not.
I am sympathetic to the argument that people ought to be allowed to buy very cheap vehicles, even if they are not safe or comfortable. However, it's clear from the sales figures that few people in the US have that preference. Modern cars are doing an excellent job of meeting buyer demands, and that's shown by the lack of demand for cheap Spartan vehicles. Emerging markets in Asia are likely to be closer to matching what Pro thinks everyone ought to want.
Pro claims, "The biggest reason for needing a big car for safety is to protect against other big cars." I have proved that to be false, and Pro has offered no evidence to support the claim. If two vehicles collide head-on, then the small car will be better off if the other car is also small. However, head-on collision are rare, only about 2% of the total. http://en.wikipedia.org... Most collisions are from people hitting fixed objects (trees and utility poles), hitting animals, colliding at angles, or hitting road debris or the like, In all those cases, a larger vehicle is safer. Moreover, larger vehicles are better able to cope with snow, flooding, and other poor road conditions. In the cases of hitting other vehicles, trucks will sill be on the road, and there would have to be more of them.
The statistics I cited show that SUVs are about twice as safe as regular cars. So independent of all arguments, the bottom line is that SUVs are in fact safer.
Pro made the new argument, without support, that trucks are easier to avoid than passenger vehicles. Actually, fatal collisions with trucks are nearly twice as common as fatal collisions with other cars. The National Highway Safety Administration says, "... the car driver's behavior was more than three times as likely to contribute to the fatal crash than was the truck driver's behavior. In addition, the car driver was solely responsible for 70 percent of the fatal crashes, compared to 16 percent for the truck driver." http://www.fhwa.dot.gov...
Pro argues that if everyone rode bicycles there would be no safety problem. Sure and if everyone walked there would be no safety problem. If bicycles could carry the passengers and cargo of a car, went 65 miles per hour on highways, and operated under all road conditions, there would be serious safety problems. They would skid off roads and hit trees just as cars do. Hitting a tree on a bicycle at 65 would not be a safe encounter.
Markets in India and China are likely to lead to the sale of vehicles that are essentially a scooter with four wheels and an enclosure to keep the rain off. They'll be cheaper than presently available cars. If so, does that mean that "Modern autos lack efficacy and efficiency"? No, efficiency is measured relative to accomplishing a specified task. Modern cars in the US do what buyers want, and they do it efficiently. Pro offered no evidence that the cars that US buyers want could be provided better or more cheaply. Pro's argument is that people should not want what they want. I think people overall correctly value safety, comfort, and utility.
The resolution is negated.
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
I agree that there are government mandates that unnecessarily impact cost. The big ones have to do with safety. If people want to take risks they should be allowed to.
Products are designed with poor people in mind. The usual complaint is that there is too much low quality cheap stuff. Walmart and thousands of others do nothing but worry about how to make products that are both cheap and good enough to suit customer needs. If you think you need a beautiful stainless steel bcket that will last you a lifetime, it's available on the internet. Walmart sells cheap plastic buckets because that's what people want. Making low cost high volume products takes a great deal of engineering. It may not be apparent, but the engineering is going into the manufacturing process.
There are many complex products that befit poor people. Cell phones are a good example. The Third World is awash with cell phones, something that could not happen if it depended upona wired infrastructure. Radios and televisions are good examples as well. Drugs and vitamin supplements are cheap products of technology that benefit poor people.
Modern televisions have only a few chips, not separate functions on plugin cards. The whole card could theoretically be replaced, but it's probably not practical. It's akin to repairing a cell phone.
To make your case, you'd have to point to some specifics not make general claims that magic could happen. Look at those rope start vehicles in India. Would they sell here is allowed?
American auto companies, over the long span of their existence, have never done what this man is in the process of doing now: http://www.wimp.com...
This is inexcusable. This guy hasn't gotten around to developing the vehicle component yet, but really that research could have been done 75 years ago. Why wasn't it? How is it that well over a century after the automobile was invented it has yet to be perfected? How many decades of crash-testing does it take to make a safe design? How many decades of progress do we need to lower the cost of an engine to where everybody can afford them and fix them? If the American auto industry had been pooling its efforts to develop affordable, universal machinery, then nobody would be paying hundreds of dollars a month on car payments. The money someone normally puts as the down payment would be enough for the entire vehicle and even if it did break down more often the parts and service wouldn't be crippling like it is now. There would be so much recycled parts that people would have a hard time charging anything for them (service would be similarly simple).
Your analogy to television tells me that I still haven't gotten my point across to you. Transportation is one of humanity's most basic needs. Food, shelter, clothing, tools... transportation is not top 5 but certainly top 10 or 20. The need for viewscreens and the technology surrounding them (even taking into account computers and the periphery) isn't a basic human need and thus there is little moral reason to keep them basic enough for affordability. Televisions are also non-comparable in terms of safety and environmental effects.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
Tires are so much better than they used to be, there's no comparison. Getting 10K miles from tires used to be standard, now its 60K. The large rim-sized tires are expensive because they are low profile, not because of the diameter.
A saw a piece on TV describing a low cost car in India. It was rope start, with the rope pull next to the driver's seat. The throttle was a hand unit like a motorcycle. It was cheap and it did keep the rain off.
When I was in high school I could repair televisions. Most of the time you could just see which tube didn't light up. Now I can't repair a TV because they are too complicated. Anyone want to got back to easy-to-repair vacuum tube electronics? I don't.
I do acknowledge that taller rims are "in" But some cars don't require a 16" rim or bigger to achieve the same effect such as vans and more antiseptic looking cars.
sadolite I feel your pain, the auto industry is a joke in so many ways. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts as to how and change it, though.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Mirza 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:
|0 points
|Agreed with after the debate:
|0 points
|Who had better conduct:
|1 point
|Had better spelling and grammar:
|1 point
|Made more convincing arguments:
|3 points
|Used the most reliable sources:
|2 points
|Total points awarded:
Reasons for voting decision: Countering votebomb.
Vote Placed by bozotheclown 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:
|0 points
|Agreed with after the debate:
|0 points
|Who had better conduct:
|1 point
|Had better spelling and grammar:
|1 point
|Made more convincing arguments:
|3 points
|Used the most reliable sources:
|2 points
|Total points awarded:
Reasons for voting decision: That was a delicious round!!!
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:
|0 points
|Agreed with after the debate:
|0 points
|Who had better conduct:
|1 point
|Had better spelling and grammar:
|1 point
|Made more convincing arguments:
|3 points
|Used the most reliable sources:
|2 points
|Total points awarded:
Reasons for voting decision: Starting in R2, Pro began making a TON of claims with little to no back up, many of them value judgements which I don't share. As seeing as no link was provided to back up the claim, there was no reason for me to believe them. The lack of sources from Pro really did harm his arguments on just about all points. It made it all too easy for Con to simply refute with simple sources.
Vote Placed by imabench 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:
|0 points
|Agreed with after the debate:
|0 points
|Who had better conduct:
|1 point
|Had better spelling and grammar:
|1 point
|Made more convincing arguments:
|3 points
|Used the most reliable sources:
|2 points
|Total points awarded:
Reasons for voting decision: At first I thought it was about car companies but after reading the arguments the Con made some very good points about why cars have gotton heavier/safer and all that and at the end he provided more convincing arguments then the pro did. Pretty good (but unnecessarily long) debate :)
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.


