Blog number 355 **** 13 December 2009
In the late fifties we - my wife and I, got a hold of a book called, "Write Me A Poem, Baby." It's a collection of writings by youngsters with the original misspellings and ignorances. Funny book.
Late in the seventies we got to talking about this book and we wanted to read it again, but couldn't find it anywhere. Several times over the years we would make another attempt to find it with no luck until finally just a few weeks ago, my wife got one from Amazon.com.
I'm going to give you a few excerpts. I hope you all enjoy it as much as we did. The first one is a one-act play entitled, "Grandmother Has Gone To The Bar - Huk." It was written by a nine year old girl. Here 'tis.
STEP-MOTHER - I'm tired of living here, I've always wanted to be an actress.
FATHER - You certainly don't care for the children think of what they'll go threw grandmother is always getting drunk.
MOTHER - If the children can't get along by there self its to bad I can't help it if grandmother gets drunk.
(children enter)
JO - Guess what I don't have any homework.
FATHER - Good do you have any Clover.
CLOVER - A little bit.
DICK - A little bit my foot.
(Grandmother Enters)
GRANDMOTHER - I've huk squesed the potatoes, huk and pealed the huk, lemons.
MOTHER - Oh dear.
FATHER - Granny wouldn't you like to get some water.
GRANDMOTHER - later on I'm going to the bar now.
JO - If you don't go to the bar more than twise a day I'll eat my hat.
GRANDMOTHER - You don't have any to eat huk.
MOTHER - Come on in and eat children.
FATHER - Grandmothers gone to the bar.
MOTHER - Thank Gonnese.
FATHER - You know the children can't stay with her.
MOTHER - They are not my children where is there real mother.
FATHER - Its a long story but you remember that big tank full of gas that started leaking in Gayton well we lived a block away and I was reading a paper and my wife was soing on some close and I opened the door and a man said the gas tank was busted so I ran for the boys and my wife ran for Clover. It was so fogie outside I couldn't see.
MOTHER - The children must have very bad memerys not to remember this.
FATHER - Well Dick was only two but he slept threw the whole thing Jo was one and Clover was 3 months well the streets were crowded my wife sliped on a rock I don't know exactly how we got apart but I notised she was missing many a times I looked for her but i never found her.
MOTHER - How queer.
******************************
When Nora Johnston was ten she produced her own newspaper called, Mairsy Doats. Nora's newspaper was dedicated to eternal resistance to tyranny - the tyranny of parents. Two of Nora's fighting editorials follow.
CLEANLINESS IS NOT NEXT TO GODLINESS
We have discovered that in the soap factory they throw the soap by bushels into dirty old tubs, they don't care what happens to it, and most of the soap you get has been left standing at least two weeks. They call it anything they can think of and the labels are mixed. Soap is impure to the body and creates a rash on the limbs.
CANDY
One of the most nutritious foodstuffs is that delicious object, manufactured all over the world, namely, candy. There are lots of kinds of candy, old fashioned sugarplums, stick candy, molasses, fudge and candy drops. The two principles of candy are hard candy and soft candy and they're both good. DID YOU KNOW THAT candy and sodas and sundaes and ice cream of all kinds have more vitamins and calories than any food in the world? That fudge should be made every day to sustain life?
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
FREE WILL, MY DONKEY!
Blog number 353 **** 05 December 2009
Many years ago I attended a magical "growth" seminar called, "est." Very often the trainer would make a prediction about how the audience would react to certain exercises and statements. The predictions always came true, although some predictions seemed to at first seem almost impossible. For instance, the consistent refrain that nobody was to have any timepieces in the room at any time - whether they were broken, didn't work, not used, or many of the other common excuses for having a timepiece in the room, even after repeated admonitions.
Came time to start, the trainer asks, "Does anyone have a watch on their person?" Several seemingly intelligent people raised their hands, and sure enough, the predicted excuses came out. My already low opinion of the average person's awareness fell several more points.
Before starting on a logical progression of the evidence for the total lack of free will in humans, the trainer told us that some of us would laugh, some of us would cry, some of us would become frightened, some bored, some confused, some angry, at the conclusion. And sure enough, that is exactly what happened. The argument went like this; when we are born, we react to something which produces a response, which produces another reaction, another response, another reaction, response, reaction, response, reaction, until finally comes the realization that nothing is happening except response, response, response, response.
Until death.
The final response.
