Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
36 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what jetjock graced us with on 1/22/2017
9:18 AM:

> Rinaldi wrote:
>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>
>>> On 01/21/2017 09:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>
>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>
>>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>>
>>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the working
>>>>> class.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>>
>>>> Rinaldi
>>>>
>>>
>>> All I know is their mansions looked pretty nice when I toured them.
>>
>>
>> Yeah.  You  don't hear too much about the ones that were killed or died
>> in poverty.
>>
>> Here's a summary with a Snopes tint:
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/pricepaid.asp
>
> Great read. Thanks Rinaldi.
+2

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/lcey2ex
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ed Mullen-10
In reply to this post by jetjock-4
On 1/22/2017 at 12:18 PM, jetjock's prodigious digits fired off with
great aplomb:

> Rinaldi wrote:
>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>
>>> On 01/21/2017 09:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>
>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>
>>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>>
>>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the working
>>>>> class.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>>
>>>> Rinaldi
>>>>
>>>
>>> All I know is their mansions looked pretty nice when I toured them.
>>
>>
>> Yeah.  You  don't hear too much about the ones that were killed or died
>> in poverty.
>>
>> Here's a summary with a Snopes tint:
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/pricepaid.asp
>
> Great read. Thanks Rinaldi.

I just scanned it after seeing this at the top:

"A popular essay outlines the fates of the signers of the Declaration of
Independence, but many of its details are inaccurate."

Unfortunately, they don't seem to point out any of the inaccuracies.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the
OTHERS here for?
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Daniel
On 1/22/2017 2:41 AM, Daniel wrote:

> On 22/01/2017 5:34 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 1/21/2017 8:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>
>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>
>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the working
>>>> class.
>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>
>>> Rinaldi
>>>
>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>
> "A president must be at least 35 years old" ... Why?? Is it written into
> your constitution, or something??
>
Yes,  Actually, the qualification is for Senator, but same for president.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Ed Mullen-10
On 1/22/2017 12:16 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

> On 1/22/2017 at 12:18 PM, jetjock's prodigious digits fired off with
> great aplomb:
>> Rinaldi wrote:
>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>
>>>> On 01/21/2017 09:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the working
>>>>>> class.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rinaldi
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All I know is their mansions looked pretty nice when I toured them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah.  You  don't hear too much about the ones that were killed or died
>>> in poverty.
>>>
>>> Here's a summary with a Snopes tint:
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/pricepaid.asp
>>
>> Great read. Thanks Rinaldi.
>
> I just scanned it after seeing this at the top:
>
> "A popular essay outlines the fates of the signers of the Declaration of
> Independence, but many of its details are inaccurate."
>
> Unfortunately, they don't seem to point out any of the inaccuracies.
>
>
Point is, that many of the signers, did give their lives, and property
for signing the document.  They weren't kidding.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Disaster Master
In reply to this post by WaltS48-3
On Fri Jan 20 2017 20:52:02 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), WaltS48
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 01/20/2017 08:24 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>> Pure BS.  WHY would he eliminate the very part of the constitution that
>> resulted in his election?
>>
> <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/president-elect-trump-reaffirms-his-long-standing-opposition-electoral-college-and-favors-nationwide>
>
> But Disaster Master indicates in a post;
>
>> He changed his tune once he actually understood the genius of the
>> Electoral College.
> Citation please?

Ok, it looks like he actually is still conflicted, as his responses to
the 60 minutes interview indicate support for both ways in your linked
article.

Here is another one one week later:

http://www.redstate.com/jimjamitis/2016/11/22/donald-trump-takes-yet-another-position-electoral-college/

I agree with the article author that he is in dire need of a remediation
class on our Constitutional Republican form of government.

Note: I am not a rabid DT supporter, and I did not vote for him. That
said, I was ecstatic (and pleasantly surprised) that Hillary was shown
the door, it restored my faith in the average voter at least to a degree.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Disaster Master
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!

This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
certain things that are not true.

The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
average big time.

Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
same as ours today.

Just one reference online:

"They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the past
century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
average life expectancy down."

From:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Disaster Master
In reply to this post by WaltS48-3
On Fri Jan 20 2017 18:01:37 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), WaltS48
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 01/20/2017 02:17 PM, Disaster Master wrote:
>> On 1/20/2017, 1:58:02 PM, WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> He added later: “You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your
>>>> hopes and your dreams will define our American destiny.”
>>> ;-) ;-)
>>>
>>> That really would make America great.
>> He changed his tune once he actually understood the genius of the
>> Electoral College.
>>
>> The vast majority of Hillary's support - and ALL of her excess popular
>> votes - came from just 2 or 3 high population places - New York City,
>> and the large population cities in California.
>>
>> The genius of the Electoral College prevents our country from being run
>> by a bunch of Socialists concentrated in a few high population areas
>> (cities/State(s)).
> I guess you failed to notice that the Senate and Congress are elected by
> the popular vote and what party has the majority in both.
>
> Talking about being concentrated in a few high population areas.

