Matias
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Butte County
《《Big Sigh》》
People try to reassure me that BANFF is over rated, but the picture seem to indicate otherwise. I'll try to get over it.
Fu*%face Von Clownstick
- Thread starter Nish
- Start date
People try to reassure me that BANFF is over rated, but the picture seem to indicate otherwise. I'll try to get over it.
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
Minnesotans have always had room in our hearts for Canadians, Dohn’cha know, Eh?You're not wrong, but you know that the listed places are the ones that voted against the d, right? Please accept us
Maybe we do a potluck. The restaurant selection in my neck of the woods is lacking, unless you want basic pub fare.
Banff is beautiful in the way Tahoe is. They're overpriced tourist towns. You can find better scenery throughout the Rockies
Matias
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Butte County
Frankly, as a whole, Minnesotans have already struck me as some of the the kindest and most pleasant Americans I have encountered.
Matias
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Butte County
Potluck actually is my favorite.
That's the most useful analogy I have heard for Banff, as I am very familiar with Tahoe. Thank you so much for finding a good, regionally appropriate comparison.
Funny story. When I was maybe 9 or 10, I decided that Minnesota would be my favourite state if anyone ever asked. I started following all the pro sports teams, studied the geography and history of it, and later in my teen years tried to keep up on Minnesotan politics. I wanted to be able to talk about my favourite state!
Fast forward to today and the Twins, T-Wolves, and Golden Gophers are my favourite teams in their respective leagues (Wild and Vikings are 2nd's), I've had a chance to visit (although for not nearly long enough), and I was fan-girling over Tim Walz be chosen as VP candidate.
evo
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- My Island, WA
Parts of Alberta are freaking beautiful, I’ve spent some time with the Blackfeet that giant rockslide is sumthin else.
what part of Canada are you in? For some reason I thought Manitoba. Any advise for getting a passport overseas? That’s next on my list
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
@BoomslangFunny story. When I was maybe 9 or 10, I decided that Minnesota would be my favourite state if anyone ever asked. I started following all the pro sports teams, studied the geography and history of it, and later in my teen years tried to keep up on Minnesotan politics. I wanted to be able to talk about my favourite state!
Fast forward to today and the Twins, T-Wolves, and Golden Gophers are my favourite teams in their respective leagues (Wild and Vikings are 2nd's), I've had a chance to visit (although for not nearly long enough), and I was fan-girling over Tim Walz be chosen as VP candidate.
Which of the MN accents have you adopted
evo
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- My Island, WA
oh wrong coast
evo
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- My Island, WA
Hey guess what the logical conclusion is of trumps tariffs?
Orange juice just got more expensive for Canadians. https://www.canada.ca/en/department...ge-in-response-to-unjustified-us-tariffs.html
Orange juice just got more expensive for Canadians. https://www.canada.ca/en/department...ge-in-response-to-unjustified-us-tariffs.html
Stumpsprouts
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Asheville
Yesterday I spent the whole day driving around a reporter from the Guardian to talk about tree damage during Helene and survey the damage. Pretty interesting conversations.
At one point she had us pull into an encampment in Swannanoa which turned out to be this stronghold of a far right group called Veterans On Patrol. It was a little hairy there but got an interesting sense of what that leader thinks of this storm- that it was caused by the US Military for a land grab for precious minerals. Trump as it happens stood just 20’ from where we interviewed this guy when he came to visit the other day. These guys think he’s going to somehow make this all better even though Trump also said he is going to cut or shut down FEMA. I don’t understand the disconnect.
We have a lot to be worried about right now, and instead of goddamn civil war we need to make sure everyone can get food and medicine in the months and years to come because the more the govt squeezes us and makes those things harder, the easier it is to blame our neighbors rather than the people in power… resist that temptation, please. There’s no where safe to go. I’m very vulnerable in some ways where I am - but I also feel strongly I should not be intimidated out of this beautiful place I’ve called home, with all the paths and trees and shrubs and garden beds that I’ve poured my heart and soul into, and my friends and family and the forests I love so dearly.
At one point she had us pull into an encampment in Swannanoa which turned out to be this stronghold of a far right group called Veterans On Patrol. It was a little hairy there but got an interesting sense of what that leader thinks of this storm- that it was caused by the US Military for a land grab for precious minerals. Trump as it happens stood just 20’ from where we interviewed this guy when he came to visit the other day. These guys think he’s going to somehow make this all better even though Trump also said he is going to cut or shut down FEMA. I don’t understand the disconnect.
We have a lot to be worried about right now, and instead of goddamn civil war we need to make sure everyone can get food and medicine in the months and years to come because the more the govt squeezes us and makes those things harder, the easier it is to blame our neighbors rather than the people in power… resist that temptation, please. There’s no where safe to go. I’m very vulnerable in some ways where I am - but I also feel strongly I should not be intimidated out of this beautiful place I’ve called home, with all the paths and trees and shrubs and garden beds that I’ve poured my heart and soul into, and my friends and family and the forests I love so dearly.
Hear, hear! Enough with the hate, history of past events that can't be changed and
ill-thought plans of retribution. It is small-minded and juvenile.
This is a time people need to connect more not less and work things out, not slam shut doors and minds.
Last edited:
I apologize if I am overstepping here, but did you vote for Trump?
Well then do something. I haven't heard a single Republican or Democrat politician stick their head out of the sand long enough to sneeze let alone try and stand up for their core values. Or do they have core values any longer?
You put an egomaniacal, sociopath in the most powerful position in the world and when shit starts hitting the fan you think sitting around the fire with a peace pipe singing Kumbaya is going to do anything? Logic, compassion, and reasoning only work on people who are open to it. What indications have you been given that the current administration is rational?
Trump doesn't care about you, your family, your neighbour, your town, your business, none of it. He straight up says there's nothing you can do to stop me. He's taunting you at every turn.
Matias
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Butte County
As for trumps notion of "drill baby, drill":
Even if you don't think climate change is real, or you think it might be something, but humans have nothing to do with it, or even if humans may have some role, but it's not from fossil fuel emissions, does anyone not believe that it is a finite resource that is already dwindling in its availability globally?
Unless it is an infinite resource, shouldn't we be developing plans for it's inevitable exhaustion? Like, even if you support getting every last bit of petro fuels out of the earth, why wouldn't you also support the continued development of as many non petro energy sources?
Even if you don't think climate change is real, or you think it might be something, but humans have nothing to do with it, or even if humans may have some role, but it's not from fossil fuel emissions, does anyone not believe that it is a finite resource that is already dwindling in its availability globally?
Unless it is an infinite resource, shouldn't we be developing plans for it's inevitable exhaustion? Like, even if you support getting every last bit of petro fuels out of the earth, why wouldn't you also support the continued development of as many non petro energy sources?
Last edited:
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.
Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”
Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.
The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.
The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.
One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.
There isn’t another Canada.
So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.
Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.
Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.
For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.
Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.
From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
— Prof. David Honig, Indiana University
Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”
Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.
The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.
The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.
One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.
There isn’t another Canada.
So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.
Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.
Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.
For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.
Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.
From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”
— Prof. David Honig, Indiana University
New threads New posts
-
test
-
Free CEUs: February 05 & March 05 - 'Urban Forestry Today' Webcasts @ Noon (Eastern)- Started by UFT
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