The actual argument was in more detail than I just gave you, and it involved mathematical probabilities, among other things, but that is the gist of it.
There is another way to argue this, which I like better because it involves actual observation of what exists. For instance, I cannot grow any more arms or legs, I cannot get a different body, I cannot sit if I am standing and I cannot stand if I am sitting. Everything is as it is.
You might say, "But I could stand up, using my free will," but I would respond, "Only if you had the desire, and if you have the desire, did you will to have that desire or did the desire to stand just come to you out of the void? Was the desire created by you or was it given to you?"
Notice also that we cannot do anything unless we have an interest in doing that thing, and if we have an interest in doing that thing, we cannot be stopped from doing that thing if it is physically possible, which once again is not up to our free will.
And we don't pick our interests. They pick us.
Now why do I think this is important? Because obviously, if we are not choosing to do what we do, who or what is? I know it's not me, because I raise my arm by just willing it to raise. I have absolutely no idea how to raise my arm. It is beyond my ability to comprehend how I use any part of my body, from oxygen interchange in the lungs to digesting the food that my mouth somehow without my understanding, prepares for the next step. BUT SOMETHING KNOWS.
And it doesn't have to be God, it could just be, "All That Is." SOMETHING. Something is using us. For some purpose? For no purpose? Who knows?
This morning I noticed in the papers, "bombings here," "killings there," "mass murders here," "sibling killings there." If nobody is really, basically "responsible" for these tragedies, then it is possible to say, "It is just time for these things to happen now, that's all. Not my problem."
When the school killings started, it was a new thing and we tried to figure out how this happened. Bullying was, I think, the consensus. But I really believe it was just that it was time for that to occur - like leaves come on the trees in the spring and it is not anyone's fault - it is not even the tree's fault. It's just time.
People tend to think in terms of tragedies and blessings because they are thinking in terms of THIS life - as if it is the only one we have or will ever have. But there is no evidence that such a thing is true. It's just that our culture has conditioned us to look at things in this way. It sells newspaper, if nothing else.
I don't like the term, "think outside the box," but dammit - think outside of it! Get a life!
I love you.
Many years ago I attended a magical "growth" seminar called, "est." Very often the trainer would make a prediction about how the audience would react to certain exercises and statements. The predictions always came true, although some predictions seemed to at first seem almost impossible. For instance, the consistent refrain that nobody was to have any timepieces in the room at any time - whether they were broken, didn't work, not used, or many of the other common excuses for having a timepiece in the room, even after repeated admonitions.
Came time to start, the trainer asks, "Does anyone have a watch on their person?" Several seemingly intelligent people raised their hands, and sure enough, the predicted excuses came out. My already low opinion of the average person's awareness fell several more points.
Before starting on a logical progression of the evidence for the total lack of free will in humans, the trainer told us that some of us would laugh, some of us would cry, some of us would become frightened, some bored, some confused, some angry, at the conclusion. And sure enough, that is exactly what happened. The argument went like this; when we are born, we react to something which produces a response, which produces another reaction, another response, another reaction, response, reaction, response, reaction, until finally comes the realization that nothing is happening except response, response, response, response.
Until death.
The final response.
The actual argument was in more detail than I just gave you, and it involved mathematical probabilities, among other things, but that is the gist of it.
There is another way to argue this, which I like better because it involves actual observation of what exists. For instance, I cannot grow any more arms or legs, I cannot get a different body, I cannot sit if I am standing and I cannot stand if I am sitting. Everything is as it is.
You might say, "But I could stand up, using my free will," but I would respond, "Only if you had the desire, and if you have the desire, did you will to have that desire or did the desire to stand just come to you out of the void? Was the desire created by you or was it given to you?"
Notice also that we cannot do anything unless we have an interest in doing that thing, and if we have an interest in doing that thing, we cannot be stopped from doing that thing if it is physically possible, which once again is not up to our free will.
And we don't pick our interests. They pick us.
Now why do I think this is important? Because obviously, if we are not choosing to do what we do, who or what is? I know it's not me, because I raise my arm by just willing it to raise. I have absolutely no idea how to raise my arm. It is beyond my ability to comprehend how I use any part of my body, from oxygen interchange in the lungs to digesting the food that my mouth somehow without my understanding, prepares for the next step. BUT SOMETHING KNOWS.
And it doesn't have to be God, it could just be, "All That Is." SOMETHING. Something is using us. For some purpose? For no purpose? Who knows?
