67RModel

I am of the opinion that it was set into place on July 22, 1944 when the Bretton Woods Agreement was executed and put into place. This was the catalyzing event that essentially created globalization as we know it. The US Dollar was set up as the world reserve currency and in return for that the US agreed to patrol and police the World's oceans with its Navy to ensure the safety and free flow of goods. This is one of the main reasons why we still have carrier groups and submarines still constantly deployed and patrolling many of the hostile waterways around the globe. The US Secretary of state at the time, Cordel Hull believed the main cause of both World Wars was economic discrimination and trade warfare. He is quote at that time was: "Unhampered trade dovetailed with peace; high tariffs, trade barriers, and unfair economic competition, with war … if we could get a freer flow of trade…freer in the sense of fewer discriminations and obstructions…so that one country would not be deadly jealous of another and the living standards of all countries might rise, thereby eliminating the economic dissatisfaction that breeds war, we might have a reasonable chance of lasting peace." Once globalization took hold and each country could specialize in whatever it was they excelled in and the writing was on the wall for the American worker and factories. No longer were American companies competing with domestic entities. They were competing with anyone in the world willing to work for less. International trade was streamlined by foreign countries currencies having defined convertibility to the US Dollar via the IMF and the terms of the Bretton Woods Agreement. Since the US was the only industrialized country still left standing and completely unscathed by the war the "golden years" of the 50s and early 60s happened as they did. This was probably the most abnormal economic situation in human history. To this day many people still lament these times and use it as a basis for "normal" or how things should have remained. Its hard to loose when your the only game in town. By the late 1960s and 1970s Europe was back on line and developing nations had pools of essentially free labor. By the 1990s American manufacturing was a shell of it former self and the US economy had all but transitioned to a service-based economy. all NAFTA did was put the final nail in that coffin. Although I don't disagree it wasn't a criminal piece of legislation, the seeds for American industrial capacity decline were planted 50 years before.

Yes tube type is not synonymous with bias ply. Tube type tires can be bias or radial. My guess is all tubeless tires at this point are radials. 24" tube type are still readily available but not common. As are 22" tube type but even less common. I just posed some links the other day to several 22" tube type tires that are available. MRF Chinese brand. Bridgestone still makes a 12.00-24 tube type radial. Its the model L317. its a beefy drive lug. Close to $1000 each.

Mrf Superlug - Heavy Duty 11.00-22 25181180, $356.24 | SpeedyTire 1100-22 MISC. HWY RIB USED - Truck Tires - St. Louis Wholesale Tire 11.00R22 16PR H Sumitomo ST508 | OTRUSA.COM

Please cite the program's official name, budget, and possibly a link if it is not the one I previously mentioned sponsored by the American Lamb Board. I think anyone with a moderate level of common sense and zero education in agronomy, botany, and/or marine biology if asked would tell you it is a bad idea to let domesticated livestock have continuous, free range access to unnamed tributaries and larger waterways. I don't think the federal government needs to be handing millions of dollars out to people to tell us what we already know. Moreover, I don't think the federal government should be funding private enterprises' expenses. If this is some type of hardship program as a response to a new regulation to quickly bring everyone in compliance then just pass the regulation and give each affected party no less than 7 years to figure out how to bring themselves into compliance. That way everyone would be operating under the same set of circumstances. The government paying to build all or even a part of your fence, but none of somebody else's fence is the government picking winners and losers and market manipulation at its finest. However, to me it sounds like some politician, lobbyist, or bureaucrat's "pork project" disguised as "research". Without knowing exactly what program we are talking about its hard to say so I will defer any further discussion on it. I can't remember if it was this thread or another but I noted that the US agriculture industry is the most regulated and manipulated industry in the land. The USDA has more regulations on the books than any other federal entity. The list is endless. The USDA subsidizes insolvent operations. The USDA subsidizes industrial scale farms owned by millionaires and literal billionaires to not farm their land. Hmmm. IMO The USDA has an image of what the American farm should look like and the small 150 acre or less "family farm" doesn't resemble that image. My guess is most New Deal agriculture programs and legislation had negative, unintended consequences. However, definitely since Earl Butz's leadership tenure the USDA has continuously advanced legislation, programs, and manipulative forces to make small farms uncompetitive. It has created a situation where the entire "private" industry is essentially a government run entity with major control by about 5 or 6 mega corporations. The "prop" handed out to these insolvent operations is treating the symptom. If the USDA truly cared about small operations and a robust agricultural supply chain they would treat the illness. I wonder why the federal government hasn't set up a US Department of Plumbing. If it did it could start printing and borrowing tons of money to pay plumbers to stay home and not do plumbing work. Additionally, they could create a litany of laws and regulations that allow no more than 10 mega corporations to control the whole industry such that the only way a self employed, sole proprietor can remain solvent is by receiving federal welfare. I am of the opinion that if the USDA and the government as a whole removed itself from farmer's private business and private industry along with all the laws and regulations it has created since at least 1971, there would be no need for any of the subsidies it hands out. Moreover, small operators wouldn't need subsidies to be competitive, the large industrialized, factory farms wouldn't have taken hold, or both. I, like you, grow much of my own food. I purchased a small farm of about 30 acres so my family and I could be more independent and not have to rely so heavily the conventional food supply chain. Never the less I'm not worried. Last I checked under the current arrangement of farming, American farmers can produce enough food for 140% of the American population.

24.5" is for tubeless tires. Those are a dime a dozen at any wrecker or truck salvage place. Check scrap yards too. A lot of trucks and trailers get scrapped with the wheels and tires still on them.

Would you recommend reading Catch-22? I have never read it but always wanted to. Never found the time yet....

Why would the federal government meddle in sheep fencing, presumably on private land, in Boyertown, PA? Was this part of the $5,000,000 earmarked for the American Lamb Board for "Measuring the Climate Benefits and Emissions of Prescribed Sheep Grazing"? Are you suggesting that without federal farm subsidies we will not be able to get food?

Just a quick thought....What is on the back of the truck? Any type of specialized body? depending on build date, a 2004 Granite is nearly 26 years old at this point. If its just a chassis then good/decent, inspected, and running examples are a dime a dozen at this point. Is this job even worth the money and effort? Obviously you already own a "new" engine so my question my be moot if you can't return it for a refund. Not being disrespectful but just looking at the big picture.

Sounds like he is asking about new rims not tires. Where would you even find new 24", dayton, tube type rims? Overseas perhaps. Going off Vlad's pics from his motorcycle trip through Iran they seem to still be quite common on new trucks. I doubt there is anything like that still produced in this country. Maybe though. As to what size to get I would say whatever you have now. I believe they came in 8 and 8.5" widths depending on hub length and spacer bands used. 3 Piece Tubetype Wheels & Rims - GMI Wheels They have demountables in 8" and 10" width and discs in 8", 8.5" and 10" widths. My guess is you have 8 or 8.5" inch wide rims. My B81 had 8.5" wide rims....

They announced back in November they would be launching a new "flagship" highway semi truck in 2025. Probably just a Volvo VNL with a different grill and a bulldog on the hood.

Pretty hard to beat an EFM 520. I never got into stokers but am familiar. It’s not uncommon to hear of ones running essentially nonstop for decades without fault. I’m pretty sure they still make them pretty much unchanged from the original design.

Are you still in business? How do you heat that sucker? I couldn't imagine heating 10,000 sft just to tinker with old trucks.

Thats what I mean. Its like all these contracts or debits are so ridiculous it seems fake. The only way it makes sense is if the politicians that signed off on this garbage are somehow connected to the foreign entities receiving the money. Laundering the taxpayers' money to line their own pockets. It would be nice if they published who or what company is the actual receiver of these monies.

I know there is concerns with the "legality" or involvement of Musk in the administration. I've heard him called a "co president" as well as the same unelected bureaucrat he seeks to eliminate. I personally have zero issue with the man. I just wish he would not use his privately owned X platform as the basis for DOGE's website. I don't know how X makes money. I'm guessing from advertising throughout peoples' feeds. Obviously Musk doesn't need the money and I don't believe he is doing this for profit but using X as a quasi government website is a blatant conflict of interest and low lying fruit for the opposition. Hopefully there is something in the works that doesn't involve X. That however is a catch 22. Creating a new government website to post government waste and inefficiencies on is indeed wasteful and inefficient 😁

I know Trump, for the most part, actually does what he says he is going to do. I think sometime in December he mentioned DOGE, but had probably been preemptively planning it for a while in case he won the election. But here it is on a website you can somewhat follow along on. It almost seems fake. Like this stuff I'm reading the department is flagging for elimination is bat$hit bizarre. Like a $25,000 debit for "empowering LGTBQIA+ refugees in Greece". Like who is authorizing this garbage. Its almost like it isn't real. Assuming it is real the transparency is insane. Like this department is literally opening these crooked books for everyone to see. I can't ever recall a time where anything like this has happened before. Maybe that is why it almost seems fake....The level of transparency and bluntness is nothing you would ever get from an establishment politician.

Case In point. Per DOGE's website (assuming its accurate) the federal agency with the most regulations is the USDA.....21,060 separate pieces of regulation.

That is what you get as a result of industrial agriculture on a commodity-based system rather than subsistence agriculture or farms operating on a direct-to-consumer model. Prices for that stuff will never come down under the current arrangement. Big ag is no joke. The entire industry (row cropping) is a monopoly controlled by about 5 or 6 entities. JD, Archer Daniels Midland, Bayer, Dow Cargill & most importantly the US Govt. The meat side of it is no better. Vertically integrated into oblivion. Owned by 3 or 4 corporations. Farming in this country has been made into a disaster IMO.

Are farm subsidies on the chopping block? I haven't heard. If they are I would guess they would have to be cancelled via a revised congressional budget. My guess is its much easier to get away with cancelling "foreign aid" than a something like domestic farm subsidies. I don't really know though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Secretary Hegseth certainly walks the walk and talks the talk. I get the impression he is not pi$$ing around. I'm not really sure what the best experience would be to be considered the best or even a good secretary of defense. Only two of them since WWII have been generals and only about half of them have had actual military experience prior to becoming secretary. Hegseth has a good deal of real word experience and some actual combat experience in Iraq / Afghanistan. He is used to seeing the military at 3,500 ft. He's now at 30,000 ft. and looking down. I hope he knows what he's looking at. I hope he can get the armed forces as a whole straightened out and hopefully get recruitment moving in the correct direction.

End the Fed.

I assume the front bumper used to read "MERCURY". Has anyone every heard of that outfit? I think the radiator guard says "Wide Load" on it but has been painted over.

Watts Mack...... B81 Front Fender Set

Oddball

Interesting. Makes sense.

Has anyone ever heard of this? I have heard some stories from people with tons more experience and years under their belt than me that this can happen. I think it would pertain to older, mechanically injected and governed diesel engines. I think the scenario I was told was that a truck was off road on a very rough construction site and was stalled and immediately was subjected to forces or momentum that forced it to move backwards I'm guessing before the driver removed his foot from the throttle? So I guess my question is can it really happen? If so is it logical to assume all the forward gears would then be reverse gears and visa versa? Would shutting off the fuel and starting it with the key as normally done return the engine to normal rotation? I guess I'm just curious if this can really happen or if it is a tall tale.....