Letters to the Editor
shannonr
Published Letters: 281 Editor's Choice: 80
-
Your doctor was right
[Read the article: Screw you for not smoking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your doctor told you:
"the stuff I'd been inhaling for 13 years had been killing me slowly; apparently it had been chivalrous enough to dispense with other germy invaders as well."
That's dead on, and it's a well-known issue with people quitting.
Almost everyone who gives up after a substantial habit (read: not "I smoked for a few years to be cool in college") reports a hellish first year of personal health.
After that though, almost everyone wonders what took them so long to want to give up.
Congratulations on surviving the difficult journey this far.
-
The New Car Rule
[Read the article: Killer smog invades children's fantasy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Have you noticed," she said, "that when you learn something new, you suddenly start seeing it everywhere? This happens to me all the time."
Indeed!
This is sometimes expressed as the "New Car Rule" which goes:
Once you've purchased a particular model of new car, suddenly you see them everywhere!
This is the beginning of a fascinating insight into how our brains work, how obsessed they are with patterns, and how they'll go on making patterns even when none really exist.
As such, it's always worth keeping the corollary of the New Car Rule in mind:
Am I seeing this new phenomenon everywhere because it is everywhere, or only because it's just been pointed out to me?
-
Ah! Now I understand!
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Consider what a previous poster considers a killer objection to cricket:
Oh, it only takes seven hours now. Sign me up!!
This, of course, is the intellectual equivalent of "I've gotten really good at sex -- I'm now down to two minutes!"
Where is it written that games have to be over in 90 minutes, or 2 hours, or an afternoon?
Cricket, with all its manifest flaws, whatever else you might say about it, is a glorious reminder that truly great things don't come in 22 minute segments neatly tied up in a bow.
A day at the cricket is a great conversation, a drink with friends, a leisurely browse of the Sunday papers, and red-hot sports action all at the same time.
Beat that.
-
Dear Tom70
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Are you 70, Tom? Is that why you make comments like:
"Oh, yeah? Would you enjoy having sex for seven straight hours?"
I do, and do so regularly. Sunday, for instance, we started around 11am when we shared the crossword in the newspaper. Then we spent the afternoon at a beautiful park. Dinner was exotic -- Peking Duck -- and then we came home and I'll draw a veil of modesty over the rest, but we finally dropped off to sleep at around 11pm. 12 hours!
Oh! You only consider the "in out in out" bit to be sex?!
Now I understand your sporting preference for games that are over quickly... and my original comment still stands.
-
Last line's a zinger...
[Read the article: Yellow dust terrorism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Your last line is perfect Andrew:
"But where is the court that could enforce such judgments?"
Indeed. Because you can bet your bottom dollar that if such a court existed, the very first country to opt out would be the US of A. And it wouldn't be the first time!
But in fact a court in name might not needed if you could have a sort of defacto court.
One idea could be that the "externality charge" of your pollution gumming up my factories could be neatly collected by a bilateral trade sanction. 15% extra on Chinese-made imports, to pay for the clean-up, until the dust stops flying...
The defacto court capable of handling this in fact already exists -- all the countries mentioned are members of the WTO.
Getting the WTO to recognize such environmental externality sanctions in its rule system, now that would be the trick!
-
Don't drive angry!
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've read about this crash so many times, and was prepared for another turgid run-through, but your telling of the tale, especially incorporating the "unedited" comments of Bob Bragg, was first class.
Bravo!
As for Bragg playacting Zanten, you're right, there is irony there. But perhaps, with such long experience himself, Bragg is in fact perfectly placed to factor into his feelings the thousands of times in commercial aviation history that similar "We gaan!" decisions have been made that _didn't_ result in the loss of 583 lives.
All of us like to think that tired, annoyed, frustrated, we would still be perfect professionals.
And yet the numbers tell us that more people are killed driving home after work in their own neighborhoods than any other combination of place and time for us to hold on to that fantasy.
I don't think I'm "making light" of a tragedy to tell you that my takehome from Tenerife has always been: "Don't drive angry!"