Putting it into perspective...

[Water Warrior 2]

Originally Posted by alanmcorcoran

I don't have the driver backrest but I do have the rider backrest. Fortunately, it's snaps on and snaps off so it's mostly off. I can still actually lift my foot up and over directly to get on if need be, but years of bicycle riding conditioned me to "saddle up" horse style, sweeping the right leg over the backend.

Maybe you can get one of those things they used to have to hoist the knights on to their mounts.

Actually a more useful item would be outriggers or a sidecar.

[patrick_777]

Outriggers? You mean training wheels?

[alantf]

Originally Posted by alanmcorcoran

Maybe you can get one of those things they used to have to hoist the knights on to their mounts.

It's called a "serf" :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Water Warrior 2]

Originally Posted by alantf

It's called a "serf" :lol: :lol: :lol:

Not another mouth to feed. I am not a rich Knight.

[dannylightning]

Originally Posted by alanmcorcoran

Dude, I have a Yamaha, not a Harley. There's no vibration. Just the purr of 1850cc's of neck snappin', asphalt chewing power!

that sounds bad ass, can i take it out for a spin lol.

[dhgeyer]

Interesting. This thread started with a kind of social/philosophical observation about North America's rate of consumption compared to the rest of the World, or at least a good part of it. The second post followed with a reminder of how lucky we are. From there it has turned into a sort of typical Internet forum armchair arms race, with people gleefully sharing just how big theirs is.

I personally am quite aware of the disparity in wealth and well being between different parts of the World. I have very mixed feelings about it. Part of me is grateful for my good fortune, and selfishly wants to keep things the way they are. I guess that's the kind of nationalistic, capitalistic, "we made it all happen so we should reap the rewards" kind of attitude. Another part of me is not comfortable with that. I guess that's the post '60s social justice part of me that I never seem to outgrow completely. I'd be more comfortable if I could make up my mind once and for all whether or not I want to have a social/political conscience!

In any case, I do think that the very capitalistic forces that created the huge chasm between different levels of consumption worldwide are very quickly leveling the playing field. It's called the "Global Economy". Like it or not, we are all competing for jobs with people all over the globe who would die for the opportunity to do them for a fraction of what we think we're worth. So the message is, treasure that big SUV, Stratoliner, BMW 1200, big Harley, and etc., because we aren't going to be in this position forever. I really believe that within my lifetime (the next 20 to 25 years), most of us will be lucky to have a 250 or a small, efficient car of any kind. And, let the flames begin, I can't say that I honestly object to this change. In a lot of ways, I think it will be good for us.

[burkbuilds]

We've been studying this economic situation in my Political Science class in school. The two main points of view seem to be, (1) Capitalism works, countries who don't have a fully developed economy can achieve the same levels over time if they modernize and follow the "capitalistic" model. Counties like S. Korea would be given as examples of this "working". or (2) The capitalist system only works because it exploits the 80% of the worlds population that lives in the "Global South" and takes their raw goods and services away without proper compensation and those countries can't do anything to get out of poverty because the "system" is stacked against them by the Global North countries that control the world economy. Those countries would say that S.Korea was only able to achieve what they've done because the US "allowed" them to do that after fighting a major war on their land, as a way to win them over to and keep them as a partner in capitalism not communism.

Interesting debate. From what I've seen so far there's no consensus on which is correct. Political Science seems to be a lot better at explaining why something did happen once it's over with for 50 years, than at predicting what can or will happen given existing circumstances. I might also add that most people in the "Global North" (capitalist countries) favor the first viewpoint, while most people in the "Global South" favor the second viewpoint. (Which sounds a lot like whining to me, "it's not my fault, it's somebody else's fault that I'm in this mess.) But, that's probably because I live in the global north.

[alanmcorcoran]

Boy you guys sure know how to knock the fun out of neck-snappin', asphalt-chewing power!

I'm no expert on the global economy or political science but I have some expereince in business. In the business world there are many kinds of participants: Creators, inventors, researchers, promoters, and risk takers; hard working laborers; exploiters and parasites; cheaters, slackers and coasters. There are very few of the first category, and they go largely unappreciated by the next three even though, with the exception of farming, they create most of the "jobs." There have been disparities in wealth since the beginning of civilization and, contrary to the implications of the "Global South" theory, there is plenty of wealth in Brazil and Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe and Mexico and Russia and China, etc. but it is held in fewer hands and most people do not feel they have any chance of accumulating any of it, (so they end up in categories 2-4.)

If you think our government is a bunch of sanctimonious, ineffective blowhards, they are noble geniuses compared to some of the regimes that these other places are saddled with. Culture and corruption are powerful economic forces and can often outweigh the effects of disparities in natural resources. (See Africa vs. Israel.)

And dh, if you think poverty will be "good for us", (a view I strongly disagree with!) you can join millions of severely over privileged folks sneaking across the border into Mexico for a better life.

[dhgeyer]

Originally Posted by alanmcorcoran

And dh, if you think poverty will be "good for us", (a view I strongly disagree with!) you can join millions of severely over privileged folks sneaking across the border into Mexico for a better life.

Alan,

I didn't use the word poverty. I don't think poverty, as I understand that word, is good for anyone. I think you probably know that. I also don't appreciate the sarcasm. I expected better from you.

I do think that, since we North Americans are able to do so, we (not all of us, but most) have become way too involved with the process of consumption beyond what is needed, or even healthy, for a good life. I think that explains a lot of our cultural difficulties. I think we'll be better off when we start paying more attention to other aspects of life, such as family, friends, parenting in particular, some sort of spiritual life (I don't advocate any particular "brand" of that), and voluntary service to others (not just financial, but as an active part of living).

I think there's a big difference between not having huge, "neck snapping" purely recreational motorcycles, and poverty. Remember, this is the GZ250 forum. A lot of people ride those, and have a lot of fun on them. It's great having the bigger, faster machines. But we don't really need them to go out and have a good time.

Dave

[Sarris]

I need both bikes to have fun. Conspicuous consumption? You Bet!!

:popcorn: :hide: :popcorn: :hide: :popcorn: :hide: :popcorn: