"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2012 10:10, brass monkey wrote:
"tim....." wrote in message
...



define "waste"

Buying duck houses for one.


I don't recall a duck house being bought on expenses.

What is a waste is the cost of new administration overseeing MP's
expenses, which is more than all the fraudulent claims that came to light.

There we are, we already have a disagreement (on a point of principle).

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the right
thing" we need a system that stops them.

And if that system really needs to cost more than they were creaming off,
then so be it - money well spent IMHO!

Though that's not to say that the system is being running economically and
couldn't be more efficient if they tried, as I really have no idea.

tim

On 10/10/2012 13:31, tim..... wrote:

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2012 10:10, brass monkey wrote:
"tim....." wrote in message
...



define "waste"

Buying duck houses for one.


I don't recall a duck house being bought on expenses.

What is a waste is the cost of new administration overseeing MP's
expenses, which is more than all the fraudulent claims that came to
light.

There we are, we already have a disagreement (on a point of principle).

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

And if that system really needs to cost more than they were creaming
off, then so be it - money well spent IMHO!

I cannot disagree with you more. Ideology is an expensive pastime.

Though that's not to say that the system is being running economically
and couldn't be more efficient if they tried, as I really have no idea.


If all was out in the open, tax returns, benefit claims and the like,
the government's coffers would be fuller by many £billions. The public
at large would do the government's job of overseeing and policing tax
returns and benefit payments.

The only reason why the MP's were caught out was that they never thought
their detailed expenses would see the light of day.

In fact I don't see the difference between hacking phones or publishing
stolen files of MPs' expenses, but hey!!

On Oct 10, 10:51*am, hugh ] wrote:
In message
,
harry writes







On Oct 9, 9:58*pm, hugh ] wrote:
In message , polygonum
writes

On 09/10/2012 01:14, brass monkey wrote:
"The Natural *wrote in message
...
wrote:
adam wrote:
Same as me - by putting a cross on your ballot paper *in the place of
your choice.
email me and I will tell you how I voted.

I vote for a person. When I was deselected I couldn't bring
myself to vote for my party's choice of my replacement, based
on comparing known histories of him and the other candidates.
I voted for somebody else who from knowning their work in the
community over the previous years I felt would be a better
replacement for me than him.

Didn't work, he got elected anyway, then a few of weeks
later promptly defected over to the other party anyway.

JGH
I voted to get rid of Gordon Brown.
And hopefully Labour.
The only party to say all the right things and then do all the wrong
things.

The Tories don't? Gimme a break. They're all as bad as each other. It
matters not who is in power, we're gonna get screwed, guaranteed.

Isn't the point that, in his view, the Tories don't even manage to say
all the right things?

Well at least we've had an opportunity to se a coalition in action

we come up with a crap idea on House of Lords reform, but which
guarantees our ongoing influence, which rightly gets rejected, so we
will stop an independent boundary commission review from being
implemented, not on any principle or that it is wrong, just tit for tat.

On Oct 10, 11:04*am, Fredxx wrote:
On 10/10/2012 10:10, brass monkey wrote:









"tim....." wrote in message
...

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
GMM wrote:

My local butchers used to have a *counter selling cooked chickens and
other hot stuff. *Went in there the other day and it was gone, replaced
by
a 'deli' counter, selling imported cooked meats, olives and stuff like
that. Apparently they concluded that nobody would pay the extra 20%, so
decided to try selling over-priced
imported stuff instead. *Oh, and they had to lose one member of staff in
the process.

A bit allegorical really: *Nothing they had done over the past couple of
years has been thought through, so nothing has achieved anything useful
...apart from pleasing the Daily Mail, of course.

VAT really has become a complete disgrace - 8.5% and 12.5% were
acceptible.

1/5 extra is not. Especially when you know they are just going to waste
half
of it.

define "waste"

Buying duck houses for one.

I don't recall a duck house being bought on expenses.

What is a waste is the cost of new administration overseeing MP's
expenses, which is more than all the fraudulent claims that came to light..

