mike carey

Yes, Yes ... I will do my best!

The start time on the program is midnight UTC/GMT on 31 Dec 69/1 Jan 70, so when it adjusts to local time in the US it's between 4pm (Pacific) and 7pm (Eastern) on 31 Dec. For me the 'adjusted time' is 10am on 1 Jan.

Don't overthink it. Enjoy your time with him. If you move on, reflect on your time together. You may have a broader off-the-clock chat relationship, if so, enjoy it.

The Economist offers an opinion piece on Boeing management. Qantas has just announced that the group has converted existing A321 neo orders to A321XLRs and added 10 for a total of 36 in a total order of 109 A321s. Delivery is still some years out. As far as I'm aware they have no B737MAX orders Schumpeter Boeing’s boss wins a reprieve, not redemption Three tests to decide whether Dennis Muilenburg should keep his job Print edition | Business Jun 22nd 2019 FEAR OF FLYING is a strange thing. In the early days of flight, those who wanted to be airborne were considered crazy. These days, those who don’t are seen as odd. Even habitual flyers engage in reassurance rituals: from prayers and hand-holding to pills and alcohol. That people get on aeroplanes at all is a matter of trust. They believe they are well made, that pilots are well trained and the industry well regulated. In its 103-year history, Boeing, the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer, has sought to build that trust with a safety-first culture. This has been thrown into disarray since two of its 737 MAX passenger jets crashed in Indonesia in October and Ethiopia in March, killing all 346 passengers and crew on board. Dennis Muilenburg, Boeing’s boss, is a Bible-reading company lifer who looks the part, from the cut of his jaw to the azure of his eyes. Yet to many his metronomic, defensive response to the disasters has compounded the mistrust in Boeing. On June 18th, just as questions about his future were percolating at the Paris Air Show, he won a reprieve. IAG, the parent company of British Airways and Iberia, said it would buy 200 new 737 MAX aircraft, the first order for the jet since it was grounded over three months ago. Although IAG will receive big discounts and the planes will only be delivered between 2023 and 2027, it was a vote of confidence in the MAX’s rejigged safety system. The big challenge for Mr Muilenburg is to convince the flying public at large to renew their faith in Boeing. His job hangs on it. Boeing’s top brass has belatedly used the Paris show to offer full apologies for the crashes. The crisis, as well as being devastating for the families of those killed, has hit morale among the planemakers’ employees. But amid civil lawsuits on victims’ behalf, and potential criminal investigations by the Department of Justice and the FBI, Boeing’s army of lawyers still appear to vet every word that emerges from Mr Muilenburg’s mouth. That has made a bad situation worse—not least because many countries where Boeing operates do not appreciate its buttoned-down, legalistic approach to crisis management. His relentless efforts to portray the disasters as just a blip in Boeing’s sterling safety record suggest a man eager to get back to business as usual. In civil aerospace Boeing is a business-to-business company. Its customers are airlines and leasing firms, not passengers. It shows. The troubles Mr Muilenburg still faces are threefold. The first comes from downplaying the 737 MAX’s problems, which carries legal risks. Shortly after the crash in Indonesia, Boeing hinted at maintenance and pilot problems at Lion Air, even though it soon discovered that its engineers had known 13 months before about a flaw in a cockpit warning system. The issue had not been reported to Boeing’s senior executives, regulators or customers. The company has insisted that its anti-stall software, known as MCAS, did not compromise safety, even after investigators found that it overwhelmed pilots in both disasters, and has since been fixed. The firm has set up a committee to review the certification process of the MAX, even though it and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) maintain that the MCAS was designed in an orthodox way. Mr Muilenburg has admitted that self-certification, in which Boeing examines itself under FAA oversight, may need improvement. The second problem is global regulation. After the Ethiopian tragedy, Mr Muilenburg called President Donald Trump to try to stop the FAA from grounding the plane. That set the tone for his tin-eared handling of the crisis. Since the groundings, he has repeated that the MAX will soon be back in business, once the FAA approves the MCAS software fix, as it is soon expected to. His apparent confidence in the FAA’s authorisation raises further questions about its relationship with Boeing. It highlights a wider problem. After the Ethiopian disaster, the FAA was slower than its counterparts to ground the MAX. Other regulators, such as those in China, may be hesitant to follow the FAA’s leadin approving the fix. Given a majority of Boeing’s business is outside America, that matters. The biggest danger is to Boeing’s brand. Though the firm is part of a civil-aviation duopoly with Airbus, competition between the two is fierce. Reputation is vital. In the months following the Ethiopian disaster, a narrative has taken root that Boeing cut corners in bringing the 737 MAX into service in order to keep up with Airbus’s popular A320neo. Some say this is unfair. But Boeing’s reluctance to take its share of the blame may have lost it what Dómhnal Slattery, boss of Avolon, a large aeroplane-leasing firm, calls the “communications battle”. As he told the Seattle Times during the Paris Air Show, Boeing appears to have forgotten about its biggest constituency: passengers. “What if the aeroplane gets back into the air and no one wants to fly it for 12 or 24 months?” Mr Slattery asked. “Every airline in the world will want to cancel or defer.” The risks to Boeing’s 737 MAX order backlog—of 4,550 jets at the end of May—remain huge, in other words. It was dealt a further blow in Paris when Airbus announced first orders for a long-range, narrow-body jet, the A321XLR, that will compete with a new midsized aircraft that Boeing will not launch for years. End-of-year MAX The share price of the $210bn company suggests investors are supportive of Mr Muilenburg. The IAG deal has bought time. Yet it would be a grave mistake to imagine that Boeing’s main task is to get the 737 MAX back in the sky fast. Instead it has to deal with the aura of incompetence and evasion surrounding the firm. To do that, Boeing’s board should strip Mr Muilenburg of his dual chairman/chief executive role and appoint an independent chairman, who sets three tests. First, Boeing must publish an independent investigation into what went wrong. Second, it has to rebuild relations with foreign regulators who now matter more than the discredited FAA. Last, it has to establish that flyers believe the 737 MAX is safe. If Boeing cannot pass those tests by the end of the year, its board should ask Mr Muilenburg to leave.◼ This article appeared in the Business section of the print edition under the headline "Trust-busting"