text:
At a press conference put together by Faith in Community, Fresno State student Brenda Noriega described her own father's fear of living as an illegal immigrant. "He was afraid all of the time to go to the grocery store and be deported," said Noriega. Noriega shared her father's story as Faith in Community launched its "Campaign for Citizenship." The group doesn't just want immigration reform; they want citizenship for an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants.
Fresno State professor Matthew Jendian said some of those undocumented immigrants are his students. "It can be better for those students and their families. So they can come out of the shadows and have a life without fear. It's amazing how they're performing in those conditions," said Jendian.
Faith in Community is a part of the PICO National Network, which believes comprehensive immigration reform should include citizenship for the undocumented within seven years. And the buzz is growing in Washington. On Tuesday, Tea Party favorite Senator Rand Paul told the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Republicans need to get behind comprehensive immigration reform.
But Michael Der Manouel, Jr. with the Fresno County Lincoln Club told Action News any immigration solution needs to begin with infrastructure. "A lot of this discussion is moot because even if we pass a bill, I don't think the government can deliver the bill, the executions. We're going to have an 8-10 year wait no matter what... How come we're not fixing that? We could do that now," said Der Manouel, Jr.


text:
In common with all other heritage image libraries, the British Library charges fees for the reproduction of images from its collection for such uses as inclusion in publications, exhibitions, marketing campaigns and public electronic media.
If you are purchasing an image for one off, personal use you do not have to seek permission.
If you wish to reproduce our images, you will need to obtain our permission.
Obtaining permission is also known as clearing reproduction rights to the image(s). More information on permissions is available in our FAQs.
Please get in touch for our current prices.
NB: The Library will impose a £5.00 administration fee for all cancellations. A fee will not be charged if the error is made by the Library.
To apply for Reproduction Rights please complete our Permissions Application form and email to email@example.com. For help in completing the form, please refer to our Guidance notes.
For all other Permissions enquires please do contact us.


text:
The best way to get a jump start on your office's 2016 Legal Food Frenzy points total happens this week.
All you have to do is get your pros to Turn Orange -- actually wear orange -- for a day. On Thursday, Sept. 3, get the gang together, snap a photo, send it to firstname.lastname@example.com and voila! 100 bonus points toward the 10th annual Legal Food Frenzy competition.
The event is part of Hunger Action Month in September and is designed to bring attention to the food needs of Virginians.
The Virginia Bar Association has taken the lead in promoting hunger awareness and assistance through its involvement in the statewide Legal Food Frenzy, held each April. Every year, a committee of the Young Lawyers Division coordinates sign-ups across Virginia for the food and fund drive.
Since the campaign began, the legal community has raised the equivalent of almost 12.8 million pounds of food to benefit food-insecure individuals throughout the commonwealth.
Remember Me
10 hours agoVBA President-elect Recognizes Teacher of the Year
7/26/2018C-SPAN To Re-Broadcast VBA Debate July 26 at 8 p.m.
8/15/2018Virginia Beach Mix & Mingle Happy Hour
8/21/2018Bankruptcy Law Section Council


text:
South Florida upsets Temple 58-44
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- South Florida gave the Temple Owls an early preview of the Big East's grinding style, and the Bulls added another upset to the NCAA tournament.
Victor Rudd Jr. and Anthony Collins each scored 17 points, and the Bulls shook off a frigid first 20 minutes, upsetting fifth-seeded Temple 58-44 on Friday night in the Midwest Regional.
The No. 12 seeded Bulls (22-13) took it to the Atlantic 10 regular season champ with their bruising, Big East-style play and held Temple 20 points below its previous season low in scoring.
That allowed the Bulls, who beat California 65-54 in Dayton on Wednesday night, to overcome a first half in which they went nearly 16 minutes without a field goal and missed 22 consecutive. In their third NCAA tournament, the Bulls will play No. 13 seed Ohio, a 65-60 winner against Michigan, on Sunday.
Khalif Wyatt led Temple (24-8) with 19 points, and Rahlir Hollis-Jefferson had 10.
The Owls came into the tournament saying anything less than a regional semifinal would be a disappointment. Now they have some explaining to do after shooting a season-low 35.7 percent (15 of 42) for the game. Ramone Moore came in leading the Owls with 17.7 points per game. He finished with five, his third game this season in single digits.
South Florida outrebounded Temple 37-28 and had a big edge outside the arc, where the Bulls hit 6 of 8 in the second half. Temple did outshoot South Florida overall (34 percent, 17 of 50), but the Bulls hit 14 of 23 in the second half.
Maybe it was fatigue from playing 48 hours earlier combined with travel to Nashville. The opening minutes were so ugly -- with both teams racing up and down the floor missing shots -- that Rudd put up his hand and motioned at his teammates to slow down just a bit after he stole the ball back.
The Bulls couldn't have missed more shots in the first half if they tried, going nearly 16 minutes without a field goal and missing 22 straight.
Somehow, they flipped a switch at halftime, hitting six of their first seven. Hugh Robertson tied it at 19 with a big dunk in the first minute, and Wyatt answered with a jumper with 17:56 remaining. That was Temple's own first field goal since T.J. DiLeo's layup with 6:34 left in the first half.
Collins scored on a layup, then Shaun Noriega hit a long 3-pointer to give South Florida its first lead of the game at 24-21 with 16:54 to go.
The Bulls hit nine of their first 11 to start the second half, part of a 31-6 stretch in rallying from their largest deficit at 19-8. They finished the spurt in style, too. Toarlyn Fitzpatrick hit a bucket, then connected on consecutive 3-pointers. Rudd gave South Florida its biggest lead adding a third straight 3, putting the Bulls up 39-25 with 12:03 left.
Temple, which averaged 76.1 points during the season, came back with 11 straight points capped by a 3-pointer by Wyatt with 5:44 left. Rudd answered with a 3, then Wyatt was called for a technical after he complained that no foul was called when he drove to the basket and missed.
Rudd hit his fourth 3-pointer with 2:34 to push the lead back to 48-38, and the Bulls finished off their second consecutive NCAA win.


text:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Ducks coach Randy Carlyle was circumspect about potential lineup changes before Wednesday's Game 4, saying that he and his staff would evaluate and look to put out the team best capable of winning but he decided to shake things up on Wednesday with three new players in the lineup, as he dressed seven defenseman.
After a lackluster effort in Sunday's 4-3 loss to the Predators in Game 3, Carlyle elected to go with a bit more experience and, perhaps, bit more sandpaper. Back in the lineup for the first time since Game 1 was forward Jarkko Ruutu. In addition, the Ducks dressed defensemen Andreas Lilja and Andy Sutton, both of whom made their playoff debuts this season. Sutton played in only two regular-season games after Feb. 19.
Scratched for Anaheim were forwards Kyle Palmieri and Brad Winchester along defenseman Sheldon Brookbank.
Ruutu, 35, has played in 56 career playoff games with 5 goals and 5 assists and a minus-3 rating to go with 112 penalty minutes. He played 73 regular-season games, totaling 3 goals and 9 assists and 97 penalty minutes.
Lilja, with 53 career playoff games, was a member of Detroit's 2008 Stanley Cup-winning team.
Palmieri, a 20-year-old, played only 10 games in the regular season for Anaheim and Game 3 was the first playoff game of his career. He was one of four rookies in that game who suited up for Anaheim.
Winchester has played in 23 career playoff games with 1 goal and 2 assists.


text:
Know more about this business than we do? Cool! Please submit any corrections or missing details you may have.Help us make it right
Be the first YellowBot user to add photos or videos of LLO BRI BAIT & TACKLE
Llo Bri Bait & Tackle was founded in 2004, and is located at 113 N Main St in Montgomery. It employs 2 employees and is generating approximately $93,000.00 in annual revenue.
Llo Bri Bait & Tackle is located at 113 N Main St, Montgomery, IL. This business specializes in Fishing.
If you don't see your business listed on YellowBot, please add your business listing.
YellowBot wants to get your input! If you have a comment, find a bug or think of something neat we should do, let us know by emailing us.
© 2007-2018 Solfo, Inc. – All rights reserved


