What do you do for a living, Bernard?
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> Dear Phil,
>
> Without wishing to make an issue out of it whatsoever, and, whilst actually
> understanding what is really meant by the statement, it is actually wrong! -
> factually or literally is open to some debate with openmindedness! It doesn't
> matter actually what industry is spoken of, since people die in every one of
> them or any, whether by the act of participation in, or as a result of. To
> single out mining as a killer is an easy task, yes, mercury ore mining was (&
> is), a risky act of industry, and obviously many have died in it's extraction
> - many have of course died in it's general use as well it must not be
> forgotten, let alone the pollution/destruction caused by it in many parts of
> the World. Coal miners must not think they are the only ones who suffer: the
> Kinnaird Commission of 1890's stated that it was considered in Cardiganshire
> that once a lead miner in certain parts of that region reached the age of 30
> he was, quote, "not worth the snap of a finger". It must also not be
> forgotten that the wages paid to same were considerably more than agriculture
> in many regions of Britain, and in fact the miners lot (in income), was
> indeed a lot better than than many other industries - indeed the chemical
> industry of those times was rather fraught....... let alone it's final usage.
> I site the case of the Weardale lead miners, who, whilst possibly being
> 'lucky' - though it was actually common in many areas - also had a field to
> keep a cow or two, maybe a few sheep, & a pig, etc., etc., did in actual fact
> do quite well in diet. Agricultural workers however were in total poverty,
> and depended nearly always on 'charity' of the employer. The mill worker was
> totally dependent on the mill owner. So who was actually worse off? Miners
> have always been regarded as getting a bad deal, when in fact their wages
> have always been higher than other industries, their working conditions of
> course have been bad in many cases, but no worse than the agricultural
> industry; both had/have to work in wet conditions, both have had to work long
> hours, but the latter has always worked for less and has had a far worse
> deal. Yes, certain mining camps around the World have had intolerable
> conditions to contend with, but many made fortunes out of them or at least
> made something out of it: those who undertook the treck and the conditions
> did it of their own free will, and could afford to do so - even as a gamble -
> whereas there were many who wished to do so but could not. Yes, there were
> non mining people who joined in the various rushes, but on analysis they
> could afford to do so - even if it meant they had to sell everything. Miners
> the World over - and I mean those who actually do the digging - have been
> known for a higher intelligence than their counterparts in other occupations
> - they have to be: the habit of the gambler is within all those involved in
> mining, whether it be the miner or the employer, they are always
> 'looking/searching' for riches. Someone siting blood being spilt in mining to
> make a point really must look far more generally, since there are many others
> who have suffered a far worse fate. Regards, Bernard
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|