After recent trip to US/canada, I have observed that most toilets are
flushed by a type of syphon (or possibly active vaccuum judging by the
force of the suction) which completely empties the toilet bowl before
refilling it. There is a small hole pointing toward the back of the
outlet that refills the bowl. This is nothing like our washdown pans,
or even our vacuum assisted types, where the cistern water causes
partial vaccum in the outlet to assist emptying.
Anyone know more about these US toilets, design and evolution etc.
Of course the bowl syphon is not to be confused with the cistern syphon
(which seems to be dissappearing anyway).
I've also read the archived posts on toilet cubicles with gaps round
the doors, yet highly private urinals with flush, strange I agree.
Cheers,
Simon.

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
oups.com...
After recent trip to US/canada, I have observed that most toilets are
flushed by a type of syphon (or possibly active vaccuum judging by the
force of the suction) which completely empties the toilet bowl before
refilling it. There is a small hole pointing toward the back of the
outlet that refills the bowl. This is nothing like our washdown pans,
or even our vacuum assisted types, where the cistern water causes
partial vaccum in the outlet to assist emptying.
Anyone know more about these US toilets, design and evolution etc.
Of course the bowl syphon is not to be confused with the cistern syphon
(which seems to be dissappearing anyway).
I've also read the archived posts on toilet cubicles with gaps round
the doors, yet highly private urinals with flush, strange I agree.

How odd, I've also just returned from a US trip and was pondering the exact
some thing while I was there. I asked a friend out there (also a DIYer) and
he said the flush worked in the same way (at least in the pan, the cistern
part tends to use a "flap valve", which is now available in the UK). As we
had along wait at the airport, I had some time to think on the problem.

The "throat" of the bowl seemed much smaller and there is a large "pool" of
water in bowl. (Good idea to keep the bowl clean). I wonder if these factors
combined give a "quick flush" that looks like a vacuum. The U seemed quite
tight, so maybe the action is like this:

Bowl full, level will form at the U top lip. When you flush, a water is
added slowly (compared to the UK) until there is enough to start the flush,
which progresses quickly as there is a lot of "head" in the bowl. So fast,
the bowl empties before enough fresh water gets in to maintain syphon level.
Syphon stops and bowl refills.

Brian

How odd, I've also just returned from a US trip and was pondering the exact
some thing while I was there. I asked a friend out there (also a DIYer) and
he said the flush worked in the same way (at least in the pan, the cistern
part tends to use a "flap valve", which is now available in the UK). As we
had along wait at the airport, I had some time to think on the problem.

The "throat" of the bowl seemed much smaller and there is a large "pool" of
water in bowl. (Good idea to keep the bowl clean). I wonder if these factors
combined give a "quick flush" that looks like a vacuum. The U seemed quite
tight, so maybe the action is like this:

Bowl full, level will form at the U top lip. When you flush, a water is
added slowly (compared to the UK) until there is enough to start the flush,
which progresses quickly as there is a lot of "head" in the bowl. So fast,
the bowl empties before enough fresh water gets in to maintain syphon level.
Syphon stops and bowl refills.

Yep, I think the crucial thing is that it is actually a syphon, so it
continues with little head of water to maintain it. With our wash-down
pans, water added just pushes out the "stuff" like a normal u-bend,
which is why the new 6 litre things are so feeble. I've just seen a
description on
http://www.howstuffworks.com
There is a jet which aims water at the syphon to get things going, and
little water goes down the sides, which is I think the other reason for
the large disconcerting pond of water that is present - there is little
wash-down action that occurs, so everything must drop under water.

Any other interesting observations about the states ?
One thing for sure, the prices are never what they seem, what with tax,
tips to be added on. Canada seemed even worse for that.

Cheers,
Simon.

sm_jamieson wrote:

Yep, I think the crucial thing is that it is actually a syphon, so it
continues with little head of water to maintain it. With our wash-down
pans, water added just pushes out the "stuff" like a normal u-bend,
which is why the new 6 litre things are so feeble.

Some loos in the yookay do have an element of siphonic action -
certainly if the water level in the bowl drops right down and then
recovers, then it is not simply washing-down. Totally agree on the
lack of effectiveness of nearly all low-volume units - not met one yet
which worked first-time, which seems to totally negate the point (a low
volume for pees can be achieved with a two-stage flush system). The
powers-that-be have British Standard turds which they claim flush away
nicely with 23ml or whatever but all I can suggest is that they must
bear no resemblance to proper jobs.

