OT Chinese productivity

Page 2 of 5  
On 11/14/2010 6:26 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I strongly doubt the use as a mooring tower entered into the design criteria for the framework. A big balloon doesn't add a lot of load. ISTR that was mainly hype to get renters to sign up anyway- although they did try one test-dock there, they pretty much knew the canyon updrafts would make it impossible as a regular procedure. Zeppelin company and US Navy weren't idiots- they knew where an airship could be landed.
--
aem sends...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was, at least according to the history channel built to withstand the hit of a big plane of the era (don't remember which one right off). Before the time of radar and great navigational stuff, they were concerned that a plane might hit it in the fog.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/14/2010 7:30 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:

A big (for the day) plane DID hit it in the 40s, and did amazingly little damage. I'm sure it wouldn't withstand a modern huge plane much better than WTC did, but ESB is definitely more than a 105% building.
--
aem sends...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I B25, in 1945.
http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They may have known, but it in fact was. Only a 50T load.
From the horse's mouth: http://www.esbnyc.com/tourism/tourism_facts_esbnews_july2000.cfm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/14/2010 8:58 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Still smells like a real estate developer's con job to me. Features to be added later are a standard selling point, and often never happen.
--
aem sends...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That seems to be the case, except that the building *was* designed to handle the load; framework and some of the mooring equipment was installed. Dumb idea, certainly, though Zepplins and dirigibles were dumb ideas in themselves.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/15/2010 7:54 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Technology of the times. They could travel at up to 80mph, travel around the world and to just about all corners of it. All this a dozen years before PanAm made the first commercial fixed wing transatlantic flight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_127_Graf_Zeppelin
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The Hoover Dam is equally amazing and built about the same time. I did take longer to build (5 years) because it is all foundation. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Nov 14, 12:12pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

The Hoover is like a big wedge with the point down, it will always keep itself ever tighter in the canyon with gravity.
The concrete in the Hoover was still cooling 10 years after it was poured, and had to be cooled with embedded water tubing during construction.
Yes there are still many American projects that outshine this little Chinese hotel, but I still have to wonder if American ability to actually do work will one day be completely stopped by excessive CYA requirements, as I see every day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Caesar Romano wrote the following:

<http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101112/bs_yblog_upshot/chinese-workers-build-15-story-hotel-in-just-six-days
They sure could use a good union. That should have taken at least 9 months and millions more $ to build.
--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101112/bs_yblog_upshot/chinese-worke rs-build-15-story-hotel-in-just-six-days>
Don't worry. China will experience every growing pain we did, unions included. It might just take them a while to get there. Maybe if the US executed more dishonest CEO's like China does, we might have fewer Madoffs and Enrons plaguing us. Outrageous CEO compensation is every bit as damaging to our competitiveness as unions are. Maybe even more. When even a failure of a CEO can walk away with a multimillion dollar golden parachute, who pays for that? We do.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 12:15:44 -0500, "Robert Green"

How about executing a few of the dishonest union heads, too? Same issue.

Who pays for the absurd union pensions? Why is one more important than the other? The one you choose to pick on is a few orders of magnitude less important in the grand scheme of things.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I always agree with my UAW buddies that GM and Chrysler were badly managed. Then I add that included how badly they managed the unions. They generally argue vehemently against that theory.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The worker & the company pay for the pensions, instead of paying into SS like the worker & company. Why do you call them absurd?
Somehow I got the feeling you're jealous of those who planned life better than you did. Now that's absurd.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They get both.

We're bankrupt and you're job is to play shrink on the Usenet. You're an idiot.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Exactly who is getting both? SS takes $1 after "x" amount from other sources. No federal or state employee collects both, maybe in the private sector, but as I said, you're only allowed to collect so much.

SS is in fact not part of the Budget, of course if you did your homework, you would know that. So who is the idiot?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Completely false. Go back go back to school and get a complete refund.

Clueless.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

LOL...Why do you open your mouth, to change feet? Look up government reduction, I'm not proving your an idiot, you're doing a fine job.
Also, I will supply a couple links, but you'll probably have to have someone explain them to you.
http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/499
In part: If you are under normal (or full) retirement age (FRA): When you start getting your Social Security payments, $1 in benefits will be deducted for each $2 you earn above the annual limit. For 2010 that limit is $14,160; and for 2009, that limit is the same at $14,160. Remember, the earliest age that you can receive Social Security retirement benefits remains 62 even though the FRA is rising.

LOL... This is getting old, having to point out you're the clueless one. But here goes again, only this time, you pick whatever link you can figure out to click on. http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=social+security+federal+budget&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
You appear rather ignorant, but are fast to shoot off your own foot. Interesting concept.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you saying that SS recipients cannot collect money from other sources? Completely false!

You're as stupid as they come.

At age full retirement age (65 to 67, currently) there is no reduction for earned income. There is no reduction at any age for unearned income. You're clueless.

No, stupid. That would be *you*.

Learn to read, stupid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.