Miscellaneous desk
< September 3	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 5 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 4

VIntage Audio Equipment Value

I have a few vintage audio electronics I would like to sell, but i have really no idea about the value or where to sell this stuff. In particular i have a Technics SL-1950 Turntable, a Technics SL-PD867 5 Disc Changer, a Technics SA-GX350 Reciever, and a RCA SCT-520 Stereo Cassette Desk. All Those items work and are in good condition (besides usal scratches that happen over the year). Can anyone tell me where I could sell those items and how much they are approximately worth? I apprechiate any kind of help --Alosolo (talk) 01:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Search for the same items on eBay and Amazon. μηδείς (talk) 02:22, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On eBay, right now:

The turntable is on sale for $60 - but has gotten zero bids (someone else is optimistically asking $350 for it).
The disk changer is up for prices ranging from $19 to $25 (with no bids) but one of them (which includes the remote and the manuals) has two bids at $75...I'm not sure why - but perhaps people value it having *ALL* of the stuff like manuals and remote.
There are lots of the receivers for sale - prices are all over the place from maybe $60 and up - but I don't see any with bids on them.
There are LOADS of these cassette decks for sale too - and even at $19, there are no bidders.

Things are only worth what they can be sold for - and from what I can see here, nobody is buying them at any reasonable price. That means that they are essentially worthless. If I were you, I'd put all four items into one eBay auction with a $50 reserve and see where you get...but I'm not optimistic. They'll cost considerably more to ship than they're worth. SteveBaker (talk) 18:24, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the value/market, you might be better off trying to unload them on kijiji or similar local market. The buyer will be local, so you don't have to worry about shipping costs, and while the total audience is much smaller than eBay, there are still lots of folks who don't fancy using online auctions (or getting electronics through the mail). Matt Deres (talk) 18:54, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - you could use Craigslist here in the USA. SteveBaker (talk) 19:38, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a vendor my parents use in New Jersey, Qwik Pack & Ship, who will receive an item from you, place it on sale for a 99c to $9.99 minimum bid on their ebay account, buyer pays shipping, and if it sells, they take a 28% commission. If it doesn't sell after a week you reclaim the item. No cost to you, no risk, you make 72% of the ebay sale price or you get the item back. μηδείς (talk) 21:03, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I chuckle at the idea of "vintage" CD and cassette players. My vintage audio includes an Edison disc player, and Edison cylinder player, a 1920's radio receiver, and a 1940's radio-phonograph. A 1970's turntable is among the newer stuff. Edison (talk) 02:24, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vintage CD player, from clear back in the 1980s, yep. So, do you happen to have a 1950s-era Dictaphone, with those wide rubber belts? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:24, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

American politician and his daughter

I was reminded of a rally where some American politician mentioned that his daughter was single but I can't remember who it was that said it. It was something along the lines of "Hey guys, she's a great catch" sort of comment. I want to say it was in the last four years but might have been a bit earlier than that. And I think it was at a celebration where the winner gets a chance to introduce his family to the public. It caused the usual sort of media kerfuffle that most political gaffes do. Does anyone remember this? It's not for anything important other than the fact that it's on the tip of my brain who it was but I just can't remember. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 10:27, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was during the last presidential cycle. μηδείς (talk) 15:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, you remember it but can't think of who it was either, eh? Dismas|^(talk) 17:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it came down to either Obama or Romney, my money would be on Romney. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:33, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was Scott Brown and she was quite attractive. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705359848/Scott-Browns-victory-comment-leaves-daughter-Ayla-Brown-blushing.html?pg=all

Thank you! I can rest easier now. Dismas|^(talk) 22:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So it's Ayla Brown then. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 00:04, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Affordable Care Act and trans benefits

Obamacare is introducing essential health benefits that include mental health coverage. Has there been any discussion on what this means for trans people? Gender dysphoria is covered by the DSM and modern treatment reccomends therapists, hormone replacement therapy and even surgeries. I would expect that mental health benefits would be expected to cover these treatments, but I haven't heard anything about it. I don't have a name (talk) 17:01, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that everything in the DSM will be covered. I have Asperger syndrome - which the latest version of the DSM recently reclassified as "Autism (spectrum)" - and I'm certainly not covered. There must be some kind of criteria for what's accepted and what isn't - but "being in the DSM" can't be it. SteveBaker (talk) 15:42, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty much what I figured - the DSM thing was mainly pointing out that it is a recognized mental health issue, so in a reasonable world you would expect it to be covered by mental health insurance. The sources I've seen all use the same language to discuss the essential benefits, I don't know where to find a more in-depth explanation. I would guess that it would be codified in the law itself, but it also seems strange to legislate what conditions do and do not count as mental health when research is constantly changing our understanding. I don't have a name (talk) 17:51, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble is that medical costs are high - and as a society, we can't afford to cover everything. So there comes a point at which you have to say that some condition has to be endured without free treatment. It's almost impossible to legislate for. Many conditions in the DSM (like mine) are "spectrum" conditions where some people have the condition in such a serious form that it's debilitating - and others have it so mildly that they are hardly even aware of it and are hardly inconvenienced by it at all. In a true spectrum condition (such as the new DSM definition of Autism) - you can't possibly draw a line in the sand and say "this person isn't ill enough to be covered and that person who is 0.01% worse off gets free treatment"...assuming you can even measure the extent of the problem with any kind of precision - which is essentially impossible for most psychological maladies. So laws are drawn up on relatively vague terms that politicians can understand and the administrators, doctors and case-workers are left to determine who gets treatment and who doesn't. It's not a particularly satisfying setup - but it's very hard to imagine anything that would work any better and yet still be affordable. SteveBaker (talk) 19:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dry sense of humor?

What does this expression mean? Miss Bono^[zootalk] 18:30, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See dry humor. Basically, it's someone who likes jokes which are told and received without much outward emotional expression. -- 205.175.124.72 (talk) 18:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our article dry humor links to the Spanish article humor seco. Look on the leftmost side of the English article, find where it says Espaňol, and click there to go to the Spanish article. μηδείς (talk) 17:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It says that in English it is know as Deadpan Miss Bono^[zootalk] 13:48, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are several terms for it. Deadpan specifically means the jokes are made by someone who doesn't smile or react to the jokes himself, with a blank expression; i.e., a dead pan. μηδείς (talk) 22:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's really "dry" as the opposite of "sweet" rather than "dry" as the opposite of "wet". Dry humor doesn't usually involve telling actual jokes. It's generally used in the context of someone who can come up with a sharp witticism in response to something that just happened - but it could also be used (for example) in the case of someone who creates really subtle practical jokes - or humor that takes a long time to emerge and be recognized. It's more generally accepted as being smarter - more intelligent. Someone like Winston Churchill would be noted for having an exceptionally dry sense of humor. When some woman complained that he was drunk, he replied "I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly." or "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." or "Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put.". SteveBaker (talk) 14:21, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should I feel offended if someone tell me that I have a dry sense of humour? O_o? Someone did and I had no idea of what dry sense of humour meant so that's the reason I came here to ask. Miss Bono^[zootalk] 18:21, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]