Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967

  1. 2 hours ago, Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770 said:

    I was at a Mine Safety Training one time where they showed a video of a guy over in India that was going to ride up on top of a train. He stood up and grabbed the electric power line. There was a "ZZZT!", a puff of smoke and he just collapsed, DRT. It used to be available on youtube, but I don't know if it still is.


    I've seen that one.  It was disturbing....  

    • Like 3
  2. I haven't been to a gun show in over a dozen years.  For good reason, evidently - it seems that other than the more recent primer debacle, not much has changed... the only thing missing from the above descriptions are T-shirts and beef jerky.  :mellow:

    • Like 3
  3. 4 hours ago, Capt. R. Hugh Kidnme said:

    Well, I've given my own guns plenty of names. And I hate tio name others' shooting irons, but let's go with "Ole Reliable" for his gun. 


    Nope.  Sorry, Cap'n, but that would make it a Sharps ~ which it obviously ain't.  :lol:


    Now, with THAT said, my first thought was that the "checkering" appears Remington-ish - sorta.  And the action does look Mauser-ish... but brings to mind the .300 Win Mag Ruger M-77 that I bought about fifty years ago.  Which, by the way, made a most effective ground squirrel gun;  150 gr BTHP coming outta the skinny end at around 3400 fps plumb vaporized them boogers.  :rolleyes: 



    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  4. News article about a hunter who shot an "84 lb coyote" in lower Michigan ~ which turned out to be a grey wolf.  This picture was included; may or may not (likely not) be the rifle used.  So, just for the fun of it, can you identify said rifle?  :)
    (By the way ~ he is reportedly not being charged for shooting the wolf - which was where wolves weren't)  :rolleyes:




  5. 45 minutes ago, Pat Riot said:

    I see they are still allowing the scam of cash vs credit pricing.

    That has always bugged me. If you buy goods at a gas station they do not increase your price if you use a credit or debit card, yet they claim there are fees to process card payments at the pump. 

    Wait…I felt my BP rise. 

    This affects me in no way now. Gotta go……..


    That one's actually correct - more or less.


    I worked in the bankcard industry for about 22 years; literally started in the mailroom for the original MasterCharge company and ended my career as the Merchant Settlement Manager for a little bank in San Francisco (mebbe Bank of America?).  There, my department processed on average $50 - $60 million a day in deposits in 1990 dollars (over $140 million today).  Processing these transactions through an "Inter-Bank" system is unbelievably complex, and it ain't free.  During my last year with that li'l SF bank three of my management colleagues literally died, and I ended up in the cardiac ward.  I was still in my 30's.  Which was why I traded a high-paying, high-stress career for a "job" and a simple life in the country.


    Anyway, the merchants are charged a fee, ironically called the "merchant discount rate," for every transaction - typically ranging from 1% - 3%; potentially higher in riskier areas.  Early rules forbade the merchants from passing on the cost by raising the price of goods or services paid for by card; eventually, however, businesses figured out that instead they could offer customers a true "discount" for cash transactions.


    Fuel companies find it simpler to use a flat fee of about a dime or so per gallon.





    • Like 1
  6. "Strong enough to float a horse shoe.  Hot enough to make it wilt.  And if there are still a few crumbs of road apple clinging to said horse shoe, well... that'll just add to the favor."  ^_^

    • Like 3
  7. My old friend Mark and his missus hauled stakes from california's Central Valley summer before last, and headed to Tennessee.  A good guy; one of those "salt of the Earth" types.  Worked hard, raised two fine youngsters, helped us secede from a huge school district and form our own, served on the School Board for eight years - six as board president for a small district that started with one elementary and now has five award-winning schools.      


    They bought a house and settled in a semi-rural area near Jackson.  One day shortly after moving, Mark was walking his dog and came across a neighbor who was watering his lawn.  Mark meandered over to the fella and introduced himself.  The gentleman - who turned out to be a LEO - politely returned the introduction, but seemed a bit reserved.  After a moment, he asked Mark where he was from.


    Mark sighed... and confessed to being from california.  The neighbor maintained a blank expression.  Mark then added "We're here now.  We left california forever - and by God, we've moved back to America!"


    The fella slowly smiled, shook Mark's hand, and said "Welcome Home!"





    • Like 7
  8. 21 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:


    That's the main California Aqueduct. The Intellectuals at EWE SEE Merced were likely adding in all the tributaries into it and all the local irrigation canals, channels, and ditches from that and other sources.   


    Or....more likely,  just accepted the typo.


    You're spot on.  The state is laced with irrigation canals that undoubtedly make up most of the "4,000 miles."  As another sad note, most of these were built earlier in the last century to provide water to farmers.  Now, relatively little water is actually delivered to farms via these canals - or "ditches," as most of my farmer friends call 'em.  

    • Like 1
  9. 12 minutes ago, Texas Joker said:

    They haven't suggested putting micro hydro power into the canals? 


    If there is water flow wheels turning gennies  would use gravity to generate power


    Won't work.  The water is pumped through the canals ~ some, but not much, gravity feed.  


    The article mentions 4,000 miles of canals.  The california Aquaduct System canals are actually only about 400 miles.  Lessee... at a width of 110 feet, and an estimated (my estimate, based on residential solar installation cost) of roughly $10,000 per linear foot of canal cover, it'd cost something like $22 billion.  But hey... they ain't that efficient.  :rolleyes:



  10. 28 minutes ago, Sedalia Dave said:

    Just wait... To pay for all those solar panels, Emperor Newsom will add an income based surcharge to everyone's electric bill AND he'll add a matching surcharge to everyone's water bill. Got to keep everything equitable don't cha know. 


    AND rural folk with domestic wells (as in not on a public water system) for a few years now have had to put meters on their wells.  At their own expense.  On top of paying for the well (in these parts $20k - $30k), plus paying for the power power to pump the water, as well as taxes on the power and equipment.


    “[property owners] must pay an annual fee of $300 for each well plus they must meter the water and send in a monthly usage report and pay a fee for water that is pumped starting in Feb 2023....


    "What a great racket!” [a] California resident added. “The government provides no service, no support, no product, doesn’t even do the billing! That’s all on citizens. All [the government does] is cash the check.”





    • Confused 1
    • Sad 5
  11. Just saw it on the news ~ Gov Gav just announced Project Nexus - a new plan to benefit the state! 


    As we all know, california is in an almost permanent state of drought (despite record rainfall) and now has the most expensive electricity in the country. 


    The plan?  Simple!  :)


    Just cover the state's 4,000 miles of water delivery canals with solar panels!  Plenty of electricity for "free," plus it'll reduce water loss from evaporation!  ^_^


    There's gotta be some sorta science in there somewhere.  Prolly gonna be cheap, too!  :rolleyes:



    The UC Merced study showed that covering California’s approximately 4,000 miles of public water delivery infrastructure with solar panels can result in significant water, energy, and cost savings for the state. The study illustrates a savings of some 63 billion gallons of water annually – enough to irrigate 50,000 acres of farmland or meet the residential water needs of more than 2 million people.


  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.