...and his widow, Harriet Fell, is a CS Professor (emerita) at Northeastern[0], and an accomplished cyclist who completed Paris-Brest-Paris (a 1200km ride and to qualify you have to complete 200km, 300km, 400km, and 600km rides in the 8 months leading up to it.)
Oh thank god. I was planning on a 200km, 300km, and 400km this year, all as mental preparation, and then having to blitz next year by traveling to warmer locales. I
I'm doing my 200km at the end of April, and my 300km in early July, followed by a 400km gravel in early August. Going to be a grind.
I tried qualifying for PBP with some friends and we were fried on the 600. We did some longer rides, but never so intensively and without rest. Such good times. Maybe one day (likely when my kids are grown) I'll try again. I still dream of eating so much French food after annihilating myself on a bicycle. It sound incredible.
This is really obscured by the K-shaped growth, dual economy now. We've reached a stable pattern of a deep underclass serving the wealthy. We won't have a crash or "correction" because the entrenched top 5% has figured out a way extract value from everyone else indefinitely.
> This is really obscured by the K-shaped growth, dual economy now. We've reached a stable pattern of a deep underclass serving the wealthy. We won't have a crash or "correction" because the entrenched top 5% has figured out a way extract value from everyone else indefinitely.
Apologies for quoting all 3 sentences of parent, but the poorly-drawn conclusion depends on the full sequence of seemingly rational statements.
The context this sequence is missing is that approximately 70% of the US economy depends on consumer spending. [0][1] If the lower stroke of the K-economy diverges too much from the upper, the economy is going to grind to halt.
Consumer spending of the bottom 90% cannot (easily?) be replaced by the top 10%.
I used to think along these lines. But now I think the truth is - does it matter if the economy grinds to a halt? Perhaps the ruling class can still keep enough Americans comfortable enough, and fearful of losing more, doing largely pointless jobs, to stay passive - and that’s all they need to do to completely bifurcate the society such that they face no threat to their own position.
Clothes in '80s were overall louder than the minimalist aesthetics of today. It all fits in with gen z's apprehension at being perceived, related to "cancel culture" and cameras everywhere.
reply