They have not made that mistake in Europe. The anti-fraud squad is
prohibited from checking out MEPs expenses etc.

On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Man at B&Q wrote :
Public sector workers are still receiving pay increases despite all
the publicity about the supposed "freeze". Certainly in education
where SWMBO works. The increments on the scale have been frozen but
you still move up the scale and get an increment, simply for being in
the job for a year longer.

Only until you reach the top of your scale which in my day was five
points (i.e. reach top after four years service) - and you weren't
necessarily appointed at the bottom one.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

In message , tim.....
writes

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2012 10:10, brass monkey wrote:
"tim....." wrote in message
...



define "waste"

Buying duck houses for one.


I don't recall a duck house being bought on expenses.

What is a waste is the cost of new administration overseeing MP's
expenses, which is more than all the fraudulent claims that came to
light.

There we are, we already have a disagreement (on a point of principle).

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

And if that system really needs to cost more than they were creaming
off, then so be it - money well spent IMHO!

Though that's not to say that the system is being running economically
and couldn't be more efficient if they tried, as I really have no idea.

tim




It might have helped if they had put someone in charge who had a bit of
experience in running an expenses system - anyone of thousands of people
in all sorts of businesses in Hr or finance. But no they gave it to
someone with no experience or expertise in the field whatsoever. May be
that was deliberate.
--
hugh

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"tim....." wrote:

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

Could you explain what you mean by "creaming the system"? If you mean,
f'rinstance, that you disagree that they be allowed to claim for train
tickets to/from their constituency and London, you'll have to explain why
they should pay for them, any more than I would be expected to pay for
travel when I used to go Cambridge - London to meet our suppliers.

Of course they can claim genuine travel expenses [1].

But even if we allow second homes they should never have been allowed to
claim for improvements to those houses, nor should they be allowed to claim
their "supermarket" shopping as their "away from main home" meal as this
isn't costing them any more then they would have paid if there were at home.

tim


[1] As actually incurred, none of this claim the 1st class fare and travel
2nd class nonsense.

In message , Andy Champ
writes
On 10/10/2012 13:31, tim..... wrote:

There we are, we already have a disagreement (on a point of principle).

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

And if that system really needs to cost more than they were creaming
off, then so be it - money well spent IMHO!

Though that's not to say that the system is being running economically
and couldn't be more efficient if they tried, as I really have no idea.

Ask any MP, and they'll say they aren't doing it for the money.

So why pay them any more than average wage? Which of course includes
paying your commute to work out of it.

Andy
Well they have two separate places of work. So I've nothing against them
claiming for travelling between London and constituency. However, as
they are provided with a second residence there is no justification for
claiming meals or other subsistence allowance at either place.

Compare what they get with for example the treatment of site workers in
the construction industry
--
hugh

On 10/10/2012 22:56, tim..... wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"tim....." wrote:

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

Could you explain what you mean by "creaming the system"? If you mean,
f'rinstance, that you disagree that they be allowed to claim for train
tickets to/from their constituency and London, you'll have to explain
why they should pay for them, any more than I would be expected to pay
for travel when I used to go Cambridge - London to meet our suppliers.

Of course they can claim genuine travel expenses [1].

But even if we allow second homes they should never have been allowed to
claim for improvements to those houses

It's not just the improvements, it's also the gains in the value of the
house while the taxpayer has been paying the mortgage and the capital
that has been paid off. What they should have done was buy a house for
them out of government funds (no mortgage payments) and sell the house
with all funds going back to the government when they cease to be MPs or
pass it on to a new MP.

They also shouldn't be allowed to keep anything that was bought for the
house or anything that is disposed of when new items are bought -
thinking furniture, electrical goods, kitchen items, etc.

I would however not object to them having SKY or similar (as many have
done in the past) as long as they are already paying for the same
service at home.

Gardening/cleaning services (tidying only, not producing stunning
display gardens!) are also fair as they have double the day to day
housework to do.

nor should they be allowed to
claim their "supermarket" shopping as their "away from main home" meal
as this isn't costing them any more then they would have paid if there
were at home.