text:
Every time when we intend purchasing leather jackets, we consider two facets mainly: first, the genuineness of the leather, and second, the budget of the jacket. Well, if you're looking for a authentic jackets for men or women, you may need certainly to make change with your budget somewhat. It's inevitable; authentic leather would allow you to pay extra. If the imitation faux leather jackets tend not to fit your flavor, you should be somewhat more generous for paying some cents additional. Therefore, you must stick by the first products when strategy to shop an exclusive jacket for you or a beloved one.
The first factor, the genuineness of the leather, is incredibly significant when you wish for a authentic bit. Will it be your first jacket? If so, you should be somewhat aware while choosing the fabrics of the leather jacket. While selecting a girls or men's leather jacket from any store, assess whether the dealers ensure of the 100% guarantee on the leather. Just after ensuring the genuineness of the leather, you should prepare yourself to pay. While scrutinizing the same, you should inquire which creature's leather was used in the garment. Most of the leather bomber jackets use cow or sheep leather, but they're not constantly likewise best. On the other hand, it is possible to choose purchasing coats manufactured from lamb leather. The jackets made of lamb-leather are light and comfy to put on. Moreover, the lamb-leather coats have a great crest-free touch over your skin.
Despite what many people used to think, motorcycle jackets are also cool and trendy to wear. Plus there are many different biker jackets to choose from and they look great on both men and women. So don't be afraid to try something new and rock a motorcycle jacket, you will impress many people!
There are a wide variety of jackets to choose from so don't just choose unless you really like them. Some new styles like the Assassins Creed clothing can be a good choice too if you are looking for style.
If you're looking for a leather jacket for girls, you also had better see the lining of the jacket. Many people skip this component while making a selection and go by the leather quality alone. The look and style of the jacket is also important. You don't want to spend a lot of money on a nice new jacket and it doesn't look good on you.
Men's fashion is inherently different from women's fashion. Men's fashion is geared more towards maturity than creativity. You need to abstain from seeming as though you are somebody who hasn't grown up yet or worse, somebody who's stuck in his past. You need to quit resembling a kid and dress like a man. The primary thing you ought to do to shed your boyish gaze is giving up on your basic Tees. Perhaps you cherish them and you might think that they are comfortable. Many men wear them relentlessly and it is understandable why you might be reluctant to give that comfort up. Be that as it may, you need to quit wearing them.
Understanding Why You Need to Avoid Graphic T-Shirts
You have such a large number of better alternatives. In spite of mainstream thinking, they don't make you look amusing, upbeat or unique. Indeed, on the grounds that each other person is donning a basic tee as well, you'll simply mix into the group. In addition, individuals partner them with folks who decline to grow up. You don't need that when you are trying to be a fashionable man. Simply take a gander at the motion pictures.
You'll never see an extreme, action movie main character or a smooth romantic comedy heartthrob wearing a basic tee. The main time you'll see a basic tee is a point at which the character is either a man-youngster, a real youngster, or a bum.Shirts ought to skim the body without being any baggier in one area than another, and ought to fit legitimately around the shoulders the greater part of all. What's more, unless you are a larger breed and must choose between limited options, short sleeves ought to be sufficiently free from your arms that you can get a finger or two under the sleeve. This is the norm.
Many people think that men, in general, do not care about their appearance just because they do not follow fashion, yet this is not the case at all. Men do care, just not in the way women do. Perhaps as a man you need to dress better, yet most style counsel spins around suiting up or just around whatever's in vogue this season. Be that as it may, that is not what you're searching for. You simply need to improve on theearly introduction of individuals you meet in ordinary life, so you would be able to make a great first impression.
Understanding Maturity as Key to Men's Fashion
You simply need to look great in your garments without looking excessively gaudy. You simply need to resemble a superiorly dressed rendition of you. You would also get a kick out of the chance to keep it easygoingand effortless while looking cool at the same time. So what you're truly searching for is some easygoing style tips for folks who need to look sharp outside of a suit and tie. All things considered, numerous men approach their easygoing style from the wrong point. They mean to look energetic. Be that as it may, in the event that you need to look fashionable, you ought to dependably plan to look like an adult.
This is due to the fact that development is an appealing quality in men. Development, all things considered, is the thing that isolates the men from the young boys. The development indicates manliness and charges admiration, and it's a quality you need individuals to find in you. That doesn't mean you need to dress like your father. It doesn't mean you need to dress old. It just means you need to abstain from depicting yourself as a young person unless you really are a youngster.