This morning I noticed in the papers, "bombings here," "killings there," "mass murders here," "sibling killings there." If nobody is really, basically "responsible" for these tragedies, then it is possible to say, "It is just time for these things to happen now, that's all. Not my problem."
When the school killings started, it was a new thing and we tried to figure out how this happened. Bullying was, I think, the consensus. But I really believe it was just that it was time for that to occur - like leaves come on the trees in the spring and it is not anyone's fault - it is not even the tree's fault. It's just time.
People tend to think in terms of tragedies and blessings because they are thinking in terms of THIS life - as if it is the only one we have or will ever have. But there is no evidence that such a thing is true. It's just that our culture has conditioned us to look at things in this way. It sells newspaper, if nothing else.
I don't like the term, "think outside the box," but dammit - think outside of it! Get a life!
I love you.
Friday, December 4, 2009
MEN WHO STARE AT COATS
Blog number 352 **** 04 December 2009
We went to our Credit Union to pick up my $2 bills and we noticed a sign on the front door that said, "Please remove sunglasses, hats and hoods." This sign is a result of a holdup man who visited this establishment a couple of months ago wearing sunglasses and a hoody.
My wife was wearing sunglasses, a man at the counter was wearing a hat and a man sitting in a chair against the wall was wearing a hoody. We mentioned all of this to the teller and asked if she mentioned to any of these people that they were not to wear those things in there and she said, "Oh they know they aren't supposed to do that. We stare at them."
We went to our Credit Union to pick up my $2 bills and we noticed a sign on the front door that said, "Please remove sunglasses, hats and hoods." This sign is a result of a holdup man who visited this establishment a couple of months ago wearing sunglasses and a hoody.
My wife was wearing sunglasses, a man at the counter was wearing a hat and a man sitting in a chair against the wall was wearing a hoody. We mentioned all of this to the teller and asked if she mentioned to any of these people that they were not to wear those things in there and she said, "Oh they know they aren't supposed to do that. We stare at them."
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
THIS IS ALL ABOUT ME FOR A CHANGE AND IT'S ABOUT TIME
Blog number 350 **** 01 December 2009
Okay, this all started when I began reading a book called, "Eating the Dinosaur." The author, an interviewer by the name of Walter Kiran, tries to understand why people answer questions posed to them by interviewers even though there is no obvious benefit for them to do so, and in fact many pitfalls to their reputation abound in answering interviewer's questions for publication either in print or film.
"So why do they do it?" he asks.
He gives six reasons why people might answer questions about themselves when they are under no obligation to do so, and then he dismisses all six motives using pretty good reasons. The motive he dwells on as most likely, is that ordinarily nobody listens to people. He says good interviewers are those that are interested in what the interviewee is saying. This experience of finally being listened to encourages people to continue talking.
The one reason people answer questions about themselves he doesn't mention and the one I find most likely, is that people see themselves as the most interesting thing on the planet. "Me and mine" as the saying goes. My experiences, my ideas, my beliefs. Let's talk about those, OK? Great!
So I guess what this new book did to me was to pique an interest in interviewing and being interviewed. I get to interview myself this time. The results follow.
I went back to visit my folks when I was in my forties One early morning I saw my dad playing solitaire on the kitchen table. At first glance it looked like an ordinary solitaire game, but then I noticed that he would place the cards in ways that seemed to make no sense at all. I knew from knowing him, that he wanted me to ask him what he was doing. But I was afraid to. I didn't want to hear his answer.
My dad would very, very seldom answer any of my questions in a serious way. His most common answer if I asked what something was for, would be, "Cat's fur to make kitten britches." I hated hearing that.
Many years ago two of my friends confessed to me behavior of their respective dads that they hated. I realized immediately that these two commonly did the same behavior that they hated in their dads. Did I also do that? I looked, and sure enough, I realized that whenever one of my kids asked me a question I usually replied with a schizophrenic answer and never ever really answered their serious questions.
I never thought that I was especially curious about people's motives, outlooks and reasons until my wife started complaining about my going up to people and quizzing them about one, two or all three of those things. I started doing this behavior when I was about 45 years old. Strangely, while shyness prevented me from doing this earlier, I also had no interest in other people, which also prevented me from doing the behavior.
