View Single Post
  #21   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
T i m T i m is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,431
Default Outdoor radiant (IR?) heaters - experiences?

On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:53:40 -0800 (PST), Nick Cat
wrote:

On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 18:05:57 UTC, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:58:33 +0000, wrote:

On 04/12/2020 01:43, williamwright wrote:
On 03/12/2020 19:28, wrote:

Please consider wearing a hat and coat instead. We all waste far too
much energy without adding to the waste with more of these ridiculous
things.

Bugger off! It's none of your business.

Bill
Nor yours, FWIW (unless you're an alias of the OP). The difference is
that I was polite and made a positive suggestion.
(No reply required)

Basically Bills view on the world is that if you can afford it, and
presumably it's not actually illegal, he / anyone should be allowed to
do it, no matter how much it might impact anyone / thing else.


He is.


Except, things change and then he can't. In many cases a group of
people already know that the changes are afoot and change before they
are forced to, simply because it's the *right thing* to do.

I realise '*right thing* simply isn't on the radar of a selfish
minority and they will inevitably spoil it for the majority.

I saw something on Youtube re some folk who were living in their vans
(in the USA in this case) because they had lost their jobs and so
homes. The guy in the video realised that parking up in say a shopping
Mal car park overnight might not be 'Allowed' but the small group that
were doing it kept themselves to themselves, didn't stay there all the
time and cleared up any litter, even though they themselves hadn't
made it. They also made a point of shopping in the store whose carpark
they were staying in, even though it wasn't the best / cheapest,
because it was the right thing to do.

Then more people started turning up, *didn't* clear up or keep quiet
or go somewhere else during the day so they *all* got told to leave
and don't come back.

Bill would be the one complaining that he had the money to keep slaves
or smoke over people in the pub because it was 'his right', without
considering his active inflicting smoke on non smokers was less 'fair'
than the non-smokers having the right to not have to suffer such.

Just because something is legal or 'legitimate' now doesn't mean it's
will continue (to be legal) and therefore question it's legality or
morality ever.

Cheers, T i m