Student Drop-Out Rates...why?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 21:34:49 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
ZJ5Pe.62754$084.27147@attbi_s22::


We are dangerously low on refinery capacity, and current EPA regulations
make it essentially impossible to build any more in the U.S.

It's insane, but it's the law.

So you wouldn't have any problem with a new refinery coming on-line up
wind of your abode?


I wouldn't mind at all. As a matter of fact I'd welcome it. At this very
moment there is a very old refinery 1.13 miles (as the Skyhawk flies) away
from my house and I can't remember the last time I smelled anything from it.

Now, when I was growing up the place regularly put out an odor that would
curl your toes but over the last 20 years it has cleaned up nicely.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 02:03:15 GMT, George Patterson
wrote in DF9Pe.5727$Ck2.3269@trndny04::

Larry Dighera wrote:

Oh yeah. That was the year he was impeached, wasn't it.

Nixon was never impeached.


Right. It's been a while. After his Vice President was caught taking
bribe money, and Nixon with his henchmen burglarizing etc. he resigned
under threat of impeachment, so that he wouldn't further disgrace the
office.


Correct, Clinton was the only President impeached during our life times.

"TaxSrv" wrote in message
news
"Mike Rapoport" wrote:
Actually, it has almost nothing to do with the EPA.
...
Refineries are like anything else, there are too many of
them so nobody builds any more.

I'm not an expert on this industry either, but do you have a source for
the above? Is the industry lying when they say that at peak demand,
refineries are generally at capacity?

Fred F.


I don't have a single source, but you will find many references to
refineries running at capacity today and you will find that most of the
major refiners are making large capital improvements to their existing
refineries (mostly more ability to handle heavy, high sulpher crude). The
process of adding capacity has begun but it takes a long time to complete.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about refining capacity or almost
anything else, the process is pretty much the same. I used to observe the
shortage to glut process in the San Francisco office space market.

Mike
MU-2

What is a "wuffo"


"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:TFaPe.3192$IG2.188@trndny01...
Jay Honeck wrote:

WHY?

Same reason some people are meat bombs and some are wuffos.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

I don't see that happening to the conclusion you draw. People with
money are =already= flying in quantity, just not as pilots.

Which means they aren't concerned about what the pilot has to deal
with. If this one loses his ticket, plenty more where he came from.

Air taxi rules don't seem to have been affected.

Actually, they have been. The fractionals are for all intents and
purposes air taxi, but operate under Part 91.

In any case, they are really only used by corporate execs who are not
spending their own money, thus don't really care what it costs.

Michael

Hit post too early...

Motorcycles are not as dangerous to other people as GA.

Nuts. Motorcycle passengers are at just as much risk as GA passengers.
Innocent bystanders (primarily pedestrians) are way more at risk from
motorcycles than from planes falling out of the sky.

Michael

That sounds like an average rather than a median.

No, that's the definition of median.

One family making $500,000,000 against several
million in the $40,000 range would have little effect on the average
and a big hit on median.

Nope. Backwards.

The "median" is the value of the sample in the middle. If you take the
highest number and increase it by a factor of a bazillion, the median is
unchanged.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mike Rapoport wrote:
What is a "wuffo"

Derived from their usual question - "Wuffo you wanna jump out of a perfectly
good airplane?"

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Roger wrote:

If you take the lowest number income to the highest and put them in
order the number in the middle would be the median.

Correct.

Average is the total income of all the households divided by the
number of households. One family making $500,000,000 against several
million in the $40,000 range would have little effect on the average
and a big hit on median.

Nope. If you had two families making $20,000, one making $40,000, and two making
$80,000, the median would be $40,000 and the average would be $48,000. If one of
those top-earners gets a raise to $100,000, the median is still $40,000, but the
average goes up to $52,000.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:36:23 -0400, Roger
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 20:36:04 -0700, "Seth Masia"
wrote:

Umm -- the definition of median is that half the range is higher and half is
lower. This means that if the median is $42,000, and there are 100 million
households, then 50 million households make more than $42k.

That sounds like an average rather than a median.
If you take the lowest number income to the highest and put them in
order the number in the middle would be the median.

This is correct only if "the number in the middle" means half of the
sequence of numbers are below it and half are above it. Such a
"median" may or may not also be the "mean".