text:
Share This Post On:
Salary: Attractive
Resource Intermediaries Limited is recruiting to fill the vacant position below:
Job Title: Head, Fleet Management
Job Location: Lagos, Nigeria
Educational Qualification: B. Sc. in a relevant course
Years of Experience: Minimum of 5 Years in a Senior Fleet Management Position preferably from a leasing company.
Other Requirements:
- To manage the fleet management services of the company
- To develop new business opportunities and ensuring existing businesses are optimally serviced.
- To coordinate repairs, maintenance and track performance of fleet operations.
Salary: Attractive
Reports: The Executive Director
Apply Before: Not Specified
How to Apply: Interested and qualified candidates should Click Here to Apply


text:
Robin Thicke and Pharrell Lose 'Blurred Lines' Plagiarism Lawsuit
They now owe Marvin Gaye's family $7.3 million.
The wild ride of the "Blurred Lines" plagiarism lawsuit has officially ended with Robin Thicke and Pharrell owing Marvin Gaye's family $7.3 million — after a jury decided that 2013's Song of the Summer did indeed borrow too much from Gaye's "Got to Give It Up." The whole mess started a year and a half ago, when Thicke and Pharrell filed a preemptive lawsuit against Gaye's family, which led to the Gayes filing their own lawsuit, which led to a deposition, which led to Thicke's Afroman Defense, which led to a trial, which led to today's decision. Go ahead and give them the money, Robin — you know they want it.


text:
Knauer Realtycorp, founded by Leonard Knauer in 1974, offers professional real estate services to the New Jersey corporate and business community. Mr. Knauer personally oversees the projects taken on by Knauer Realtycorp in an effort to ensure that every step of each transaction conforms to his highest levels of professionalism. With over 75 years combined experience in the industrial and commercial brokerage industry, the Knauer team is able to provide personalized attention to their exclusive representation of customers and owners. Knauer Realtycorp has successfully negotiated many of the regions major transactions.
Knauer Realtycorp's full real estate services include:


text:
Effective OHCs in Healthcare
Occupational Health Committees (OHCs) are required in the workplace under current Saskatchewan occupational health and safety legislation which sets out the structure for the workplace responsibility system (IRS). This is the primary mechanism for the employer and employees to work together and resolve health and safety concerns.
Following OHC Level I and Level II training, SASWH offers additional support to assist OHC members in applying the classroom theory to the workplace. The Effective OHCs in Health Care program consists of nine components to assist OHCs to become more effective as health and safety becomes standard daily work. Committee members will learn their responsibilities, help the employer identify and assess workplace hazards as well as develop and monitor policies, programs and plans. This will achieve the goal of having a safe work environment.
This course is designed to meet or exceed provincial legislation and industry best practices for occupational health committees.
Duration and Materials:
Each module is a one hour presentation. All modules can be completed in a four hour presentation. Handouts are available. The modules are:
- OHC Orientation and Training – an overview of OHC member roles, responsibilities and how to create, support and contribute to a safe and healthy environment.
- OHC Meeting Success – reviews meeting frequency, agenda, conduct, Minutes, quorum and co-chair responsibilities.
- Terms of Reference – looks at the purpose and composition of terms of reference that includes meetings, co-chair duties, terms of office and reporting structure.
- Effective OHC Members – will discuss duties and functions, attributes, how to select members and workforce engagement.
- OHC Goal Setting – how to alignment with the organizations goals, knowing the organizations current situation.
- Effective OHC Inspections – understanding the purpose, a high level review of the process, knowing the essentials and three types of an effective inspection. How inspections are a key component to the organization's safety management system.
- Effective Investigations – understanding the purpose, determining the root cause of incidents, making recommendations and identifying trends.
- Developing Recommendations – includes the development of a formal recommendation, content and who should receive a recommendation.
- Self-assessment Checklist – to benchmark progress and assist with goal setting.
Participants are encouraged to bring a copy of the legislation to reference, highlight, and flag and make notes in. Recommended class size is 25.
Target Audience:
OHC members; anyone who has leadership responsibilities for effective OHCs.
Specific Learning:
Highlights will be given to legislative responsibilities. Guidance and follow up is offered by SASWH.


