On 10/21/2012 1:10, Stephen wrote:
> But how did you learn that Brits don’t go outdoors?

It was a joke because Andrew commented that the place two blocks away was
 
almost close enough to walk.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."

Post a reply to this message

On 10/21/2012 1:14, Warp wrote:
> of weirdo when he wanted to go to the grocery store by foot.

I've done that. The problem is not so much the walking as the fact that 
you're lugging groceries back. Buy a gallon of milk, and you won't be 
lifting your elbow above your shoulder for several days.

> I have heard rumors that there are neighborhoods in the US where there
> are no sidewalks at all, only streets.

Well, yes. Things like Beverly Hills, perhaps. Neighborhoods composed 
entirely of houses that have an acre of land around them and the houses cost 
ten million dollars and up.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."

Post a reply to this message

On 10/21/2012 2:22, Warp wrote:
> I have heard that there are many shops there where the parking space in
> front of them is actually owned by the shops, and it's forbidden to have
> your car parked in front of a shop while you are visiting a different one.

Sort of.

> If you want to go to one shop and then to another, you have to actually
> move your car, even if it's just by one parking space (to get to the
> other shop's parking space.)

Not really. What's much more common is that there are 500 parking spaces, 
and the 20 in front of the restaurant are reserved for the restaurant's 
customers. If you're going somewhere other than the restaurant, you park in 
one of the other spots.

Unless you're really obvious about it, like parking in front of the 
restaurant for the entire day, or actually being an employee of the 
restaurant and parking in front of the door, nobody is going to bother you 
about it. They have no idea whose car it is or whether they're in the 
restaurant, after all.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."

Post a reply to this message

> I have heard rumors that there are neighborhoods in the US where there
> are no sidewalks at all, only streets. You are *supposed* to *always*
> drive a car there and, in fact, if you were to walk there, people would
> look at you suspiciously (because they would think you might be some kind
> of thief scouting the premises or something.) I don't know if this is true.
> (Sounds rather impractical to me.)

When visiting some suburb of Detroit (don't remember the name, near to 
the Ford place) it was exactly like this. I could see a shopping mall 
from my hotel window, but to walk there was a nightmare, involving 
walking along the road (no footpath leading up to the hotel), climbing 
over a barrier and crossing 4 lanes of traffic (although it wasn't that 
busy). The same thing happened when I tried to walk home from the office 
to my hotel, and I also noticed signs forbidding cycling on various 
roads near to the shops (such signs I would expect to cause an uproar 
amongst cyclists in any European country).

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> On 10/21/2012 1:14, Warp wrote:
> > of weirdo when he wanted to go to the grocery store by foot.

> I've done that. The problem is not so much the walking as the fact that 
> you're lugging groceries back. Buy a gallon of milk, and you won't be 
> lifting your elbow above your shoulder for several days.

I really think you need more exercise... :P

(Personally, I always use a backpack.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> Who on the whole seem friendly and obliging.
>
> Except if you are an atheist, that is. ;)
>
> Atheism, the new communism (which in itself is the new witchcraft.)
>

It depends where, in Raleigh, North Carolina, being the "wrong" kind of 
Christian is sometimes enough.

Neighbor:  Hi, welcome to the neighborhood.  Where are all y'alls from?
Cousin:  Ottawa, Canada.
Neighbor:  Ah.  Have you found a church, yet?
Cousin:  No, we've only been here 2 days.  We saw St-Something-Or-Other 
nearby, is there another one closer?
Neighbor:  Oh! You're Catholics... You know you'll burn in Hell!

(Neighbor left in huff and never spoke to them again for the 3 years 
they were there)

Disclaimer:  I realise not every North Carolinian is a Southern Baptist, 
and not all Southern Baptist is as closeminded as my cousin's neighbor.
-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> When visiting some suburb of Detroit (don't remember the name, near to 
> the Ford place) it was exactly like this. I could see a shopping mall 
> from my hotel window, but to walk there was a nightmare, involving 
> walking along the road (no footpath leading up to the hotel), climbing 
> over a barrier and crossing 4 lanes of traffic (although it wasn't that 
> busy). The same thing happened when I tried to walk home from the office 
> to my hotel, and I also noticed signs forbidding cycling on various 
> roads near to the shops (such signs I would expect to cause an uproar 
> amongst cyclists in any European country).

I don't understand how that can be in any way practical.

Not every single person who might want to move from point A to point B
inside that suburb owns a car, or even has a license. Some might have
bikes, but from your description it sounds like the suburb isn't very
bike-friendly either. Even then, some people *don't* own even a bike.

What happens if your car breaks, and you need to go to the grocery store
*right now*? Do you call a taxi? Seems rather unreasonable. (Friends and
neighbors might not be there to help you as they may be somewhere else or
just busy otherwise.)

What about plain old exercising? What if you want to go jogging? I suppose
you are expected to drive to some place dedicated precisely to that
purpose, such as a park. You have to drive to a place where you can
exercise... sound *so* American. :P

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 10/22/2012 6:45, Warp wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom>  wrote:
>> On 10/21/2012 1:14, Warp wrote:
>>> of weirdo when he wanted to go to the grocery store by foot.
>
>> I've done that. The problem is not so much the walking as the fact that
>> you're lugging groceries back. Buy a gallon of milk, and you won't be
>> lifting your elbow above your shoulder for several days.
>
> I really think you need more exercise... :P

I don't think so. I think it was actually closer to 2 miles, and might have 
been two gallon-jugs. But whatever.

> (Personally, I always use a backpack.)

That would have been much wiser in my case. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "They're the 1-800-#-GORILA of the telecom business."

Post a reply to this message

> What about plain old exercising? What if you want to go jogging? I suppose
> you are expected to drive to some place dedicated precisely to that
> purpose, such as a park. You have to drive to a place where you can
> exercise... sound *so* American. :P

Funnily enough that exact shopping mall advertised some kind of 
walking/jogging event inside the mall before the shops opened (it's the 
first time I had ever heard of such events and it still seems strange to 
me).

Post a reply to this message

Francois Labreque <fla### [at] videotronca> wrote:
> It depends where, in Raleigh, North Carolina, being the "wrong" kind of 
> Christian is sometimes enough.

Politics in the United States used to be like that not so long ago.
Back then politicians generally avoided the subject of religion like the
plague because it would have been a political suicide to proclaim your
religious affiliation. It would have driven a good portion of the voters
away. ("Oh, he's a catholic! It's the church of Satan! I'm definitely not
voting for him!" or "Oh, he's a baptist. Those are nutjob religious
fundamentalists. Definitely not for me!")

Somehow this has turned completely on its head during the last years.
Nowadays it would be a political suicide *not* to profess one's religion.
Of course as long as you keep it vague enough. Just talk about "God" and
"Christian values" in a very vague and non-specific manner, without going
too much into specifics about exactly which one of the 30000+ different
denominations you are talking about.

Nowadays people there still get an uneasy feeling if a candidate represents
a denomination they don't like (such as mormonism), but are too afraid to
complain about it too loudly... What was once a definitive show-stopper
has been turned into a "well, maybe it's not *that* bad; he's a Christian
after all..."

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message