Not sure what you are implying here. Reps and Senators are elected by
their constituencies, all local in nature.

Also, Senators used to be to provide a balance of power to the States,
and were appointed by the State legislatures of each State. Changing
their selection to the popular vote was just one more step down the road
to changing America's system to a pure 'democracy', that all of the
founders of this country abhorred.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Direct_Election_Senators.htm

> If the electors are to prevent our country from being run by an unstable
> and unqualified candidate.

That is not the purpose of the Electoral College. That is just what some
people want you to believe.

As I said before, the purpose of the EC is to make sure only a few
high-population states cannot impose their will on the rest of the
country (much of which is more rural and much less densely populated).

This, as I said, was genius. It prevents the silly, mislead socialists
in NYC from imposing their will on me.

> Why do the candidates only campaign in the
> states that will win them the most electoral votes and ignore the rest
> of the country,

Your question answers itself. They generally only focus their campaigns
in those states that they feel may be 'swing' states - meaning, it isn't
clear which way the state may go.

California always goes democrat because the high population cities are
filled with leftists who always vote democrat,. so it didn't make sense
for DT to campaign there. He did, however, campaign in states that
Republicans usually lose (and ignore) because he felt he had a chance of
swinging, and it ended up paying off big time.

What is telling in this election is that Hillary ignored states that
historically have always gone democrat, and that ended up costing her
dearly - thank god.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

jetjock-4
In reply to this post by Ed Mullen-10
Ed Mullen wrote:

> On 1/22/2017 at 12:18 PM, jetjock's prodigious digits fired off with
> great aplomb:
>
>> Rinaldi wrote:
>>
>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>
>>>> On 01/21/2017 09:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the working
>>>>>> class.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rinaldi
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All I know is their mansions looked pretty nice when I toured them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah.  You  don't hear too much about the ones that were killed or died
>>> in poverty.
>>>
>>> Here's a summary with a Snopes tint:
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/pricepaid.asp
>>
>>
>> Great read. Thanks Rinaldi.
>
>
> I just scanned it after seeing this at the top:
>
> "A popular essay outlines the fates of the signers of the Declaration of
> Independence, but many of its details are inaccurate."
>
> Unfortunately, they don't seem to point out any of the inaccuracies.
>
>
Evidently, you did not read the whole page. After the post that was
supposedly "fact", they went on to give the "true" facts about each
statement below.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

WaltS48-3
On 01/23/2017 12:25 PM, jetjock wrote:

> Ed Mullen wrote:
>> On 1/22/2017 at 12:18 PM, jetjock's prodigious digits fired off with
>> great aplomb:
>>
>>> Rinaldi wrote:
>>>
>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>
>>>>> On 01/21/2017 09:06 AM, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> WaltS48 decreed, Read These Runes!:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our founding fathers were very wise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To protect the rich elite 1% that they were. They weren't the
>>>>>>> working
>>>>>>> class.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have any idea just how young most of those guys were?  Madison
>>>>>> was in his early 20's for chrissakes.  Franklin was the old fart and
>>>>>> more bohemian than elitist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rinaldi
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All I know is their mansions looked pretty nice when I toured them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah.  You  don't hear too much about the ones that were killed or died
>>>> in poverty.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a summary with a Snopes tint:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/pricepaid.asp
>>>
>>>
>>> Great read. Thanks Rinaldi.
>>
>>
>> I just scanned it after seeing this at the top:
>>
>> "A popular essay outlines the fates of the signers of the Declaration
>> of Independence, but many of its details are inaccurate."
>>
>> Unfortunately, they don't seem to point out any of the inaccuracies.
>>
>>
> Evidently, you did not read the whole page. After the post that was
> supposedly "fact", they went on to give the "true" facts about each
> statement below.

The alternate facts weren't the true facts. Shocking!

>
>
> Doctor Who: You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alters their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views, which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.

 From the Face of Evil: Part Four which aired in 1977.