--
"Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic"

I lived in the US for a few years and my experience of these toilets is
that the narrow "throat" (what a disgusing throught) required for the
syphon also leads to many blockages. I lived there for 4 years and had
3 blockages in my toilet and heard from many others who had the same
problem.

The "flap valve" system in the cystern seems like a very good idea as
it's extremely simple. However, they are prone to slow leaks where
limescale builds up on the flap and face. Also I've seen one where the
incoming water tended to lift the flap, causing it to stick in the up
position. I could only remedy this by turning the water pressure right
down.

Personally I think the UK ones are better. And I don't want to talk
about the German "crap on a shelf" things!

Bodgit wrote:


Personally I think the UK ones are better. And I don't want to talk
about the German "crap on a shelf" things!

At least that stops the dreaded splash back! A few years ago I visited
Hong Kong, there they have automatic flushes that detect a person
sitting on the seat, then flushes when that person gets up. Big snag
there, lean forward too far and you get a cold and unpleasant surprise!

Totally agree on the lack of effectiveness of nearly all
low-volume units - not met one yet which worked first-time,
which seems to totally negate the point (a low volume for
pees can be achieved with a two-stage flush system).

Strange, I've fitted a couple of 6 litre units and they've never had trouble
flushing. Maybe my huge heavy bombs are easier to clear than the average
floater.

Christian.

A few years ago I visited Hong Kong, there they have automatic flushes
that detect a person sitting on the seat, then flushes when that person
gets up. Big snag

Yes. I hate those, usually found in recently refurbished airports. They
don't give you time to close the lid before the flush and they usually
manage to flush about 2 or 3 times during each usage, wasting huge amounts
of water.

The best toilet innovation I've seen is in the US (although it only partly
made up for the cubicle doors, which aren't far off having CCTV of your
movements displayed on the terminal screens). It consisted of an automatic
paper feeder that dragged a fresh bit of paper onto the seat when you
pressed a button, so you don't need to wipe the seat and delicately balance
a couple of sheets on the seat.

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
A few years ago I visited Hong Kong, there they have automatic flushes
that detect a person sitting on the seat, then flushes when that person
gets up. Big snag

Yes. I hate those, usually found in recently refurbished airports. They
don't give you time to close the lid before the flush and they usually
manage to flush about 2 or 3 times during each usage, wasting huge amounts
of water.

The best toilet innovation I've seen is in the US (although it only partly
made up for the cubicle doors, which aren't far off having CCTV of your
movements displayed on the terminal screens). It consisted of an automatic
paper feeder that dragged a fresh bit of paper onto the seat when you
pressed a button, so you don't need to wipe the seat and delicately
balance a couple of sheets on the seat.

Christian.

When a son was posted to Germany and lived on the Durch border his daughters
were fascinated by the lavs in a particular restaurant where the seats swung
round somehow - but I can't remember the purpose. It seemed sensible at the
time ...

In Canada I was impressed by the use of grey water for flushing, this was
sixteen years ago before it had been heard of widely here.

Last weekend I was at the Battle of Bosworth (the wrong victor again) where
a new public toilet block (Green Buildings components) is flushed entirely
with low volume harvested water from an underground storage tank; hot water
is provided by Solartwin panels (like ours!); and the bright internal
lighting is pir and powered by pv.

Now that WAS impressive. I talked at length to the Leicestershire CC sites
manager who inspired us to go further in our environmental aspirations.

Mary

wrote:

sm_jamieson wrote:


Yep, I think the crucial thing is that it is actually a syphon, so it
continues with little head of water to maintain it. With our wash-down
pans, water added just pushes out the "stuff" like a normal u-bend,
which is why the new 6 litre things are so feeble.


