Taken To Task

You know, when I talk about a gun that has taken my fancy (e.g. the gorgeous S&W Model 25 of last Friday), that doesn’t mean I think it’s the only good gun, nor even the best gun;  it just caught my eye and I felt like talking about it.

So when I drooled over the Model 25 (and 625), that didn’t mean I was ignoring others of the ilk, nor even saying ugly things about them.

Such is not the case among my Readers, yea even unto the Comments.  Saith Reader MPW250:

“Sorry, but being raised by one of the few (at the time) Colt New Service collectors, I have to disagree and go with a New Service in plain or Flat Top Target configuration.”

I know all about the New Service line — hell, back in the old Racist Republic, I used to carry a modified 1917 (shortened barrel, adapted to use moonclipped .45 ACP):

…because .45 Colt ammo was nowhere to be found in South Africa at the time, but .45 ACP was plentiful.

So don’t think I’m being dismissive of the Colt DA revolvers just because I was talking about Smiths.

And then there are the legions of Ruger devotees, such as Reader MikeL, who sent this to my email addy:

I have to disagree slightly on your choice of 45 revolver.
The model 25 is nice. Don’t get me wrong. However in addition to me being a much bigger fan of Ruger over Smith & Wesson – there is another factor.
The Ruger Redhawk 45. With the Redhawk you can not only chamber 45 ACP (using moon clips of course) but also 45 Long Colt.
This gives you a versatile tool.
Also with Ruger, according to Buffalo Bore Ammo, Ruger RedHawks can handle stout ammo. The Plus P 45 long colt approaches entry level 44 Mag level power.
And for those days when softer recoil is needed – 45 ACP or regular 45 Long Colt ammo types will do just fine.

Again:  I have nothing repeat nothing bad to say about the Redhawk — as with the 1917 above, I’ve actually owned one (albeit in the .45 LC-only version):

…and I loved the thing.

But (and I cannot stress this too strongly) on the day during which my gaze fell upon the S&W Mod 25 at Collectors, I didn’t see whether there were any Colt New Service revolvers, nor Ruger Redhawks either:  because I wasn’t looking for them.

So please:  when I drool over a gun, don’t think I’m making a comparison — unless I actually make a comparison (as I did between the two rifles chambered in 7.62x39mm last Saturday).  I know there are always different options, but let me rave on in peace.

Walking Back-Pedaling

It appears that Coca-Cola has been somewhat stung by the criticism leveled at it by their silly support of bad practices, criticism such as:

…created by Yours Truly.

So now they’ve started reversing / backpedaling / retreating:

Coca-Cola, whose CEO denounced the Georgia voting bill, is now striking a conciliatory tone after coming under pressure from conservatives.
The soda giant, which is based in Atlanta, was absent from a list of more than 500 corporations and individuals that signed a statement condemning any election legislation that would “restrict” voters from having “an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot.” The missive was placed as a two-page Wednesday ad in the New York Times and Washington Post, with the effort being organized by the Black Economic Alliance.
Coca-Cola said in a statement to the Washington Examiner on Wednesday that the company “had not seen the letter” initiated by the alliance but is “certainly open to hearing their perspective.” It said it has supported the right to vote and that it will assess how to support voting rights.
“We believe the best way to make progress now is for everyone to come together to listen, respectfully share concerns and collaborate on a path forward. We remain open to productive conversations with advocacy groups and lawmakers who may have differing views,” the company said. “It’s time to find common ground. In the end, we all want the same thing – free and fair elections, the cornerstone of our democracy.”
Coca-Cola’s Wednesday remarks are notably less confrontational than its previous statements on the Georgia voting law.

Translated from corporate weaselspeak:

“Even after the New Coke fiasco, it appears that we still haven’t figured out that our primary market is conservative people, who seem to have a problem with a law which allows their own votes to be negated by a truckload of fraudulent votes.  Who knew?  Anyway, we’ll mark time on this one because we depend on these assholes to maintain our market share in the super-sweet battery-acid drink business.”

Message to all the other giant corporations who are diving into the Sea Of Wokedom, from conservatives like myself:

We may only be about 75 million in number, but we can still do damage to your company by using your products less and less, or else withholding our business altogether.

News Roundup

Short and not-so sweet.


also, a line of Ferrari vacuum cleaners, toaster ovens and curling irons.  What the hell:  why not?


I know:  sing a song, bonk a groupie, sing a song, fight with Keith, bonk a groupie, sing a song, rip off the Beatles, bonk a groupie, sing a song, bank lots of money.  All very boring, really.


I think he’s confusing 2021 America with 1971 South Africa.


of course not.  When they’re not even going to release his name


well, they would;  they’re all fucking old-school Communists and they sing off the same song sheet.


ya thank?  [watching all American professional sports circle the drain]


so for all the vets who voted Democrat:  enjoy your problem.  Too bad about the rest.


and just so we’re all in the know, they’re not the only European country where you can bonk a middle-schooler without penalty.


considering that one usually turns off the light before going to sleep, I would imagine that any wall color would be irrelevant .


and they say engineers are boring Key word:  Scotland.


I would suggest that before he goes to jail, he be tied spreadeagled and naked to a scaffold.  Then a few serious butch lesbians are given baseball bats and turned loose on him, so that he can take a little pleasure in his own pain, fear and humiliation.  Or maybe I’m just being too harsh.

of course, by “conservatives”, they mean “conservative Communists”, i.e. Trotskyites, compared to the Stalinism they all favor.


the real question being:  54 years on, people are still singing Yesterday, Eight Days A Week, Yellow Submarine and Hard Day’s Night.  In 2065, how many people will even remember a Taylor Swift song?

