Jump to content

The Greatest Generation? Overrated?


bbb

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

I do that as well.... I figured then it allows them to decide if they want to claim it on their taxes or not. If it goes through your credit card, they absolutely have to....

It may be wrong, but I figure hell, I already paid taxes on that money so why should I make someone else do that too

Uh, I was referring to the cheap French Canadian habit of tipping so little that it's done in coins rather than paper money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

There were far fewer fatties before The Smoking Ban.  Something to consider.

Well, a lot of things have changed, fast food, microwave ovens and increased availability of cheap unhealthy food. 

 

And, as a side note, I just think that Tom Brokaw is a little weasel. "Greatest Generation" is just a marketing strategy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, row_33 said:

image.png.a50f3704ee60d49018c45c0d8d6a1141.png

 

Babies from before the smoking ban were a Million Times Tougher

and

had a Million Times more Testosterone

than the Millenial "guys" of Today.

 

This is Settled Science.

 

IMA140068.jpg

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, row_33 said:

sitting in the back of an unsafe at any speed car with 3 people chain smoking and the windows rolled up was a Darwinian test of survival.

at least now we know...

i kid.. i kid...

Edited by Foxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Babies from before the smoking ban were a Million Times Tougher

and

had a Million Times more Testosterone

than the Millenial "guys" of Today.

 

This is Settled Science.

 

IMA140068.jpg

We were much more sophisticated:

 

image.jpeg.ed27a50f93c0b4c43cf75b83c3550ed2.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

In reality I think that the Greatest Generation had that moniker placed upon them by circumstances. We were attacked in WW2 much like we were attacked on 9/11. There was a great outcry and surge of patriotism in both of those instances. In WW2 about 60% of the servicemen were drafted and 40% were volunteers. It's a misnomer though in that starting in 1942 volunteers between the ages of 18 and 37 were prohibited. To get into the service one had to be drafted. Supposedly this was done to limit recruits and the subsequent training to an amount that could be handled efficiently. 

 

 

It was more because volunteers could specify what service, and what specialty, they could go in to, which by 1943 was creating an unmanageable imbalance in manpower allocation.  Not everyone could join the Marines.  Drafting allowed a more efficient allocation of personnel.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

It was more because volunteers could specify what service, and what specialty, they could go in to, which by 1943 was creating an unmanageable imbalance in manpower allocation.  Not everyone could join the Marines.  Drafting allowed a more efficient allocation of personnel.

 

Air Force was the immediate choice, but they winnowed out people quickly for any possible flaw.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...