It seems that my interest in people arrived at the same times as my fear of them disappeared. It doesn't seem to me that either of these phenomena came before the other, but rather that both arrived at the same time - as if both were caused by some third phenomena. It seems, from looking at myself from the inside, that this interest in people seeded an interest in other creatures, and this in turn created an interest in existence itself, which still blows my mind whenever I ponder upon it.
That was fun for me.
Was it good for you?
Okay, this all started when I began reading a book called, "Eating the Dinosaur." The author, an interviewer by the name of Walter Kiran, tries to understand why people answer questions posed to them by interviewers even though there is no obvious benefit for them to do so, and in fact many pitfalls to their reputation abound in answering interviewer's questions for publication either in print or film.
"So why do they do it?" he asks.
He gives six reasons why people might answer questions about themselves when they are under no obligation to do so, and then he dismisses all six motives using pretty good reasons. The motive he dwells on as most likely, is that ordinarily nobody listens to people. He says good interviewers are those that are interested in what the interviewee is saying. This experience of finally being listened to encourages people to continue talking.
The one reason people answer questions about themselves he doesn't mention and the one I find most likely, is that people see themselves as the most interesting thing on the planet. "Me and mine" as the saying goes. My experiences, my ideas, my beliefs. Let's talk about those, OK? Great!
So I guess what this new book did to me was to pique an interest in interviewing and being interviewed. I get to interview myself this time. The results follow.
I went back to visit my folks when I was in my forties One early morning I saw my dad playing solitaire on the kitchen table. At first glance it looked like an ordinary solitaire game, but then I noticed that he would place the cards in ways that seemed to make no sense at all. I knew from knowing him, that he wanted me to ask him what he was doing. But I was afraid to. I didn't want to hear his answer.
My dad would very, very seldom answer any of my questions in a serious way. His most common answer if I asked what something was for, would be, "Cat's fur to make kitten britches." I hated hearing that.
Many years ago two of my friends confessed to me behavior of their respective dads that they hated. I realized immediately that these two commonly did the same behavior that they hated in their dads. Did I also do that? I looked, and sure enough, I realized that whenever one of my kids asked me a question I usually replied with a schizophrenic answer and never ever really answered their serious questions.
I never thought that I was especially curious about people's motives, outlooks and reasons until my wife started complaining about my going up to people and quizzing them about one, two or all three of those things. I started doing this behavior when I was about 45 years old. Strangely, while shyness prevented me from doing this earlier, I also had no interest in other people, which also prevented me from doing the behavior.
It seems that my interest in people arrived at the same times as my fear of them disappeared. It doesn't seem to me that either of these phenomena came before the other, but rather that both arrived at the same time - as if both were caused by some third phenomena. It seems, from looking at myself from the inside, that this interest in people seeded an interest in other creatures, and this in turn created an interest in existence itself, which still blows my mind whenever I ponder upon it.
That was fun for me.
Was it good for you?
THE GODS MUST BE CRAZY III (3)
Blog number 349 **** 01 December 2009
In the book, "The Old Way" by Elizabeth Thomas about the pygmies of central Africa, the author tells about the time she was trying to determine the ages of the children, and since the bush people do not pay any attention to the number of years that people have been alive, she wanted to look into the mouths of the children so she could determine somewhat, their ages.
She said she didn't have any trouble with any of the children, who opened their mouths willingly, but one child objected, so she squeezed his cheeks in order to get him to open his mouth and he grabbed hold of a poisoned arrow that had carelessly been left leaning against a tree by a person getting ready to go on a hunt.
The author quickly backed away and the child's older brother knocked the arrow out of child's hand. Nobody said anything to the child, but there was a definite uncomfortableness to those who happened to see the incident. Elizabeth said it wasn't exactly like this, but this was as close as she could get, she said it was like when a person farts and nobody says anything for fear of embarrassing the miscreant. The child looked unhappy at the ostracism he was given. Everybody ignored him with perfectly blank faces.
One time a child wanted to go hunting with the father, who refused and the child threw a tantrum. This was the first and only time Elizabeth had seen such a thing and it was so unusual that the parents didn't know what to do and looked beseechingly at the others for help. The "others" didn't know what to do either, so they pretended they had important chores that needed done right away.
In the book, "The Old Way" by Elizabeth Thomas about the pygmies of central Africa, the author tells about the time she was trying to determine the ages of the children, and since the bush people do not pay any attention to the number of years that people have been alive, she wanted to look into the mouths of the children so she could determine somewhat, their ages.
