On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:20:25 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
When you switch a kettle off it doesn't stay boiling for very long does it.

No reason why it should - if you only boil enough for your immediate needs.

That can't be done you need to biol more water as it evaporrates as it boils and any steam coning out reduces efficiency, and yuo get bits of lime scale in yuor cup if yuo use every ml of water you boil.

Ideally you'd use one of those boiling water taps then no one would need a kettle would they, but I don't believe those taps are as efficient as a kettle anyway.

On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:52:48 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 11/05/2016 23:08, Capitol wrote:
Chris B wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:30, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:03:29 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Then they came for vacuum cleaners, soon kettles and toasters.

Oh, that 2014 fabricated scare-story's come out of hibernation, has it?

What a surprise.

Even the Telegraph backtracked on it a few months ago.

Well its not come out of hibernation yet - its been put on the "back
burner" (If we are still allowed to have such things) until after the
referendum in case it makes people vote to leave.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/36642906-d...#axzz48NVyRLIh


But after the referendum I will wager its "full steam ahead" (well
partial steam ahead anyway from our new low power kettles).


Oh dear, back to buying for stock again! I'm sure the real reason is
to lower electricity demand as the generating capacity is being
destroyed by the EU eco warriors. Back to coal fires people.

But will lower powered kettles, ovens, toasters and other heating
devices lower demand?

That's the 'logic' I just don't get. if I have a kettle that is half the power it will take twice as long to heat up, so it'll be on twice as long possible more due to loses.


The power of each will be lower, but as each will
need to be on for longer, there is likely to be a greater overlap and
therefore more operating at any one time. It *might* have an effect at
the ad break in a major event, but that's about all - and that is
already planned for and places like Dinorwig are brought online for the
surge.

yes and I'm not sure a 300 watt kettle would actually boil enough to make a decent cup of tea.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It used to be simply the latter, until the Glorious Socialism of the 60s
onwards assumed that we all wanted high taxes (as long as someone else
got taxed) free services (even if they were worth what you paid for
them) and lots of chaps with speed cameras and parking tickets going
around telling you that you couldn't do the sensible thing...

Right. So you were disillusioned with the UK long before the EU arrived?
Yet want to go back to the 'old days' before it? Do you ever think before
posting?

--
*How can I miss you if you won't go away?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:20:25 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
When you switch a kettle off it doesn't stay boiling for very long
does it.

No reason why it should - if you only boil enough for your immediate
needs.

That can't be done you need to biol more water as it evaporrates as it
boils and any steam coning out reduces efficiency, and yuo get bits of
lime scale in yuor cup if yuo use every ml of water you boil.

So if you can't use all the water in the kettle, why the concern about
what remains cooling down quickly?

--
*Sleep with a photographer and watch things develop

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, 13 May 2016 14:12:28 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It used to be simply the latter, until the Glorious Socialism of the 60s
onwards assumed that we all wanted high taxes (as long as someone else
got taxed) free services (even if they were worth what you paid for
them) and lots of chaps with speed cameras and parking tickets going
around telling you that you couldn't do the sensible thing...

Right. So you were disillusioned with the UK .

I've never been frustrated by the UK, I might be disillusioned by some of the individuals in it or who re making teh laws or whatever.

I was disgusted by jimmy savellie not the UK, I was disillusioned and disgusted by those that allowed him to do what he did and those that turned a blind eye to what was happening, for me this didn't reflect on the UK as a whole but just on those individuals.


Sure I might be long before the EU arrived?
Yet want to go back to the 'old days' before it? Do you ever think before
posting?

You can't seperate these things quite as easily as you imagine.

Do we really want to go back to the days when we could trade with Europe like we did 2000 years ago, without teh need to give someone in the UK/EU extra money for doing little if anything.

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:00:25 +0100, Clive George wrote:

On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:
Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides
to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

That apart, I'm very intrigued as to how one - even a couple - of
staunchly Catholic countries could apparently ban abortions across the
whole of the EU.

Perhaps Dave would care to climb out of the Whisky bottle for long enough
to explain that one?

Still, it's not like that bastion of freedom - the US - would ever take
such a strong stance against personal freedoms, is it?

Oh.