Some loos in the yookay do have an element of siphonic action -
certainly if the water level in the bowl drops right down and then
recovers, then it is not simply washing-down. Totally agree on the
lack of effectiveness of nearly all low-volume units - not met one yet
which worked first-time, which seems to totally negate the point (a low

The B&Q Blanco range one I fitted is actually quiet effective in that
respect - it does clear the bowl every time on a 6L flush, but suffers a
different flaw in that the water trap position is much nearer the front
than on many pans. Thus resulting in it not being directly under the
drop zone, so skid mark city!

volume for pees can be achieved with a two-stage flush system). The
powers-that-be have British Standard turds which they claim flush away
nicely with 23ml or whatever but all I can suggest is that they must
bear no resemblance to proper jobs.

Or proper jobbies even ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

This group definitely has a toilet fixation!

I never "go" in the office when visiting the US because of those
bloody cubicles. I try to restrict my visits for #2's to the hotel.
The ability to sit on the throne and chat eye-to-eye to your next
door neighbour is not desirable, IMO.

Yes. No country in the world has perfect perfect toilets.

North America has 20 cm high saloon doors with 5 cm gaps down the sides, but
otherwise clean and functioning
Northern Europe has steps built in so that you get to examine the previous
occupant's digestive health in all its majesty and aroma.
Southern Europe either has holes in the floor or no toilet seat and you have
to put the toilet paper in the bin
Middle East and Africa have no toilet paper, just a short bit of hose
connected to a tap
UK public toilets are rarely clean

Where can I go for a nice clean dump? Singapore?

Christian.

This group definitely has a toilet fixation!

Talking about toilet fixation, I'm short of those bolt you connect toilets
to the floor with. Does anyone know a supplier? The alternative is to rely
solely on the silicone.

Christian.

Christian McArdle wrote:
I never "go" in the office when visiting the US because of those
bloody cubicles. I try to restrict my visits for #2's to the hotel.
The ability to sit on the throne and chat eye-to-eye to your next
door neighbour is not desirable, IMO.

Yes. No country in the world has perfect perfect toilets.

North America has 20 cm high saloon doors with 5 cm gaps down the sides, but
otherwise clean and functioning
Northern Europe has steps built in so that you get to examine the previous
occupant's digestive health in all its majesty and aroma.
Southern Europe either has holes in the floor or no toilet seat and you have
to put the toilet paper in the bin
Middle East and Africa have no toilet paper, just a short bit of hose
connected to a tap
UK public toilets are rarely clean

Where can I go for a nice clean dump? Singapore?

Christian.

Home...nowhere else is as good IMO.

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
ups.com...
Any other interesting observations about the states ?
One thing for sure, the prices are never what they seem, what with tax,
tips to be added on. Canada seemed even worse for that.

While it is true that you have to allow for sales tax when comparing prices,
the prices of most things are far lower than the UK. It is time we displayed
prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are being ripped
off.

And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown may be a
bit less convinced of his next job!

Brian

While it is true that you have to allow for sales tax when comparing
prices, the prices of most things are far lower than the UK. It is time we
displayed prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are
being ripped off.

Nah. I really HATE the american habit of not showing the proper price. It is
impossible to tell what you have the cash to buy, or to get the change
ready.

And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown may be
a bit less convinced of his next job!

Petrol should be expensive, to discourage use and encourage the development
of alternative technologies.

Christian.

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
ups.com...
Any other interesting observations about the states ?
One thing for sure, the prices are never what they seem, what
with tax,
tips to be added on. Canada seemed even worse for that.

While it is true that you have to allow for sales tax when
comparing prices,
the prices of most things are far lower than the UK. It is time we
displayed
prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are
being ripped
off.

And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if
we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown
may be a
bit less convinced of his next job!


Perhaps if what the tax paid for he would, and that would go for any
Chancellor.

Funny how people don't like paying tax but still want all that the
tax pays for...

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT Brian Reay wrote :
While it is true that you have to allow for sales tax when comparing
prices, the prices of most things are far lower than the UK. It is
time we displayed prices without VAT so people start to recognise how
much we are being ripped off.

Ripped off? If you want to pay less tax the government has to spend less.
Is this a vote winner? David Cameron seems less than convinced.

The American system got me the first time I went the I was mystified
at street sellers in Chicago selling ice creams for 93c (of course = $1
with tax). The reason that US prices are ex tax, AIUI, is that not only
does each state have its own tax rate, but each local city council can
levy an additional amount - thus there are thousands of sales tax areas
across the USA. It would impossible to force retailers to advertise
inclusive prices since these will differ within relatively small areas,
let alone those covered by regional and national media.