It does cost more for two separate meals than for one larger meal for a
family. There should be a strict limit, similar to what a normal,
averagely paid, single person is likely to spend each day.

tim


[1] As actually incurred, none of this claim the 1st class fare and
travel 2nd class nonsense.

Quite right. Also they should not be able to claim expenses, untaxed
"company" cars or chauffeur driven cars for the journey from their
London residence to the House of Commons, office, etc. - the same as
normal employees can't claim for the journey to and from work.

SteveW

On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 03:57:27 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

harry wrote:
Talking about that sort of thing
http://www.th-eu-nit.com/index.php/a...g-old-jam-jars

Oh Noes! So I've got to throw away all that jam I made last month?
http://pics.mdfs.net/2012/09/120904.htm

I can't afford to /pay/ for food, that's supposed to to keep me
fed until next year

Looks good!

The sugar is the most expensive ingredient and sometimes it can be a
disappointment to have to discard fruit just because there isn't
enough sugar available at the right time. Well, I've been practicing a
technique for bottling fruit in nothing more than water on the basis
that if I have it preserved then I can decide what to add to it later
when I've decided if it's going for jam or desert or for wine.

Basicly, it's all about hygene and sterilisation. If you are a little
bit sloppy with the sterilisation with a normal recipe you can usually
rely on the vinegar or the sugar to zap any bacteria that happen to
remain in there; with just water you can't. So total cleanliness
rules. At the very least you should blanche all the fruit - I prefer
to cook it through, just to be sure.

Last weekend I bottled some pears. I cooked some of them up in a big
saucepan and placed the jars and the lids in an even bigger saucepan
to simmer at 100deg C. I spooned the hot pears into the jars while the
jars were still simmering and put the sterile lids on before lifting
them out and away to cool.

Last weekend I opened a jar of rhubarb in water that had been bottled
that way at least five years before. It was fine. I enjoyed my rhubarb
crumble!

And another thing: my bathtap shower diverter sometimes gets clogged
with limescale. Blocking the outlet with blu-tack then filling the
block with rhubarb juice and leaving it overnight does wonders. And
you wouldn't want any sugar in that!

Nick

Nick Odell wrote:
jgh wrote:
Oh Noes! So I've got to throw away all that jam I made last month?
http://pics.mdfs.net/2012/09/120904.htm

Looks good!
The sugar is the most expensive ingredient

Over the years I've experimented with reducing the suger in
my jam. This jam is 5/8 brambles, 2/8 apples, 1/8 sugar which,
so far, is the lowest sugar content I've tried, but it tastes
ok. With this year's rain the brambles were so ripe and sweet
I think I could have reduced it even further.

The jars sat in and were filled with steaming hot water
before filling, and the vacuum formed has sealed the lids so
well I can't undo them by hand!

JGH

On Oct 12, 12:56*am, wrote:
Nick Odell wrote:
jgh wrote:
Oh Noes! So I've got to throw away all that jam I made last month?
http://pics.mdfs.net/2012/09/120904.htm

Looks good!
The sugar is the most expensive ingredient

Over the years I've experimented with reducing the suger in
my jam. This jam is 5/8 brambles, 2/8 apples, 1/8 sugar which,
so far, is the lowest sugar content I've tried, but it tastes
ok. With this year's rain the brambles were so ripe and sweet
I think I could have reduced it even further.

The jars sat in and were filled with steaming hot water
before filling, and the vacuum formed has sealed the lids so
well I can't undo them by hand!

JGH

You might think about using the freezer more. We freeze all our
surplus garden produce. Fruit and veg.

harry wrote:
You might think about using the freezer more. We freeze all
our surplus garden produce. Fruit and veg.

I don't have a freezer. Most of my veg gets packed in boxes
between layers of newspapers and stored in the cellar. I've
got potatoes to last until maybe February as half the crop
rotted this year. After years or trying I still can't get
anything other than potatoes to grow. I trade them for non-
potatoes.

