You've reached the City Center of Music and Drama, Inc.-- located in
the New York State Theater at Lincoln Center.
For information on events related to the New York City Ballet or the
New York City Opera, please visit their Websites at:
www.nycballet.com
www.nycopera.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: RE: if it works ... Re: Get me off this list
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED] at INTERNET-MAIL
Date: 7/24/98 1:23 PM
My point exactly. SHOW ME THE DOOR! You shouldn't have to WORK to get rid
of this one!
I should be able to leave quietly and peacefully on my own!
Yet, without expressed procedures, I CAN'T!
It would piss you off too if you kept trying to get off a listserve to no
avail, with the sys-op ignoring you and have 30 unwanted messages pouring
in a day you don't have any interest in!
>Some people one is only too happy to show where the door is. We are
>working on getting rid of this one.
> ----------
>From: Ryan Hensley
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: if it works ... Re: Get me off this list
>Date: Thursday, July 23, 1998 11:24PM
>
>Ditto!!!!! I've been trying unsuccessfully to get off this list for a
>MONTH
>now!!!!
>
>Hey List operator! You are doing a SHITTY job!!!!!
>
>Post removeable procedures once a month like everyone else
>does/should!!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D
>>I have tried for months to get my address removed from the futurework
>list
>>without success. I am goint to forward all
>>future work communications back to the list until somewone gets the
>>message and does something about my request to be
>>removed from this list.
>>
>>Mick
>>
>>--
>>Mick Holsclaw
>>Yuba Community College
>>voice (530)741-6981
>>FAX (530)741-3541
>>
>>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D
>>X-POP3-Rcpt: mholscla@mail2
>>Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from yuba.cc.ca.us ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [207.62.206.3]) by
>>mail2.yuba.cc.ca.us (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA14219 for
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:45:05 -0700
>>Received: from dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[129.97.54.123])
>> by yuba.cc.ca.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA05206
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:31:41
>-0700 (PDT)
>>Received: (from root@localhost)
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA16242
>> for futurework-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:53:29 -0400
>>Received: from ns.easyinternet.net ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[207.176.244.6])
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA14956
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998
>11:53:24 -0400
>>Received: from default (user85.easyinternet.net [207.176.244.85]) by
>>ns.easyinternet.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA18773; Wed, 22 Jul
>1998
>>11:37:31 -0400
>>From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Cc: "Futurework" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: Technology and change (and lack of progress...)
>>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:25:28 -0400
>>Message-ID: <01bdb58d$56e36040$0100007f@default>
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Precedence: bulk
>>
>>>Ed Weick wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>> The fact that women
>>>> have been able to enter the labour market in large numbers is at
>least
>>>> partly due to the fact that the amount of time needed for domestic
>>>> chores has been greatly diminished.
>>
>>
>>Brad McCormick::
>>
>>>I know all this is rather superficial hear-say type
>>>speculation, but I wonder if two of the big
>>>reasons more women are "working" are: (1) it has
>>>become socially acceptable, and (2) the husband does
>>>not earn enough for the family to live on. Obviously,
>>>decrease in the number of children (which is
>>>always a concern for the "Dulce et decorum est pro
>>>patria mori" set) is an enabling factor, too.
>>
>>
>>I'm sure you're right. Something happened to attitudes in the
>immediate
>>pre- and postwar period which made it all right for women to go to
>obtain
>>higher education and enter the workforce. At first, during the late
>1950s
>>and early 1960s, it was merely accepted that they could do so, though
>>grudgingly. A little later, that they could do so became something of
>a
>>feminist cause celebre. Now it is almost expected that they do so, and
>>women who do not leave to household to go to work have become objects
>of
>>curiosity. Many women work because the single paycheck is not enough
>to pay
>>all of the bills, but I would suspect that many, perhaps the majority,
>work
>>because they want to. And because they want to work, or have to, they
>have
>>fewer kids.
>>
>>My only point about technology is that it has helped women leave the
>>household. Whether they work outside of the home or not, most women
>still
>>do a disproportionate amount of the work needed to keep a household
>going.
>>The fact that they have dishwashers and various other appliances is
>>enormously helpful in this regard.