She said she didn't have any trouble with any of the children, who opened their mouths willingly, but one child objected, so she squeezed his cheeks in order to get him to open his mouth and he grabbed hold of a poisoned arrow that had carelessly been left leaning against a tree by a person getting ready to go on a hunt.
The author quickly backed away and the child's older brother knocked the arrow out of child's hand. Nobody said anything to the child, but there was a definite uncomfortableness to those who happened to see the incident. Elizabeth said it wasn't exactly like this, but this was as close as she could get, she said it was like when a person farts and nobody says anything for fear of embarrassing the miscreant. The child looked unhappy at the ostracism he was given. Everybody ignored him with perfectly blank faces.
One time a child wanted to go hunting with the father, who refused and the child threw a tantrum. This was the first and only time Elizabeth had seen such a thing and it was so unusual that the parents didn't know what to do and looked beseechingly at the others for help. The "others" didn't know what to do either, so they pretended they had important chores that needed done right away.
Monday, November 30, 2009
THE GODS MUST BE CRAZY II (2)
Blog number 349 **** 30 November 2009
In a very interesting book by Elizabeth Thomas called, "The Old Way" about the pygmies of central Africa, and where the three tales about the effect the rising and setting sun has on animals that I wrote about three or four Blogs ago entitled, "Father, Sun and Holy Ghost", she tells of the use these people had with poisoned arrows, which I will try to summarize here.
In this Blog.
Now.
They poisoned the arrow heads on the shafts of the head, not the tip - for protection against getting accidentally poisoned by being stuck with the sharp point. The arrow heads were not as we commonly know them - like the American Indian arrow heads, but more like darts, commonly made from porcupine quills.The poison is made from the grub of a beetle that lives on the Baobab tree The grub buries itself in the dirt by the tree and is dug out by the pygmies. They pound on the body of the grub until it is mush, then remove the head and smear the innards onto the arrow head and Viola! Poisoned arrow.
One drop of the poison will kill a full grown man.
When they are done with making the arrowhead poisonous, they burn the leavings, being very careful to stand away from the smoke made by the fire.
Elizabeth says that she was standing downwind from such a burning with a tiny scratch on her hand, preferring to stand in smoke because of its warmth. Almost immediately the wound started hurting so much that she got a little worried, so she told someone about it. He smelled the wound (evidently flesh infected with the poison has a definite smell) and immediately started sucking on it. She said that she started feeling the effects up to her elbow and wondered how much farther it would have gone if left alone. She said she must have gotten only two or three molecules of the stuff from standing in the smoke from the fire.
Kinda makes one wonder how they found out that the innards of a grub was poisonous when injected into the flesh. Probably a pretty interesting story back of that.
By the way, they get their knowledge of the environment from experience and also much of it from what the older ones tell them. If you ask a question about something and they don't know the answer, they will say, "I don't know. The old ones didn't tell us that."
I guess the old ones didn't tell them how they come to be making poison from grubs, more's the pity.
In a very interesting book by Elizabeth Thomas called, "The Old Way" about the pygmies of central Africa, and where the three tales about the effect the rising and setting sun has on animals that I wrote about three or four Blogs ago entitled, "Father, Sun and Holy Ghost", she tells of the use these people had with poisoned arrows, which I will try to summarize here.
In this Blog.
Now.
They poisoned the arrow heads on the shafts of the head, not the tip - for protection against getting accidentally poisoned by being stuck with the sharp point. The arrow heads were not as we commonly know them - like the American Indian arrow heads, but more like darts, commonly made from porcupine quills.The poison is made from the grub of a beetle that lives on the Baobab tree The grub buries itself in the dirt by the tree and is dug out by the pygmies. They pound on the body of the grub until it is mush, then remove the head and smear the innards onto the arrow head and Viola! Poisoned arrow.
One drop of the poison will kill a full grown man.
When they are done with making the arrowhead poisonous, they burn the leavings, being very careful to stand away from the smoke made by the fire.
Elizabeth says that she was standing downwind from such a burning with a tiny scratch on her hand, preferring to stand in smoke because of its warmth. Almost immediately the wound started hurting so much that she got a little worried, so she told someone about it. He smelled the wound (evidently flesh infected with the poison has a definite smell) and immediately started sucking on it. She said that she started feeling the effects up to her elbow and wondered how much farther it would have gone if left alone. She said she must have gotten only two or three molecules of the stuff from standing in the smoke from the fire.