JGH

On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:57:50 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

On Oct 12, 12:56*am, wrote:
Nick Odell wrote:
jgh wrote:
Oh Noes! So I've got to throw away all that jam I made last month?
http://pics.mdfs.net/2012/09/120904.htm

Looks good!
The sugar is the most expensive ingredient

Over the years I've experimented with reducing the suger in
my jam. This jam is 5/8 brambles, 2/8 apples, 1/8 sugar which,
so far, is the lowest sugar content I've tried, but it tastes
ok. With this year's rain the brambles were so ripe and sweet
I think I could have reduced it even further.

The jars sat in and were filled with steaming hot water
before filling, and the vacuum formed has sealed the lids so
well I can't undo them by hand!

JGH

You might think about using the freezer more. We freeze all our
surplus garden produce. Fruit and veg.

My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.

Nick

On Oct 12, 9:43*am, Nick Odell
wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 23:57:50 -0700 (PDT), harry









wrote:
On Oct 12, 12:56*am, wrote:
Nick Odell wrote:
jgh wrote:
Oh Noes! So I've got to throw away all that jam I made last month?
http://pics.mdfs.net/2012/09/120904.htm

Looks good!
The sugar is the most expensive ingredient

Over the years I've experimented with reducing the suger in
my jam. This jam is 5/8 brambles, 2/8 apples, 1/8 sugar which,
so far, is the lowest sugar content I've tried, but it tastes
ok. With this year's rain the brambles were so ripe and sweet
I think I could have reduced it even further.

The jars sat in and were filled with steaming hot water
before filling, and the vacuum formed has sealed the lids so
well I can't undo them by hand!

JGH

You might think about using the freezer more. We freeze all our
surplus garden produce. Fruit and veg.

My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.

Nick

I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature alarm. Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?

On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 05:51:43 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

On Oct 12, 9:43*am, Nick Odell
wrote:

My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.


I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature alarm. Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?

Dunno about glass bottles but they certainly had ceramic pots and
animal fat to seal them with. I've always hankered after doing some
old-fashioned potting but not yet got the necessary tuit.

Nick

In message , SteveW
writes
On 10/10/2012 22:56, tim..... wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"tim....." wrote:

IMHO MPs should not be allowed with creaming the system to their own
advantage and as we know that some (most) can't be trusted to "do the
right thing" we need a system that stops them.

Could you explain what you mean by "creaming the system"? If you mean,
f'rinstance, that you disagree that they be allowed to claim for train
tickets to/from their constituency and London, you'll have to explain
why they should pay for them, any more than I would be expected to pay
for travel when I used to go Cambridge - London to meet our suppliers.

Of course they can claim genuine travel expenses [1].

But even if we allow second homes they should never have been allowed to
claim for improvements to those houses

It's not just the improvements, it's also the gains in the value of the
house while the taxpayer has been paying the mortgage and the capital
that has been paid off. What they should have done was buy a house for
them out of government funds (no mortgage payments) and sell the house
with all funds going back to the government when they cease to be MPs
or pass it on to a new MP.

They also shouldn't be allowed to keep anything that was bought for the
house or anything that is disposed of when new items are bought -
thinking furniture, electrical goods, kitchen items, etc.

I would however not object to them having SKY or similar (as many have
done in the past) as long as they are already paying for the same
service at home.

Gardening/cleaning services (tidying only, not producing stunning
display gardens!) are also fair as they have double the day to day
housework to do.

nor should they be allowed to
claim their "supermarket" shopping as their "away from main home" meal
as this isn't costing them any more then they would have paid if there
were at home.

It does cost more for two separate meals than for one larger meal for a
family. There should be a strict limit, similar to what a normal,
averagely paid, single person is likely to spend each day.

tim


[1] As actually incurred, none of this claim the 1st class fare and
travel 2nd class nonsense.