>>
>>Ed Weick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D
>>X-POP3-Rcpt: mholscla@mail2
>>Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from yuba.cc.ca.us ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [207.62.206.3]) by
>>mail2.yuba.cc.ca.us (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA14229 for
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:45:58 -0700
>>Received: from dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[129.97.54.123])
>> by yuba.cc.ca.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA05215
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:32:34
>-0700 (PDT)
>>Received: (from root@localhost)
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA20348
>> for futurework-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:53:38 -0400
>>Received: from ns.easyinternet.net ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[207.176.244.6])
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA21622
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998
>11:53:33 -0400
>>Received: from default (user85.easyinternet.net [207.176.244.85]) by
>>ns.easyinternet.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA18779; Wed, 22 Jul
>1998
>>11:37:39 -0400
>>From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "Futurework" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Ray E. Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: working alternatives ?
>>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:25:36 -0400
>>Message-ID: <01bdb58d$5b898fc0$0100007f@default>
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Precedence: bulk
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ray E. Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: Ed Weick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Futurework
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Date: Monday, July 20, 1998 9:01 PM
>>Subject: Re: working alternatives ?
>>
>>
>>>So Ed,
>>>
>>>You know I admire you but I really hate this one. Most artists, by
>your
>>>definition, don't work until they make money on what they have done?
>By
>>that
>>>definition most of the world's great composers today never work. Van
>Gogh
>>never
>>>worked. He was an amateur?
>>
>>
>>Ray,
>>
>>This is a tough one. I would argue that Van Gogh worked because he
>produced
>>items of tremendous value. The problem is that he never got paid for
>them.
>>Others did. I doubt very much that he knew he was working or even
>cared.
>>
>>A very long time ago I attended an art school for a year. I had a
>friend
>>there who had the personality of Van Gogh, but not one iota of Van
>Gogh's
>>talent. My friend literally consumed himself during that year. While
>he
>>did not cut off his ear, he painted madly, wrecked his marriage, and
>wound
>>up a derilict. Was he working? He thought so. But I've never seen a
>>painting signed "Arny" next to a "Vincent" in any of the gallaries I've
>>visited.
>>
>>We should not overlook that many of the composers and artists we revere
>>today worked in a rather bazare market economy. They had patrons who
>>expected them to produce. Look at poor overworked (and overused)
>Mozart.
>>
>>Others were "amatuers" in the sense that had other jobs and could never
>>quite bring themselves to being full time artists. Brad McCormick
>mentioned
>>Charles Ives, an insurance broker. Wallace Stevens was a banker. They
>>were, nevertheless, successful artists because they left something of
>value
>>behind. And I'm sorry that I have to intrude the market here, but it
>does
>>come into play.
>>
>>There are two kinds of artists I feel sorry for. One is represented by
>my
>>friend Arny, who had all of the passion but none of the talent. The
>other
>>is like the fellow mentioned by Brad McCormick, who simply kept himself
>too
>>busy at other things to write that great book. I have known people
>like
>>that. They are the greater tragedy because they are afraid of finding
>out
>>who they really are.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Ed Weick
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D
>>X-POP3-Rcpt: mholscla@mail2
>>Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from yuba.cc.ca.us ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [207.62.206.3]) by
>>mail2.yuba.cc.ca.us (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA14266 for
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:48:52 -0700
>>Received: from dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[129.97.54.123])
>> by yuba.cc.ca.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA05224
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:35:28
>-0700 (PDT)
>>Received: (from root@localhost)
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22662
>> for futurework-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:53:55 -0400
>>Received: from ns.easyinternet.net ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[207.176.244.6])
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA22656
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998
>11:53:48 -0400
>>Received: from default (user85.easyinternet.net [207.176.244.85]) by
>>ns.easyinternet.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA18787; Wed, 22 Jul
>1998
>>11:37:51 -0400
>>From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "Eva Durant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Cc: "Futurework" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: Technology and change
>>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:25:47 -0400
>>Message-ID: <01bdb58d$620d58e0$0100007f@default>
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Precedence: bulk
>>
>>Eva Durant:
>>
>>>I thought technology is the most
>>costly for the capitalists, more so than labour,
>>this is the reason for the tendecy of the rate of profit
>>to fall, exploiting labour is more and more expensive.
>>
>>
>>Last time I looked, labour costs were more significant that other
>costs.
>>Traditionally, labour costs have run to some 60% of GDP. The only data
>I
>>have at hand is from Canada's Provincial Economic Accounts for 1991.