<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/doctor-who-alternative-facts_us_58860d95e4b070d8cad3b0e1>


--
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by WaltS48-3
On 1/23/2017 9:46 AM, Disaster Master wrote:

> On Fri Jan 20 2017 18:01:37 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), WaltS48
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 01/20/2017 02:17 PM, Disaster Master wrote:
>>> On 1/20/2017, 1:58:02 PM, WaltS48 <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> He added later: “You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your
>>>>> hopes and your dreams will define our American destiny.”
>>>> ;-) ;-)
>>>>
>>>> That really would make America great.
>>> He changed his tune once he actually understood the genius of the
>>> Electoral College.
>>>
>>> The vast majority of Hillary's support - and ALL of her excess popular
>>> votes - came from just 2 or 3 high population places - New York City,
>>> and the large population cities in California.
>>>
>>> The genius of the Electoral College prevents our country from being run
>>> by a bunch of Socialists concentrated in a few high population areas
>>> (cities/State(s)).
>> I guess you failed to notice that the Senate and Congress are elected by
>> the popular vote and what party has the majority in both.
>>
>> Talking about being concentrated in a few high population areas.
>
> Not sure what you are implying here. Reps and Senators are elected by
> their constituencies, all local in nature.
>
> Also, Senators used to be to provide a balance of power to the States,
> and were appointed by the State legislatures of each State. Changing
> their selection to the popular vote was just one more step down the road
> to changing America's system to a pure 'democracy', that all of the
> founders of this country abhorred.
>
> https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Direct_Election_Senators.htm
>
>> If the electors are to prevent our country from being run by an unstable
>> and unqualified candidate.
>
> That is not the purpose of the Electoral College. That is just what some
> people want you to believe.
>
> As I said before, the purpose of the EC is to make sure only a few
> high-population states cannot impose their will on the rest of the
> country (much of which is more rural and much less densely populated).
>
> This, as I said, was genius. It prevents the silly, mislead socialists
> in NYC from imposing their will on me.
>
>> Why do the candidates only campaign in the
>> states that will win them the most electoral votes and ignore the rest
>> of the country,
>
> Your question answers itself. They generally only focus their campaigns
> in those states that they feel may be 'swing' states - meaning, it isn't
> clear which way the state may go.
>
> California always goes democrat because the high population cities are
> filled with leftists who always vote democrat,. so it didn't make sense
> for DT to campaign there. He did, however, campaign in states that
> Republicans usually lose (and ignore) because he felt he had a chance of
> swinging, and it ended up paying off big time.
>

Even so, he got 25% of the vote.  Probably would have been 40% had
illegals not been allowed to vote.


> What is telling in this election is that Hillary ignored states that
> historically have always gone democrat, and that ended up costing her
> dearly - thank god.
>

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Daniel
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:

> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>
> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
> certain things that are not true.
>
> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
> average big time.
>
> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
> same as ours today.
>
> Just one reference online:
>
> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the past
> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
> average life expectancy down."
>
> From:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>
It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who reached
the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.46 Build identifier: 20161213183751
or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.38 Build identifier: 20150903203501
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

WaltS48-3
On 01/24/2017 04:44 AM, Daniel wrote:

> On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
>> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
>>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>
>> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
>> certain things that are not true.
>>
>> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
>> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
>> average big time.
>>
>> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
>> same as ours today.
>>
>> Just one reference online:
>>
>> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the past
>> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
>> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
>> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
>> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
>> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
>> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
>> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
>> average life expectancy down."
>>
>> From:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>>
>>
> It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who reached
> the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
> through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
> to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!
>

<http://buffalonews.com/2017/01/24/alternative-facts/>

--
Visit Pittsburgh <http://www.visitpittsburgh.com/>
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by Daniel
On 2017-01-24 04:44, Daniel wrote:

> On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
>> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
>>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>
>> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
>> certain things that are not true.
>>
>> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
>> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
>> average big time.
>>
>> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
>> same as ours today.
>>
>> Just one reference online:
>>
>> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the past
>> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
>> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
>> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
>> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
>> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
>> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
>> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
>> average life expectancy down."
>>
>> From:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>>
> It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who reached
> the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
> through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
> to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!

That's why insurance companies hire actuaries. ;-)

Search for "life expectancy by age". Here's one hit:

https://www.sunlife.ca/ca/Learn+and+Plan/Tools+and+Calculators/Life+expectancy+calculator?vgnLocale=en_CA

Have fun (?)

--
Wolf K.
https://kirkwood40.blogspot.com
It's called "opinion" because it's not knowledge.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ron Hunter
On 1/24/2017 8:11 AM, Wolf K. wrote:

> On 2017-01-24 04:44, Daniel wrote:
>> On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
>>> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron Hunter
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average life
>>>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>>>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>>
>>> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
>>> certain things that are not true.
>>>
>>> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
>>> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
>>> average big time.
>>>
>>> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
>>> same as ours today.
>>>
>>> Just one reference online:
>>>
>>> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the past
>>> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
>>> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
>>> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
>>> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
>>> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
>>> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
>>> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
>>> average life expectancy down."
>>>
>>> From:
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>>>
>>>
>> It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who reached
>> the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
>> through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
>> to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!
>
> That's why insurance companies hire actuaries. ;-)
>
> Search for "life expectancy by age". Here's one hit:
>
> https://www.sunlife.ca/ca/Learn+and+Plan/Tools+and+Calculators/Life+expectancy+calculator?vgnLocale=en_CA
>
>
> Have fun (?)
>
Wow, it says I might still be around at 87!