Quite right. Also they should not be able to claim expenses, untaxed
"company" cars or chauffeur driven cars for the journey from their
London residence to the House of Commons, office, etc. - the same as
normal employees can't claim for the journey to and from work.

SteveW

Or, to put it another way, they should be treated exactly the same as
the rest of us would be in similar circumstances
--
hugh

On Oct 12, 5:00*pm, Nick Odell
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 05:51:43 -0700 (PDT), harry









wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:43*am, Nick Odell
wrote:
My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.

I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature *alarm. *Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?

Dunno about glass bottles but they certainly had ceramic pots and
animal fat to seal them with. I've always hankered after doing some
old-fashioned potting but not yet got the necessary tuit.

Nick

I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.
They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

harry wrote:


I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.

Entirely location specific. Drying in hot countries, freezing in cold,
salting, smoking and pickling in temperate.

Followed by canning and bottling in industrialised nations.

Whatever stops the bugs dead in their tracks without killing the eater
works.


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Similar to vaccum sealed Stilton that develops its greenness after its
opened, and after a few weeks is sour bitter and past its best - like you.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

hugh wrote:
Or, to put it another way, they should be treated exactly the same
as the rest of us would be in similar circumstances

Exactly. If I was an oil rig worker, I'd expect my employer to pay
to transport me from the mainland to the oil rig, and I'd expect
the employer to provide on-call barracks. I wouldn't expect my
employer to give me 200 grand to buy a house near the helicopter
terminal, and let me charter a helicopter and trust me to hand in
the correct receipts.

JGH

On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Dryness. dry grain does not spoil. Cool and dry is the target

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/fieldcrops/15052.html

Not even with a dead rat on it. Bloke I knew had a dessicated mummified
rat that fell into a grain silo. Dried it right out - zero decay, just
mummified. He had it nailed on the wall next to the WWII memorabilia..

seeds don't spoil until they get warm and wet, then they sprout and THEN
they can decay and die.



Andy


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Oct 12, 7:33*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
harry wrote:

I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.

Entirely location specific. Drying in hot countries, freezing in cold,
salting, smoking and pickling in temperate.

Followed by canning and bottling in industrialised nations.

Whatever stops the bugs dead in their tracks without killing the eater
works.

They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

You are a ****ing halfwit. Silage is not rotted.
It is fermented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silage

On Oct 12, 11:40*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:

They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Dryness. dry grain does not spoil. Cool and dry is the target

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/fieldcrops/15052.html

Not even with a dead rat on it. Bloke I knew had a dessicated mummified
rat that fell into a grain silo. Dried it right out - zero decay, just
mummified. He had it nailed on the wall next to the WWII memorabilia..

seeds don't spoil until they get warm and wet, then they sprout and THEN
they can decay and die.

Andy


CO2
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...22474X83900048
--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

In message , Andy Champ
writes
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Don't know but quality assurance schemes and most grain buyers require
it to be 14.5% or below moisture content.

Cereals can be stored at 18% or so but need ventilation and cooling
together with close attention to avoiding invasion by grain beetle.

--
Tim Lamb

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:11:43 +0100, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Andy Champ
writes
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Don't know but quality assurance schemes and most grain buyers require
it to be 14.5% or below moisture content.

Cereals can be stored at 18% or so but need ventilation and cooling
together with close attention to avoiding invasion by grain beetle.

I cannot answer how it works but Peter at the Butser Ancient farm did
some work on barley stored in pits in the 80s, he found that as long
as the pit was gas and rain tight even grains up to 35% would
germinate the following year. CO2 concentrations did rise to 25% so I
guess this did slow the respiration of the grain. This must be
different from silage where the anaerobic conditions cause the
formation of organic acids which drop the pH sufficiently to inhibit
putrefying agents.

I'm ashamed I cannot remember Peter's surname, he died from an
internal bleed from an arthritic joint while on tour abroad where the
only painkiller available was aspirin...

AJH

wrote:
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:11:43 +0100, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Andy Champ
writes
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)
Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.
Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good fight
- but how else does a grain storage pit work?
Don't know but quality assurance schemes and most grain buyers require
it to be 14.5% or below moisture content.