>In
>>these, "Wages, salaries and supplementary labour income" accounts for
>57.2%
>>of the combined GDP of Canada's provinces. All of the items which
>might be
>>interpreted as suggesting returns to capital total less than 13%.
>However,
>>much would depend on the firm. Some firms rely much more heavily on
>capital
>>than others, and replacing old capital with newer and more efficient
>capital
>>could be the major cost.
>>
>>>Women worked in hell-factories and even mines
>>without any technological link... Women work now,
>>because to keep the standard of living required
>>by the social/cultural environment, and due to the
>>stagnation of wages, now two income is necessary for
>>most families. I cannot think of a new housework
>>easing device besides the microvawe in the last 3,4,5?
>>decades.
>>
>>I don't think too many people had dishwashers four or five decades ago.
>And
>>all of the other appliances have improved. We just recently bought a
>>washing machine to replace an old one that leaked all over the floor.
>It
>>does things the old one certainly couldn't do (besides not leak greasy
>>water).
>>
>>>Due to some improvement in making education more
>>gender-equal and more economic independence,
>>it will be difficult to push women back to the
>>kitchen again, though the present yet halfhidden
>>recession is already trying to do that, with the
>>idea, that only lone mothers have the moral duty to work,
>>middle class married women should be home-makers,
>>if they work, they are to be blamed for all ills of
>>society...
>>
>>I would predict that any attempt to push women back into the kitchen
>would
>>meet with extreme resistance.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Ed Weick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D
>>X-POP3-Rcpt: mholscla@mail2
>>Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Received: from yuba.cc.ca.us ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [207.62.206.3]) by
>>mail2.yuba.cc.ca.us (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA14259 for
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 09:48:31 -0700
>>Received: from dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[129.97.54.123])
>> by yuba.cc.ca.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA05220
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 10:35:07
>-0700 (PDT)
>>Received: (from root@localhost)
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA25232
>> for futurework-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:54:12 -0400
>>Received: from ns.easyinternet.net ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[207.176.244.6])
>> by dijkstra.uwaterloo.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA20874
>> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 22 Jul 1998
>11:54:07 -0400
>>Received: from default (user85.easyinternet.net [207.176.244.85]) by
>>ns.easyinternet.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with SMTP id LAA18799; Wed, 22 Jul
>1998
>>11:38:12 -0400
>>From: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tom Walker"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: Re: Technology and change
>>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 12:26:06 -0400
>>Message-ID: <01bdb58d$6d92df00$0100007f@default>
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>X-Priority: 3
>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Precedence: bulk
>>
>>>Ed Weick wrote,
>>>
>>>>What's all this say, that we no longer need labor? No. I would say it
>>means
>>>>go find yourself something else to do. And that is exactly what
>people
>>have
>>>>done, generation after generation, age after age. The one thing that
>we
>>>>intend to discount in the march of technological progress and labor
>>>>displacement is human ingenuity.
>>
>>>The short answer to the last question is that there has been
>tremendous
>>>catastrophe bundled with the benign "finding something better to do"
>as you
>>>put it. The adjustment from "1900 to now" has included depression,
>>>holocaust, world wars, revolutions, counter-revolutions and famine.
>Nazis
>>>and Stalinists alike found what they thought was something better to
>do
>>>after being booted out of what they thought were secure jobs.
>>
>>(cut)
>>
>>>But I don't want to get sucked into an emotional discussion with
>>>you, Ed, because I suspect that you are explaining things to me that I
>>>already know and that I am explaining things to you that you already
>know.
>>>
>>>Our energy would be better spent seeking a richer understanding of
>what we
>>>don't know.
>>
>>
>>I agree, and I would also agree that this has probably been the most
>brutal
>>century on record. And I would not quarrel with the notion that
>advances in
>>science and technology have had a lot to do with it, not only making
>mass
>>extermination possible, but making it real. However, these advances
>have
>>also had a lot to do with improving the lot of humankind.
>>
>>I would also agree that many of the people who were displaced by
>technology,
>>or depressions or wars or crumbling and archaic social systems found
>>destructive things to do, either as leaders or pawns. However, ever so
>many
>>did not, and even if the pawns were destructive at times, they were
>>constructive at others. As humans, we are both angels and brutes, and
>it is
>>often impossible to predict which side of us will emerge in response to
>>particular ideas or events.
>>
>>Ed Weick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------C7199889B0649EC6467C454D--