On Friday, 13 May 2016 15:03:28 UTC+1, Clive George wrote:
On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

You mean the part that isn't England or the UK I think it's called Republic of Ireland and is a seprate country. I don;t remmebr being asked to vote on such a thing even though the Republic of Ireland is in the EU, so where's the democray that is spoken so highly off in the EU.

On Friday, 13 May 2016 15:25:59 UTC+1, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:00:25 +0100, Clive George wrote:

On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:
Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides
to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

That apart, I'm very intrigued as to how one - even a couple - of
staunchly Catholic countries could apparently ban abortions across the
whole of the EU.

Perhaps Dave would care to climb out of the Whisky bottle for long enough
to explain that one?

Is the EU a democrcy or not ?
Is the EU more controlled by religion than it should be ?



Still, it's not like that bastion of freedom - the US - would ever take
such a strong stance against personal freedoms, is it?

What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that in teh UK do we.


Oh.

On Friday, 13 May 2016 08:12:36 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
Steve Walker wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Now that the LEDs are available things are improving. The banning of
traditional lighbulbs was brought in before a proper alternative was
available.

They could do something sensible like make them refer to the life of the
complete lamp, rather than just the life of the LEDs.

Sensible to encourage good efficiencies for these.

If you were choosing your targets sensibly, you'd do those which would
save the greatest amount of energy first. How many minutes per month do
you use a hoover or hairdryer?

power transformers

Already very efficient.

I think it does refer to electricity supplier transformers, rather than
wall-warts, but presumably they are not keen to heat up their switching
yards?

electric motors

Already pretty efficient and improvements are likely to be by adding
complex electronics, which will increase the cost to unaffordable levels
for many devices.


Permanent magnet motor are much more efficient than conventional ones.

On Friday, 13 May 2016 09:00:01 UTC+1, Chris B wrote:
On 12/05/2016 22:34, Tim Streater wrote:

There was some talk that glyphosate was for the chop, too,

I think its still up for debate soon, and it looks like there is
widespread support for a ban in europe (with a small e), the EU seem to
be in favour of the stuff.

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...ned-glyphosate

There was a question about it on GQT a few weeks ago and the wisdom of
the panel seemed to be that the fear was that it was carcinogenic, but
that there is little evidence that glyposate is harmful when used as
directed, but there is much more doubt about some of the surfactants now
being added to make it more effective.

Panel believed most likely outcome was a ban for amateurs but the big
business would still be able to use it.

Amateurs already banned from the concentrate(since last September).
I have got my supply in.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 13 May 2016 15:03:28 UTC+1, Clive George wrote:
On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone
decides to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

You mean the part that isn't England or the UK I think it's called
Republic of Ireland and is a seprate country. I don;t remmebr being
asked to vote on such a thing even though the Republic of Ireland is in
the EU, so where's the democray that is spoken so highly off in the EU.

Right. You're apparently in favour of our 'sovereignty' since you want to
leave the EU - but want to have a vote on the internal affairs of a
separate country? Something doesn't quite compute...

--
*Frustration is trying to find your glasses without your glasses.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Still, it's not like that bastion of freedom - the US - would ever
take such a strong stance against personal freedoms, is it?

What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that
in teh UK do we.

I'm sure the US right to bear arms will prove very useful if Trump gets
elected.

But are you seriously saying you'd like to see that right here?

--
*If you can't see my mirrors, I'm doing my hair*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip
And a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK if
we do leave.

--
*What do you call a dinosaur with an extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK if we do
leave"?
Would you care to quantify that? 25% less? 50% less? A feeling in your head
without anything to back it up?
I will be very impressed if you can show your working to arrive at an actual
figure.

You may well be right and you may well be wrong.
--
Dave W

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 13 May 2016 15:25:59 UTC+1, Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:00:25 +0100, Clive George wrote:

On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:
Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides
to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

That apart, I'm very intrigued as to how one - even a couple - of
staunchly Catholic countries could apparently ban abortions across the
whole of the EU.

Perhaps Dave would care to climb out of the Whisky bottle for long enough
to explain that one?

Is the EU a democrcy or not ?
Is the EU more controlled by religion than it should be ?



Still, it's not like that bastion of freedom - the US - would ever take
such a strong stance against personal freedoms, is it?

What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that in
teh UK do we.