Personally I prefer the way we do it. Go to Australia and look at new car
prices and you'll be envious. Then look at all the on-the-road additions,
which of course we used to have. Better WYSIWP g.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:23:20 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
wrote:


And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown may be
a bit less convinced of his next job!

Petrol should be expensive, to discourage use and encourage the development
of alternative technologies.


Why pick on petrol?

Why not stick a 400% tax on all scarce or polluting resources.

Road fuel accounts for only a small percentage of energy use in GB.

DG

I never "go" in the office when visiting the US because of those
bloody cubicles. I try to restrict my visits for #2's to the hotel.
The ability to sit on the throne and chat eye-to-eye to your next
door neighbour is not desirable, IMO.

How / why did this evolve in the USA? Let's hope it doesn't catch on - I
hate it.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...

UK public toilets are rarely clean

Oh come on! I've been very impressed in the last few years. The Welsh public
toilets on the roadside which I've used are excellent - and numerous. Most
British service station lavs are clean and well serviced, the only problem
(this is personal and doesn't apply everywhere anyway) is that some have
piped music or radio.

If public lavs aren't clean it's the fault of the users. Of course no-one
will admit to making them less than perfect ...

Where can I go for a nice clean dump? Singapore?

Your dumps are 'clean'?

Mary

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...


And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown may
be a bit less convinced of his next job!

Petrol should be expensive, to discourage use and encourage the
development of alternative technologies.

Yes.

And I noticed today that it's dropped by 6p a litre.

Mary

Christian.

"Christian McArdle" wrote in
message ...
snip

Petrol should be expensive, to discourage use and encourage the
development
of alternative technologies.


A very simplistic way of looking at the issues involved...

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT someone who may be "Brian Reay"
wrote this:-

It is time we displayed
prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are being ripped
off.

Ripped off?

What do you think VAT pays for? Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Christian McArdle wrote:
Totally agree on the lack of effectiveness of nearly all
low-volume units - not met one yet which worked first-time,
which seems to totally negate the point (a low volume for
pees can be achieved with a two-stage flush system).

Strange, I've fitted a couple of 6 litre units and they've never had trouble
flushing. Maybe my huge heavy bombs are easier to clear than the average
floater.

All together now...

Too much information !

(Seriously, perhaps loos are getting better. But with average
time-to-replace at perhaps 10-20 years, there's a lot of crappy
crappers out there that we'll have to suffer for a long time yet.)

--
"I can resist anything but temptation."

"Huge" wrote in message
...
snip

It's actually illegal to display only ex-VAT prices. This is, of
course
so people don't realise how much they're being ripped off.


No, it was to stop retailers ripping off customers, by displaying one
price and charging another - after all if the customer can't work out
what the VAT percentage is of the marked price what chance of them
being able to work out the percentage that should be added to a
ex-VAT price.

It was even more of a problem when it was not clear if the price
quoted was ex-VAT or inc-VAT, one could get charged twice for the
VAT!..

"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
oups.com...
After recent trip to US/canada, I have observed that most toilets are
flushed by a type of syphon (or possibly active vaccuum judging by the
force of the suction) which completely empties the toilet bowl before
refilling it. There is a small hole pointing toward the back of the
outlet that refills the bowl. This is nothing like our washdown pans,
or even our vacuum assisted types, where the cistern water causes
partial vaccum in the outlet to assist emptying.
Anyone know more about these US toilets, design and evolution etc.
Of course the bowl syphon is not to be confused with the cistern syphon
(which seems to be dissappearing anyway).

I've no idea, but I'll never forget seeing a plumber on This Old House going
round a bog manufacturers. They had all the old standards of american bog
(something crazy like 7 gallon cistern) and a European style bog, and a
fluid dynamics lab etc. I'll never forget the plumbers face when he showed
him how the european bog flushed, he looked like he'd just been told we all
**** our pants instead of going to the lav...

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message
...
Totally agree on the lack of effectiveness of nearly all
low-volume units - not met one yet which worked first-time,
which seems to totally negate the point (a low volume for
pees can be achieved with a two-stage flush system).