Kinda makes one wonder how they found out that the innards of a grub was poisonous when injected into the flesh. Probably a pretty interesting story back of that.
By the way, they get their knowledge of the environment from experience and also much of it from what the older ones tell them. If you ask a question about something and they don't know the answer, they will say, "I don't know. The old ones didn't tell us that."
I guess the old ones didn't tell them how they come to be making poison from grubs, more's the pity.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
POTPOURRI PARA TI
Blog number 348 **** 29 November 2009
Yesterday I was watching a documentary about a killer whale catching a great white shark off the coast of California in 1997 . The story itself was interesting, with the people telling of what they saw and the film of the whale carrying the shark around in its mouth and the comments from the biologists about different pods of killer whales eating different foods, and the supposition that this whale learned how to kill great whites from a pod off the coast of Australia, or else he learned it on his own.
One thing curious to me was that none of the whale watching captains, the killer whale expert biologists, the narrator - none of them, ever referred to the whales as, "Orcas" but always as "killer whales." Wonder what that's all about.
Anyhow, the main curious thing to me was that a crew of fish biologists were at a group of barren islands off the coast of California - the Fallon or the Farron islands - I don't know which and I'm too lazy to look it up and it doesn't make any difference to my story anyhow, studying a group of about one hundred great white sharks that came there every year in October to feast on the sea lions that gathered there.
After the whale killed that shark - evidently a very unusual thing - never before seen anywhere outside of the Australian waters, no great white was ever seen that October in their gathering place in the Fallon or Farron islands. Over a hundred great whites disappeared immediately from the area after the killing of one of their own by a predator in that area. Think about that.
*******************************
On another program I watched that same day - a program called "Alaskan Patrol," one of the cops was saying that of the fourteen villages in that area, twelve of them were voted dry because alcohol caused so many problems. He said that there was a lot of unemployment in the villages so the villagers tended to drink out of despair and boredom.
Later on he says that the people could make an alcoholic beverage out of yeast, sugar and water, and it was ready to drink in 24 hours. (yech!) He then went on to say that a gallon of this stuff sold for $7. Then later he's talking about people buying a fifth of whisky in Nome for six dollars and then selling it in the villages for two hundred and fifty to three hundred dollars a fifth.
Now I'm thinking, "these people are unemployed, so they buy whisky at three hundred dollars a fifth to get drunk so they don't have to think about not having any money."
Neat trick!
Yesterday I was watching a documentary about a killer whale catching a great white shark off the coast of California in 1997 . The story itself was interesting, with the people telling of what they saw and the film of the whale carrying the shark around in its mouth and the comments from the biologists about different pods of killer whales eating different foods, and the supposition that this whale learned how to kill great whites from a pod off the coast of Australia, or else he learned it on his own.
One thing curious to me was that none of the whale watching captains, the killer whale expert biologists, the narrator - none of them, ever referred to the whales as, "Orcas" but always as "killer whales." Wonder what that's all about.
Anyhow, the main curious thing to me was that a crew of fish biologists were at a group of barren islands off the coast of California - the Fallon or the Farron islands - I don't know which and I'm too lazy to look it up and it doesn't make any difference to my story anyhow, studying a group of about one hundred great white sharks that came there every year in October to feast on the sea lions that gathered there.
After the whale killed that shark - evidently a very unusual thing - never before seen anywhere outside of the Australian waters, no great white was ever seen that October in their gathering place in the Fallon or Farron islands. Over a hundred great whites disappeared immediately from the area after the killing of one of their own by a predator in that area. Think about that.
*******************************
On another program I watched that same day - a program called "Alaskan Patrol," one of the cops was saying that of the fourteen villages in that area, twelve of them were voted dry because alcohol caused so many problems. He said that there was a lot of unemployment in the villages so the villagers tended to drink out of despair and boredom.
Later on he says that the people could make an alcoholic beverage out of yeast, sugar and water, and it was ready to drink in 24 hours. (yech!) He then went on to say that a gallon of this stuff sold for $7. Then later he's talking about people buying a fifth of whisky in Nome for six dollars and then selling it in the villages for two hundred and fifty to three hundred dollars a fifth.
Now I'm thinking, "these people are unemployed, so they buy whisky at three hundred dollars a fifth to get drunk so they don't have to think about not having any money."
Neat trick!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