Cereals can be stored at 18% or so but need ventilation and cooling
together with close attention to avoiding invasion by grain beetle.

I cannot answer how it works but Peter at the Butser Ancient farm did
some work on barley stored in pits in the 80s, he found that as long
as the pit was gas and rain tight even grains up to 35% would
germinate the following year. CO2 concentrations did rise to 25% so I
guess this did slow the respiration of the grain. This must be
different from silage where the anaerobic conditions cause the
formation of organic acids which drop the pH sufficiently to inhibit
putrefying agents.

keeping air out is the important thing in silage.
Keeping water out in grain.

I'm ashamed I cannot remember Peter's surname, he died from an
internal bleed from an arthritic joint while on tour abroad where the
only painkiller available was aspirin...

AJH


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

"ss" wrote in message
...
On 06/10/2012 20:48, John Williamson wrote:
can't wait to vote for my mate David

Yip, me too.

The key is Ed Balls as Finance Minister instead of the current weirdo bunch.
There has been NO economic growth since they came in. They attack the poor
and unemployed as if the unemployed are architects of their own doom. Rich
greedy speculator were a major cause of the Crash. They cut welfare while
leaving the stinking rich's millions laying in banks.

Everybody's skint so the Gov needs to put more money into the economy -
rather than take it out which is what the present half-witted outfit is
doing. But having a lot of money around just sets off a house price bubble
which prices out young people. Even the most grasping greedy value driven
homeowners are slightly worried about the next generation. Land Valuation
Tax (LVT) needs implementing as a house price inflation counter measure.
LVT can be aimed at keeping land/house prices steady while the increase in
the money supply does all the good work instead of being used speculatively
and being poured into land. So LVT wouldn't necessarily wipe out your only
asset. LVT means less Income Tax.

But LVT is not on the mainstream Labour radar, (the landed class Tories hate
it with a vengeance) although they do have an LVT pressure group.

Note: LVT is a tax on the "value" of the land, not the building. Assessed
annually.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:

I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.

Entirely location specific. Drying in hot countries, freezing in cold,
salting, smoking and pickling in temperate.

Followed by canning and bottling in industrialised nations.

Whatever stops the bugs dead in their tracks without killing the eater works.


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to keep
CO2 in, but air out.

Oh FFS you're as thick as Harry.

Silage is pickled in exactly the same way as sauerkraut.

Similar to vaccum sealed Stilton

No nothing like.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

harry wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:00 pm, Nick Odell
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 05:51:43 -0700 (PDT), harry









wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:43 am, Nick Odell
wrote:
My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.

I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature alarm. Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?

Dunno about glass bottles but they certainly had ceramic pots and
animal fat to seal them with. I've always hankered after doing some
old-fashioned potting but not yet got the necessary tuit.

Nick

I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.
They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Silage is not preserved by CO2. So not like silage at all.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

On 12/10/2012 23:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Andy Champ wrote:
On 12/10/2012 19:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
harry wrote:


They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Wrong as usual

The 'trapped CO2' does not preseverve it. Silage has already rotted. The
issue is to stop the rot whilst its still palatable to ruminants, which
means keeping the process anaerobic, which is why its sealed. Not to
keep CO2 in, but air out.

Dunno about the silage comparison, and I know you two like a good
fight - but how else does a grain storage pit work?

Dryness. dry grain does not spoil. Cool and dry is the target

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/fieldcrops/15052.html

Not even with a dead rat on it. Bloke I knew had a dessicated mummified
rat that fell into a grain silo. Dried it right out - zero decay, just
mummified. He had it nailed on the wall next to the WWII memorabilia..

seeds don't spoil until they get warm and wet, then they sprout and THEN
they can decay and die.

Hmm. Following the link to storage pits on that page

"A well-constructed pit storage is air-tight and oxygen levels gradually
reduce over time.