I applaud your heroic defence of the right wing US demonisation of everything to do with Cuba, your talkng points are pitch perfect, so I guess gullibility can be a double edged sword. You speak as though successive US administrations and their often politicised agencies have never stretched the truth to to suit their own purposes. And no, I don't know whether the Cuban statistics have been fudged nor indeed whether they might be inaccurate for lack of rigour rather than malign intent, but I also don't have reasons to believe that they have been. Dictators lie isn't an argument. You simple assume the worst because Cuba.

Most people are not, but most is not all. Some take things at face value, many do so wilfully. But hey, never let the truth or logic get in the way of alt-right group think (sic). But of course, no health care system is perfect, and they all ration its provision to some extent. You can compare health care systems by looking at minutiae or at overall outcomes. There's plenty wrong with the Cuban system when you look at the details of how it works but there's much it gets right when you look at population level health indicators.

Been there!

There are previous threads that discuss his past, this is not the place to rehash them. This thread is about his current availability in New York state.

Not quite, hearsay is when someone reports what someone else has said had happened, rather than a direct witness reporting what they actually saw. So, it's indirect rather than direct evidence. Hearsay may be able to be substantiated and it may be true, but it cannot be used (in a court of law) to substantiate other evidence or as evidence in its own right.

Not funny in a 'laugh-out-loud' sort of way, but still funny in another sense is the typo on the new Australian $50 notes. The Reserve Bank's response? 'Nobody died.' https://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/no-one-died-behind-the-typo-on-the-new-50-note-20190618-p51yqg.html

It's been canvassed in other threads but narrative comments are visible everywhere except the US, so I can see them when I log on from here but not when I'm in the US. If you are in the US you need to use a virtual private network (VPN) that allows you to appear to be in, say, the Netherlands.The 'how to' has been posted here before but I don't know how to do it.

I know how that works. As I said, I go to where they are.

I work on the principle that if I want to meet someone I go to where they are. I'm sure Mike would have travelled to Australia if the circumstances were right. If he were here I'd try to meet him but meeting him in the US would be the best way to go.

I should have weighed in earlier. As far as I'm concerned, Mike is smart, hot and engaged. I'd see him again in a heartbeat. But I am not everyone. Almost everyone has an opinion similar to mine, but 'almost' is not 'everyone'. It shouldn't come as a surprise that someone didn't click with him. It doesn't say anything about that person, it's simply a reminder that no matter how well someone is regarded, they aren't a match with everyone. That said, unless your self-worth is deflated if you meet even one guy with whom you don't click, call Mike and set up a meeting. The chance that you will be disappointed is vanishingly small.

The latest Economist podcast has an interview with Armistead Maupin. https://play.acast.com/s/theeconomistasks/468dedb0-0cd1-4108-89cb-5b6170f20b3a

I was about to make a cow reference but realised it would be of a political nature and not appropriate for this forum. So sorry, D_v_n.

Yes, the pricing is odd. It's not clear whether the prices are in AUD or USD. I'd assume AUD so 1 hour would be about USD280. (His phone number is an Australian mobile and is listed in the Australian domestic format.)

You may well say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Him? Not so much. Freedom™.

https://rent.men/DominiKingNYC

Ouch!

I read Eric's comments rather differently than you, perhaps I was missing the point. I took his point to be that there is sticker shock in being presented with a monthly HOA bill when people living in stand-alone houses have no such bill. While houses have no equivalent, if you add up all the necessary expenses in owning and maintaining a house it can come close to or even exceed HOA fees over time. I say over time because it may be possible to defer payment for housing maintenance. For example, you pay a monthly contribution in your HOA fee towards expenses like roof repairs or painting that may be years off, whereas if it's your house you don't need to find the money until the work is required.

Most Monday nights the ABC screens an episode of 'Australian Story', a half hour show charting some interesting aspect of the life of an Australian. Sometimes they are famous, sometimes just interesting, but it provides a generally sympathetic look at its subject. Last night's was searing. In 2014 an Australian couple, their three young children and the wife's father were on holidays in Amsterdam. The couple decided to stay on for a couple of extra days, while the grandfather took the children home to Perth for the start of the school term. They waved their family off in their taxi to catch their flight back to Australia, on flight MH17. You know what happened next. The program documents their grief and how they have rebuilt their lives since the world ended.

Oh, I'd meet up with you to talk about why that would be a good idea.

@WilliamM I've been to the US five times in the last three years or so, but for 10 days to two weeks (not for a weekend). I appreciate that people would not want to travel long distances for short periods away. I also appreciate that many people will limit their trips away to those they can take travelling by land. But if you're going to fly, I don't see any real difference between going to Florida and going to PV or Mazatlán, if you gotta fly, three or five hours is much the same.