16YO trying to sail around the world, found alive with boat disabled, rescue on

[CaptainCrunch]

My old man has a real dark streak. His problem was that a 16 year old girl who's blond and cute is sailing around the world solo through the Indian Ocean and posting her location daily through the web.

When she first sounded the distress, his first thought was that she had been grabbed.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Sliver

First of all, the dolphin thing sounds like a giant waste of money.

Second, people are welcome to follow their dreams all they want, but they shouldn't expect them to be funded by taxpayers.

Clearly Trad is in the arts

[Byrns]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

My old man has a real dark streak. His problem was that a 16 year old girl who's blond and cute is sailing around the world solo through the Indian Ocean and posting her location daily through the web.

When she first sounded the distress, his first thought was that she had been grabbed.

I would imagine someone interested in abducting a young girl, would be able to find a slightly easier target.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

We can't just start to pick and choose who gets saved for free and who's not covered under the Adventure/Risky/Probably expecting bad weather exclusion clause.

Sure we can. If an insurer won't cover a risky adventure because it is too dangerous, than the adventurer should post a bond. If you want to feed your ego, then be prepared to pay when it all goes wrong.


IMO, it is selfish for anyone with dependants to participate in high risk sports. It is also selfish to expect taxpayers to underwrite your follies.

http://outside.away.com/peaks/features/transcript.html

How do climbers square the risk with the reward when embarking on these expeditions?

In fact, statistically the risk is closer to one in 33 [risk of dying]. And I don't square the risk. I mean, climbing is an irrational act. It makes no sense. It defies logic. It's something I'm compelled to do. I'm not sure why. I'm at a loss to explain it in any way that makes any sense.

I've written two books--Eiger Dreams and Into the Wild--that deal with this question of risk and why people do it. And I'm sure I've failed to explain it in both those books. I've devoted many months, years, in those books to try to explain this question and I haven't succeeded. I don't think I ever will. [Jon Krakauer]

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Sliver

First of all, the dolphin thing sounds like a giant waste of money.

Second, people are welcome to follow their dreams all they want, but they shouldn't expect them to be funded by taxpayers.

You would seriously let the dolphins die?

Secondly, the Canadian Taxpayers gave me (not loaned, granted me) $30,000 to go to school to follow my dreams, and only about a third of my income comes from it. Do you resent that?

[MelBridgeman]

When I lived in Vancouver, their were almost daily rescue missions on the North Shore to rescue skiers from the back country. It got the point were there were cries to make those being rescued responsible for the cost, not only because it was becoming costly for the goverment, but also seen as a way to maybe make people rethink their decision, most of these cries came from the rescuers themselves, who sometime risk their own lives to save someone else

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

You would seriously let the dolphins die?

Secondly, the Canadian Taxpayers gave me (not loaned, granted me) $30,000 to go to school to follow my dreams, and only about a third of my income comes from it. Do you resent that?

I don't know exactly what you did with that, so it's hard to judge if this grant was a waste or not. But, speaking in the abstract, the government feels that supporting the arts and/or investing in an educated populace is a wise investment in the cultural/economic development of the country. Someone pulling a stunt in no way contributes to "society" - in the end, it's a very selfish act.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I don't know exactly what you did with that, so it's hard to judge if this grant was a waste or not. But, speaking in the abstract, the government feels that supporting the arts and/or investing in an educated populace is a wise investment in the cultural/economic development of the country. Someone pulling a stunt in no way contributes to "society" - in the end, it's a very selfish act.

society has a duty to help insure the survival of the weakest.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

society has a duty to help insure the survival of the weakest.

just...

[troutman]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

society has a duty to help insure the survival of the weakest.

not the vainest

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Sliver

First of all, the dolphin thing sounds like a giant waste of money.

Second, people are welcome to follow their dreams all they want, but they shouldn't expect them to be funded by taxpayers.

From a purely biological point of view, I would argue that a pack of dolphins is more valuable to the biodiversity of the planet than 1 random teenaged human.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Byrns

I would imagine someone interested in abducting a young girl, would be able to find a slightly easier target.

Yeah, but more profitable?

The girl was famous, cute, a U.S. citizen, with fairly well off parents who was in the news.

Hell the ransom alone would be huge.

Let alone if your a flesh peddler opening bidding to the highest bidder.

[Traditional_Ale]

^ "Taken" was an awesome movie. If little girls Dad was Liam Neeson's character...

[Traditional_Ale]

^ Thanks man! You're my hero!

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

You would seriously let the dolphins die?

Secondly, the Canadian Taxpayers gave me (not loaned, granted me) $30,000 to go to school to follow my dreams, and only about a third of my income comes from it. Do you resent that?

It's not a matter of me letting them die; animals die in the wild all the time. Don't be ridiculous.

Actually I do. I'm opposed to governments funding the arts. If your artistic ventures aren't profitable then they are hobbies. And nobody offers to pay for me to snowboard, buy cars and generally just hang out, which is what I like to do in my spare time.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by fotze

Sliver you missed the memo, the thread has reached that inevitable point where everyone concedes that we aren't going to agree and we start cracking jokes.

True. But there always has to be one guy that keeps carrying on all serious like. I figured that could be me this time.

[burn_this_city]

I'm trying to figure out how this thread went from stupid 16 year old sailor to the government funding the arts.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'm trying to figure out how this thread went from stupid 16 year old sailor to the government funding the arts.

I compared funding for rescuing people who don't deserve it to funding for education for people who don't deserve it.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I compared funding for rescuing people who don't deserve it to funding for education for people who don't deserve it.

At least you're honest about not deserving it.

[Traditional_Ale]

^ It's good to be Canadian.