Time for INSIGNIFICA:

    

One of the above is not true.

Finally, let’s do something totally different and look at a TV presenter:

That’s Stacey Dooley.

Quote Of The Day

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) joined demonstrators Saturday evening outside the police station in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, and told Americans to take to the streets unless Derek Chauvin is convicted for murder in the death of George Floyd.

“We’re looking for a guilty verdict. And we’re looking to see if all of the talk that took place and has been taking place after they saw what happened to George Floyd, if nothing does not happen, then we know that we’ve got to not only stay in the street, but we’ve got to fight for justice.”

I know that this is the moronic Maxine Waters speaking;  but I wonder if she is even aware that what she’s demanding — and the threat of what would happen should she not get her way — is the very essence of the word “terrorism”?

Monday Funnies

What day is it again?

So to get over that gagging thing, a little Italian food humor:

Some Wop humor:

And some gender-specific stuff:

And speaking of beautiful Italian women… oh hell, where to begin?  I’ll just pick one, and don’t yell at me because I didn’t pick your favorite.

Say hello to Sabrina Ferilli:

And a more recent one:

Bellissima.

Not Durable, Evergreen

I have often counseled young men to take up a trade before (or, depending on the lad, instead of) going off to college.  This is as much for some kind of income stability, of course, as it is for them to learn the value and reward of hard physical work — which every man should experience.

So when I saw this link about “Durable Trades” at Insty’s, I hurried over to see what it was all about.  And was a little disappointed.

Defining “durable” has not been easy. I wanted to know which types of businesses have been the least affected by external factors throughout history, place, governments, economic cycles, invention, and social upheaval. Which trades have endured for centuries and still exist today? Which trades are the most family-centric? And, of course, which trades do all this and still provide a living? Conversely, which trades are overly dependent on brittle systems and therefore not likely to withstand economic, societal and technological upheaval?

Granted, in a time of economic collapse or a return to Middle Ages-type living, the demand for “Instagram influencers” may not be as important as they are today (quit that cheering).  But at the same time, I have to question some of his trades because while they may have been durable in the past — and to be fair, the author doesn’t attempt to forecast anything — I’m not so sure what the future holds for them.  Here are his top trades in order (and go back to the link to see his methodology):

Shepherd (rancher, livestock farmer, dairyman)
Farmer
Midwife
Gardener (arborist, landscaper, florist)
Woodworker (cabinetmaker, “finish” carpenter)
Carpenter (a builder of structures)
Painter (siding contractor, wall covering specialist)
Cook (chef, caterer, restauranteur)
Brewer (winemaker, distiller)
Innkeeper (hotelier)

For some reason, I think that an electrician is a more durable trade than a gardener — it certainly will be, going forward — and likewise, a metalworker (blacksmith, welder, etc.) will have a better go than an innkeeper.  (I know:  there wasn’t much call for electricians back in the sixteenth century, but I’ll bet that metalworkers were in high demand.)  And since we’ve moved away from leeches and trepanning, I’m pretty sure that a doctor would have a more durable trade than a wall covering specialist.

There are basically four kinds of trade, methinks (and there is some overlap, certainly over time):

Primal:  builders (carpenters, bricklayers, stone masons, and ship builders), farmers (crops and livestock) fishermen, weavers / tailors, drovers (carts and wagons, and the trades which built them:  blacksmiths, cartwrights and wainwrights), soldiers, cooks / bakers and yes, midwives.  From the Year Dot until, say, the twelfth century, all these trades could garner for their practitioners a decent and even consistent living.

Mechanical:   engineers, electricians, [add:  plumbers, thankee ] coachbuilders, and the trades which are extensions of, or adjuncts to the earlier ones:  architects, doctors, brewers / distillers, and so on.

Services:  innkeepers, painters, gardeners, waiters, repair technicians (outside of the primal trades), prostitutes, police, teachers and the like.

Intellectual:  lawyers, software developers, accountants, entertainers (actors, musicians) and so on.  (Typically, these do not require any kind of manual labor.)

I take Groves’s point about “family-centric” trades being the most durable (cooking, building, teaching and birthing are the first that come to mind), but the extension of that thought is that as one moves further away from home and family needs, one eventually ends up with advertising account executives and marketing consultants, whose value to society is so close to zero as makes no difference.

Feel free to discuss this topic further in Comments


Note:  I’ve left “professional sportsmen” and careers like “modeling” off the list entirely.  Although these folks can earn a substantial amount, the actual number that do (as a percentage of all people who perform such activities) is tiny — far less than 1% — and the vast majority of professionals of this type earn very little.  Also, the working life of a professional sportsman is little more than a decade, less for a model, so it’s not a durable trade.  (I know, golf.  It’s not a sport, it’s a game, like snooker.)

Some may also raise an eyebrow at my inclusion of prostitution on this list, but it’s not only a durable trade (assuming you can survive it, e.g. Carroty Nell), but one you could theoretically practice for a very long time.  (Here’s a little personal anecdote.  In my three-and-a-half years as an undergraduate here in Texas, I knew personally about half a dozen girls who had been on the game, and another few who were still doing it.  All were amazingly attractive, by the way.)