text:
This powerful tool uses a completely new data analysis engine to fix AutoCAD file corruption.
Sacramento, CA (PRWEB) February 12, 2014
Fix Toolbox, a company known for its growing product portfolio and deep expertise in the field of data recovery and repair, is happy to announce the availability of the most recent and advanced version of DWG Fix Toolbox. This program can be downloaded and installed in seconds, allowing users to start data recovery and fix AutoCAD files immediately after a data corruption incident. http://www.autocad.fixtoolbox.com/
The newest version of DWG Fix Toolbox is based on a completely revamped recovery engine that uses cutting-edge algorithms to yield excellent results time after time. The program was created to be used by people with different backgrounds and with different levels of computer skills, which is why the interface has been significantly simplified to contain a minimum of control elements. http://www.fixtoolbox.com/
Users can open, preview and restore the contents of corrupted DWG image files with just a few mouse clicks in the program's convenient recovery wizard. The UI of the program transforms the technically complex recovery procedure into a routine that even complete novices will not have any problems with. DWG Fix Toolbox supports all major formats of the AutoCAD DWG format, from 2000 through 2011, and allows users to choose the version of the output file in case there are several copies of AutoCAD installed on the user's system. The program does not modify the source files it works with and lets users resort to alternative recovery methods, if necessary. http://www.fixtoolbox.com/products.html
"We are glad to have brought another product from our portfolio in compliance with the highest performance and efficiency standards of today's market," explained Boris Bobrov, Senior Product Manager at Fix Toolbox. "The new core and updated algorithms do their job and make the recovery of AutoCAD documents a breeze, and we hope that the product will be warmly accepted by the public."
The demo version of DWG Fix Toolbox is available for download on the official website of Fix Toolbox. http://www.fixtoolbox.com/download.html


text:
Thursday, September 3, 2009
La Befana blouse from SmartBargains!
There's nothing like a printed blouse to show off your favourite jeans! This one by La Befana features a graphic floral Kabuki print; the keyhole neckline and elasticized sleeves add a dash of panache. It's $49.99 from SmartBargains. Check out some other sweet deals in SmartBargain's 10-hour Designer Dash!


text:
Learn a language today with Rosetta Stone 24 Month Online Subscription. Choose from the following languages: Spanish, Italian, French, German, Arabic, Japanese, Chinese, and more! Access the online course on your computer to learn from home; pick up where you left off and learn on the go on your tablet or mobile phone. The most trusted language learning software for more than 25 years. From the simple to the complex, gain the confidence to share your ideas and opinions. Develop conversational skills to plan adventures, care for your health, and move abroad. Talk about government, work, movies, and citizenship. Discuss family and traditions, and celebrate success.Subscribe and start learning how to speak French
Sync your progress across computers and mobile devices
Perfect your pronunciation with TruAccent–our patented speech recognition engine compares your voice with millions of native speakers over 100 times per second.
Extended Learning expands on your core lessons with: Phrasebook*, Stories, and Audio CompanionTM
Browser Platforms: Internet Explorer 11, Chrome 50, Firefox 46, Safari 9.1, Edge 13 or greater, Latest version of Adobe Flash Player


text:
Licensed To Teach
- Zumba Basic
License to teach regular Zumba® classes.
- Aqua Zumba
License to teach the 'pool party' workout for all ages using the Zumba® formula and traditional aqua techniques.
- Zumbatomic
License to teach the custom-designed kids program that blends dance-fitness routines with fun games and high-energy music.


text:
If you're wondering where I've vanished or if I've died, let me tell you that nothing of that sort has happened.
I haven't been writing much. No, I am not busy either. If you were on Instagram, you would have known that all I do is consume gallons of coffee. But the good part is, I have been reading a lot.
Let me tell you this though. A lot of terrible questions have been lurking in my head.
Why am I unable to string words together to form meaningful sentences? Why am I unable to produce stories out of my imagination? Am I waiting for an inspiration to appear from thin air? Or is this just a phase that'll pass?
I have tried looking for reasons too.
Maybe it is because I am watching too much of Gossip Girl. I hit my head to the wall two weeks ago, maybe it is all that? Or perhaps I am waiting for something dramatic to happen in my life.
Funnily enough, I am able to do my writing work at office or the freelance ones. Of course, it might be the fear of not getting paid that is driving me to write them.
So, no more Gossip Girl. And no more binge watching sitcoms that are lame.
In fact, no more waiting for inspiration like Carrie Bradshaw.
Let's see how this works.
P.S. I have a nostalgic post lined up in a day or two. Send me hate mail if I don't blog regularly.