"The low oxygen levels prevent development of damaging numbers of grain
insects. If in doubt about the gas-tightness of the pit, grain
protectants can be applied to the grain when it is placed in storage"

Then it occurred to me of course...

http://www.ftic.biz/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=428&Itemid=15

.... that I should check with my uncle. Though it looks like Harry is
right this time.

Andy

On 13/10/2012 12:01, wrote:

I'm ashamed I cannot remember Peter's surname, he died from an
internal bleed from an arthritic joint while on tour abroad where the
only painkiller available was aspirin...


This might bring back memories.

http://www.butserancientfarm.co.uk/buildings/peter.htm

Or in case that link doesn't work for you either

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itU8pFnTc0A

Andy.

On Oct 13, 1:06*pm, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
"ss" wrote in message

...

On 06/10/2012 20:48, John Williamson wrote:
can't wait to vote for my mate David

Yip, me too.

The key is Ed Balls as Finance Minister instead of the current weirdo bunch.
There has been NO economic growth since they came in. *They attack the poor
and unemployed as if the unemployed are architects of their own doom. *Rich
greedy speculator were a major cause of the Crash. They cut welfare while
leaving the stinking rich's millions laying in banks.

Everybody's skint so the Gov needs to put more money into the economy -
rather than take it out which is what the present half-witted outfit is
doing. *But having a lot of money around just sets off a house price bubble
which prices out young people. Even the most grasping greedy value driven
homeowners are slightly worried about the next generation. Land Valuation
Tax (LVT) needs implementing as a house price inflation counter measure.
LVT can be aimed at keeping land/house prices steady while the increase in
the money supply does all the good work instead of being used speculatively
and being poured into land. *So LVT wouldn't necessarily wipe out your only
asset. *LVT means less Income Tax.

But LVT is not on the mainstream Labour radar, (the landed class Tories hate
it with a vengeance) although they do have an LVT pressure group.

Note: LVT is a tax on the "value" of the land, not the building. *Assessed
annually.

Ed balls is one of those got us into all this trouble. He is a
tosser.
Exactly how is it to be assessed?

On Oct 13, 3:05*pm, Steve Firth wrote:
harry wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:00 pm, Nick Odell
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 05:51:43 -0700 (PDT), harry

wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:43 am, Nick Odell
wrote:
My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.

I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.

I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature *alarm. *Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?

Dunno about glass bottles but they certainly had ceramic pots and
animal fat to seal them with. I've always hankered after doing some
old-fashioned potting but not yet got the necessary tuit.

Nick

I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.
They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)

Silage is not preserved by CO2. So not like silage at all.

--
•DarWin|
*_/ * *_/

So why does it rot if the bag is damaged?
CO2 gets out, air gets in.

harry wrote:
On Oct 13, 3:05 pm, Steve Firth wrote:
harry wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:00 pm, Nick Odell
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 05:51:43 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:43 am, Nick Odell
wrote:
My freezer is full and I use it all the time. However, last time I had
a freezer breakdown I ended up, at ten o'clock at night, giving frozen
food away to my neighbours then working through the night to cook,
bottle and otherwise preserve the remainder.
I love the fact that with my freezer I can take advantage of those
last-minute yellow-label offers at the supermarket and know they won't
go to waste but I love the way bottling stuff is a final solution that
requires no further energy input to preserve the contents sometimes
for years and years. I also get satisfaction from doing something
people have done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Bunging
some raspberries into a plastic bag and putting them the other side of
a door just doesn't feel the same.
I have two freezers. It means as the produce is used up, I can close
one down.
Also if one breaks down, I can swop over (assuming they're not both
full). But they're usually both full over Winter when a breakdown is
less of a problem.
You need a temperature alarm. Gives you some leeway/warning. Should
activate before anything melts.
Also neighbours will help out with spare space if there is a
breakdown.
Did they have glass bottles thousands of years ago?
Dunno about glass bottles but they certainly had ceramic pots and
animal fat to seal them with. I've always hankered after doing some
old-fashioned potting but not yet got the necessary tuit.
Nick
I think the main way of preservation in days of yore was by drying.
Meat, fish and vegetables.
They used to clamp grain (bury it) & the trapped CO2 preserved it.
(A bit like silage)
Silage is not preserved by CO2. So not like silage at all.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