Strange, I've fitted a couple of 6 litre units and they've never had
trouble flushing. Maybe my huge heavy bombs are easier to clear than the
average floater.

The earlier ones are probably rubbish, and the later ones good. As I said in
another place, these bog manufacturers have CAD models of the fluid flow
etc. now.

On 2006-08-23, Mary Fisher wrote:

Oh come on! I've been very impressed in the last few years. The Welsh public
toilets on the roadside which I've used are excellent - and numerous. Most
British service station lavs are clean and well serviced, the only problem
(this is personal and doesn't apply everywhere anyway) is that some have
piped music or radio.

No paper towels. Hot-air dryers don't work and are unsanitary. Would
any of the businesspeople who have them installed use them at home? I
don't think so.

David Hansen wrote in
:


What do you think VAT pays for? Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.

Well said that man!

"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT someone who may be "Brian Reay"
wrote this:-

It is time we displayed
prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are being
ripped
off.

Ripped off?

What do you think VAT pays for? Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.


I've no problem paying for those things, along with education, sensible
welfare scheme etc. However, I'd like to stem some of the other areas the
money goes.
Like the millions being sent to rebuild bridges in a country that harbours
terrorists. And don't get me started on the money we fritter away in Europe.

Brian

On 2006-08-23 17:23:20 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
said:

While it is true that you have to allow for sales tax when comparing
prices, the prices of most things are far lower than the UK. It is time
we displayed prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much
we are being ripped off.

Nah. I really HATE the american habit of not showing the proper price.
It is impossible to tell what you have the cash to buy, or to get the
change ready.

And, don't get me started on the price of Petrol --Grrr! Again, if we
displayed price with and without the taxes, may be old Gordon Brown may
be a bit less convinced of his next job!

Petrol should be expensive, to discourage use and encourage the
development of alternative technologies.

Christian.

It is.

People still pay.

On 2006-08-23 18:05:12 +0100, David Hansen
said:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT someone who may be "Brian Reay"
wrote this:-

It is time we displayed prices without VAT so people start to recognise
how much we are being ripped off.

Ripped off?

What do you think VAT pays for? Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.

One could delete the health service and save a substantial proportion
of tax revenue....

On 2006-08-23 19:02:34 +0100, Huge said:

On 2006-08-23, Mike the unimaginative wrote:
David Hansen wrote in
:

What do you think VAT pays for? Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.

Well said that man!

Hardly. It's unmitigated tosh.

Exactly

Complete wank would be more accurate.

On 2006-08-23 19:01:53 +0100, Huge said:

On 2006-08-23, Jerry wrote:

"Huge" wrote in message
...
snip

It's actually illegal to display only ex-VAT prices. This is, of
course
so people don't realise how much they're being ripped off.


No, it was to stop retailers ripping off customers,

That might have been what was said. I don't believe it. You
only have to look (preferably from a distance) at the metrication
fascists to know what kind of people were involved.

Have you heard the John Cleese voice that goes with TomTom Navigator?

On approaching a motorway exit (half mile), he goes on about how it's
800m these days because of "that little *******, Napoleon"

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:05:12 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT someone who may be "Brian Reay"
wrote this:-

It is time we displayed
prices without VAT so people start to recognise how much we are being ripped
off.

Ripped off?

What do you think VAT pays for?

Dunno.

I know what it gets spent on ...

Buying votes with benefits (Turkeys don't vote for Christmas).

Right-on, 60's hippy-esque harebrained PC schemes to pacify Old Lab.

Incompetance, such as the various state IT fiascos (watch out for news
about ISOFT and Accenture before the end of the week.) This list is
not by any means exclusive.

DG


Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.

Brian Reay wrote:
"sm_jamieson" wrote in message
oups.com...
After recent trip to US/canada, I have observed that most toilets are
flushed by a type of syphon (or possibly active vaccuum judging by the
force of the suction) which completely empties the toilet bowl before
refilling it. There is a small hole pointing toward the back of the
outlet that refills the bowl. This is nothing like our washdown pans,
or even our vacuum assisted types, where the cistern water causes
partial vaccum in the outlet to assist emptying.
Anyone know more about these US toilets, design and evolution etc.
Of course the bowl syphon is not to be confused with the cistern syphon
(which seems to be dissappearing anyway).
I've also read the archived posts on toilet cubicles with gaps round
the doors, yet highly private urinals with flush, strange I agree.