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Daniel
On 25/01/2017 6:40 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:

> On 1/24/2017 8:11 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>> On 2017-01-24 04:44, Daniel wrote:
>>> On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
>>>> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron
>>>> Hunter
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average
>>>>> life
>>>>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>>>>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>>>
>>>> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to imply
>>>> certain things that are not true.
>>>>
>>>> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
>>>> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
>>>> average big time.
>>>>
>>>> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
>>>> same as ours today.
>>>>
>>>> Just one reference online:
>>>>
>>>> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the
>>>> past
>>>> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average life
>>>> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in 1900
>>>> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a research
>>>> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
>>>> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
>>>> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death of 50
>>>> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
>>>> average life expectancy down."
>>>>
>>>> From:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who reached
>>> the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
>>> through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
>>> to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!
>>
>> That's why insurance companies hire actuaries. ;-)
>>
>> Search for "life expectancy by age". Here's one hit:
>>
>> https://www.sunlife.ca/ca/Learn+and+Plan/Tools+and+Calculators/Life+expectancy+calculator?vgnLocale=en_CA
>>
>>
>>
>> Have fun (?)
>>
> Wow, it says I might still be around at 87!
>
First time through, with pretty accurate data, I'm gunna live to 82
Dropped an inch in height, upped my drinking from 2 per day to 3-5 per
day and increased my weight from 230 to 250lbs and my expectancy dropped
all the way to 81!!

I know! I know!! I've got to get my weight down under 200lbs!! (83yrs
Yippee!)

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.46 Build identifier: 20161213183751
or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.38 Build identifier: 20150903203501
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Trump plans to do away with the Electoral College.

Ron Hunter
On 1/25/2017 7:01 AM, Daniel wrote:

> On 25/01/2017 6:40 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 1/24/2017 8:11 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>>> On 2017-01-24 04:44, Daniel wrote:
>>>> On 24/01/2017 2:30 AM, Disaster Master wrote:
>>>>> On Sun Jan 22 2017 01:34:47 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time), Ron
>>>>> Hunter
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> A president must be at least 35 years old.  Given that the average
>>>>>> life
>>>>>> expectancy when the constitution was written was mid 40s, this was
>>>>>> pretty old.  James Madison was 58 when he took office!
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a perfect example of how statistics can be manipulated to
>>>>> imply
>>>>> certain things that are not true.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reason that the *average* life expectancy was so low hundreds of
>>>>> years ago was because the infant mortality was so high. It skewed the
>>>>> average big time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once a person reached maturity, their average life span was almost the
>>>>> same as ours today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just one reference online:
>>>>>
>>>>> "They also point to the many life-extending medical advances of the
>>>>> past
>>>>> century as precedents, with no end in sight, and note that average
>>>>> life
>>>>> expectancy in the United States has long been rising, from 47.3 in
>>>>> 1900
>>>>> to 78.7 in 2010. Others are less sanguine. S. Jay Olshansky, a
>>>>> research
>>>>> associate at the Center on Aging at the University of Chicago, has
>>>>> pointed out that sharp reductions in infant mortality explain most of
>>>>> that rise. Even if some people lived well into old age, the death
>>>>> of 50
>>>>> percent or more of infants and children for most of history kept the
>>>>> average life expectancy down."
>>>>>
>>>>> From:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/opinion/sunday/on-dying-after-your-time.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It would be interesting to know the average age of everybody who
>>>> reached
>>>> the age of, say, five to eliminate the effects of infant mortality
>>>> through time! Or of everybody who reached the age of, say, twenty-five
>>>> to eliminate the effects of alcohol on new drivers!
>>>
>>> That's why insurance companies hire actuaries. ;-)
>>>
>>> Search for "life expectancy by age". Here's one hit:
>>>
>>> https://www.sunlife.ca/ca/Learn+and+Plan/Tools+and+Calculators/Life+expectancy+calculator?vgnLocale=en_CA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have fun (?)
>>>
>> Wow, it says I might still be around at 87!
>>
> First time through, with pretty accurate data, I'm gunna live to 82
> Dropped an inch in height, upped my drinking from 2 per day to 3-5 per
> day and increased my weight from 230 to 250lbs and my expectancy dropped
> all the way to 81!!
>
> I know! I know!! I've got to get my weight down under 200lbs!! (83yrs
> Yippee!)
>
Well, check and see what smoking or not smoking does to the numbers.
Glad I didn't get the habit.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12