So why does it rot if the bag is damaged?
CO2 gets out, air gets in.
the key is that the air gets in.
Not that the CO2 gets out


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:18:03 +0100, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 13/10/2012 12:01, wrote:

I'm ashamed I cannot remember Peter's surname, he died from an
internal bleed from an arthritic joint while on tour abroad where the
only painkiller available was aspirin...


This might bring back memories.

http://www.butserancientfarm.co.uk/buildings/peter.htm

Or in case that link doesn't work for you either

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itU8pFnTc0A


Yes that's him and the first link neither worked for the video or to
the storage pits.

AJH

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Harry wrote :
Note: LVT is a tax on the "value" of the land, not the building.
Assessed annually.

Ed balls is one of those got us into all this trouble. He is a
tosser.
Exactly how is it to be assessed?

The same way as in Australia? Our rateable values are reassessed regularly
and the rate demand has two values, rateable value (on which you pay rates,
no upper limit) which is generally a little shy of market value to save
arguments and an unimproved land value, what the land on its own would be
worth given current planning policies. If total value (excluding your own
home) you hold in one state (it's a state tax) exceeds a certain amount you
have to pay Land Tax on it.

http://www.chan-naylor.com.au/land-tax/

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

harry wrote:
On Oct 13, 1:06 pm, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
"ss" wrote in message

...

On 06/10/2012 20:48, John Williamson wrote:
can't wait to vote for my mate David

Yip, me too.

The key is Ed Balls as Finance Minister instead of the current
weirdo bunch. There has been NO economic growth since they came in.
They attack the poor and unemployed as if the unemployed are
architects of their own doom. Rich greedy speculator were a major
cause of the Crash. They cut welfare while leaving the stinking
rich's millions laying in banks.

Everybody's skint so the Gov needs to put more money into the
economy - rather than take it out which is what the present
half-witted outfit is doing. But having a lot of money around just
sets off a house price bubble which prices out young people. Even
the most grasping greedy value driven homeowners are slightly
worried about the next generation. Land Valuation Tax (LVT) needs
implementing as a house price inflation counter measure. LVT can be
aimed at keeping land/house prices steady while the increase in the
money supply does all the good work instead of being used
speculatively and being poured into land. So LVT wouldn't
necessarily wipe out your only asset. LVT means less Income Tax.

But LVT is not on the mainstream Labour radar, (the landed class
Tories hate it with a vengeance) although they do have an LVT
pressure group.

Note: LVT is a tax on the "value" of the land, not the building.
Assessed annually.

Ed balls is one of those got us into all this trouble.

He caused the Credit Crunch all by himself? Wow!

Tony Bryer wrote:
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:07:16 -0700 (PDT) Harry wrote :
Note: LVT is a tax on the "value" of the land, not the building.
Assessed annually.

Ed balls is one of those got us into all this trouble. He is a
tosser.
Exactly how is it to be assessed?

The same way as in Australia? Our rateable values are reassessed
regularly and the rate demand has two values, rateable value (on
which you pay rates, no upper limit) which is generally a little shy
of market value to save arguments and an unimproved land value, what
the land on its own would be worth given current planning policies.
If total value (excluding your own home) you hold in one state (it's
a state tax) exceeds a certain amount you have to pay Land Tax on it.

http://www.chan-naylor.com.au/land-tax/

It should be 100% on unimproved land values and only falls on the landowner.
Taxing buildings is pure daftness - like taxing your washing machine.

Tony Bryer wrote:
The same way as in Australia? Our rateable values are reassessed
regularly ...

Exactly. The only thing wrong with Council Tax is that the
value it's based on is not reassessed regularly, and that it's
set in bands instead of X-percent of assessed value.

JGH