How odd, I've also just returned from a US trip and was pondering the exact
some thing while I was there.

Funilly enough, me too. In fact, I was so intruiged that I partially
dismantled the cistern in my hotel bedroom to try to work it out.
Unfortunately I didn't go prepared with any tools so I didn't get far
(probably a good job really) Inside the cistern there was soem sort of
pressure vessel though. The cistern appeared to push a very high
powered jet of water from the front of the bowl to the rear, pushing
the contents of the bowl out through a very small hole. It certainly
used very little water and seemed very effective. I wouldn't have one
in my house though for the simple reason that they are *very* noisy.
(Especially at 3am)

Jon.

"Adam Funk" wrote in message
news
On 2006-08-23, Mary Fisher wrote:

Oh come on! I've been very impressed in the last few years. The Welsh
public
toilets on the roadside which I've used are excellent - and numerous.
Most
British service station lavs are clean and well serviced, the only
problem
(this is personal and doesn't apply everywhere anyway) is that some have
piped music or radio.

No paper towels. Hot-air dryers don't work and are unsanitary. Would
any of the businesspeople who have them installed use them at home? I
don't think so.

I've no idea about that but hands dry without artificial aids ... I don't
use hot air or paper on environmental grounds.

Why is hot air unsanitary and why doesn't it work?

I suspect that those who have them installed use terry towels at home. They
could be said to be unsanitary which wouldn't really matter in a domestic
situation but it would in a service station if lots of people used them.

A couple of years ago I went to the lav in the Savoy in London. It was very
swish and warm, dry, unnecessarily large, white towels were given to each
person. They were then dumped in baskets for laundering. Luxurious but
wasteful.

Mary

On 2006-08-23 20:45:41 +0100, Derek ^ said:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:05:12 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:16:10 GMT someone who may be "Brian Reay"
wrote this:-

It is time we displayed prices without VAT so people start to recognise
how much we are being ripped off.

Ripped off?

What do you think VAT pays for?

Dunno.

I know what it gets spent on ...

Buying votes with benefits (Turkeys don't vote for Christmas).

Right-on, 60's hippy-esque harebrained PC schemes to pacify Old Lab.

There are still dogs in the government? Actually a scan around
Downing St confirms this. CFL bulb subsidies and compulsions as well.



Incompetance, such as the various state IT fiascos (watch out for news
about ISOFT and Accenture before the end of the week.) This list is
not by any means exclusive.

Didn't see that. Have Wankcenture done it again? They will need to
bring in McKinsey now to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Apparently the next project is a wind farm.... They are good at those.

Tiger Woods must be being paid a lot of money to put his name to all this.












DG


Perhaps you could do without the
health service, roads, the armed forces and so on, but I doubt if
many would.

On 23 Aug 2006 18:01:53 GMT, Huge wrote:


That might have been what was said. I don't believe it. You
only have to look (preferably from a distance) at the metrication
fascists to know what kind of people were involved.

It was to conceal the humunguous scale of taxation we pay nowadays.

If you and I were both VAT registered artisans employed by our own
companies, I would pay income tax and VAT, you would pay income tax
and VAT. If I were to spend a day working on a private project on your
house (say) for you @ £400 inc VAT that would yield a marginal income
of £400 -£60 (vat) - £80 (both NI's) - £112 (Higher rate tax) =
£148.

Now if I had spent the £148 remaining out of the £400 you gave me on
motor fuel I would have got (say) 30 quids worth of fuel all the rest
= £370 being tax.

Now :-)) since your finances are identical to mine to get the £400
that you paid to me in spendable cash you would have had to bill out
£400x400/180 = £888.88 to your customers just to pay me enough money
to buy 30 quids worth of poxy diesel in my sorry heap.

:-(

Tha above analysis is not rigorous, I don't have access to or
understand tax/NI tables. However it also omits most of the nickel and
dimeing taxes. Company car tax, taxes on notional benefits in kind,
such as private use of a works phone, computer, travel insurance
etc. GB created a tax incentive for firms to buy PC's for employees,
now he proposes taxing the employee on the benefit in kind on them.

Shysters. No other word for it.

DG