Just look out the window at the women passing by.
--
Dave W

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:

Still, it's not like that bastion of freedom - the US - would ever
take such a strong stance against personal freedoms, is it?


What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that
in teh UK do we.

I'm sure the US right to bear arms will prove very useful if Trump gets
elected.

But are you seriously saying you'd like to see that right here?


Well it would reduce the road rage problem IMO and frighten a
few politicians.

whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:52:48 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:

On 11/05/2016 23:08, Capitol wrote:

Chris B wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:30, Adrian wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:03:29 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:


Then they came for vacuum cleaners, soon kettles and toasters.

Oh, that 2014 fabricated scare-story's come out of hibernation, has it?

What a surprise.

Even the Telegraph backtracked on it a few months ago.


Well its not come out of hibernation yet - its been put on the "back
burner" (If we are still allowed to have such things) until after the
referendum in case it makes people vote to leave.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/36642906-d...#axzz48NVyRLIh


But after the referendum I will wager its "full steam ahead" (well
partial steam ahead anyway from our new low power kettles).


Oh dear, back to buying for stock again! I'm sure the real reason is
to lower electricity demand as the generating capacity is being
destroyed by the EU eco warriors. Back to coal fires people.

But will lower powered kettles, ovens, toasters and other heating
devices lower demand?

That's the 'logic' I just don't get. if I have a kettle that is half the power it will take twice as long to heat up, so it'll be on twice as long possible more due to loses.



The power of each will be lower, but as each will
need to be on for longer, there is likely to be a greater overlap and
therefore more operating at any one time. It *might* have an effect at
the ad break in a major event, but that's about all - and that is
already planned for and places like Dinorwig are brought online for the
surge.

yes and I'm not sure a 300 watt kettle would actually boil enough to make a decent cup of tea.



My experience of low power traveling kettles is that they take
forever to boil a small quantity of water.

In article ,
Dave W wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip
And a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK
if we do leave.


"a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK if
we do leave"? Would you care to quantify that? 25% less? 50% less? A
feeling in your head without anything to back it up? I will be very
impressed if you can show your working to arrive at an actual figure.

The BREXIT lot seem to be plucking figures from the air, so I just thought
I'd join them.

You may well be right and you may well be wrong.

I'd say on balance there is more informed opinion about the short term
effects of leaving being bad for the majority than the other way.

--
*Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 13/05/2016 11:37, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:20:25 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
whisky-dave wrote:
When you switch a kettle off it doesn't stay boiling for very
long does it.

No reason why it should - if you only boil enough for your
immediate needs.

That can't be done you need to biol more water as it evaporrates as
it boils and any steam coning out reduces efficiency, and yuo get
bits of lime scale in yuor cup if yuo use every ml of water you
boil.

Ideally you'd use one of those boiling water taps then no one would
need a kettle would they, but I don't believe those taps are as
efficient as a kettle anyway.

The extra water to compensate for the evaporated water coming out of a
kettle, provided it is not actually left boiling, is tiny.

--
Rod

On 12/05/2016 13:52, Adrian wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 13:22:14 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

The fuss over the vacuum cleaner thing was amazing. Most of it coming
from those who've never touched one in their lives.

I always find it amusing how forceful some of the more, umm,
unreconstructed men here can get over a bloody vacuum cleaner.

But, then, I always found it amazing how some of the cheap vacs were
prepared to shout about how they were TWO THOUSAND WATT - yet if you had
to use one, they were **** at actually sucking up, except at making a lot
of heat and noise - while something like a Henry did a much better job
with half the power.

Henry is pretty poor once you have a HEPA filter.
You need a fair few watts to move much air through a HEPA filter the
size they usually have in a vac.

I bought a meil when they were going cheap, its 2000W but I seldom run
it above 600 watts.

On 12/05/2016 16:35, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 15:09:11 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

It would, of course, be silly to restrict power on a kettle
which is near 100% efficient. And I'll eat my hat if the EU do
bring in a upper limit for them, on the grounds of efficiency.

Why legislate to limit the maximum, why not just mandate an A-F
rating and let people *choose* what they want?

No point really in specifying this on a kettle as they are so close
to 100% efficient.

How do you work out the efficincy of say one of the plastic £5 ones
compared to the £60+ one I brought. (actually I have both, I have 4
tin openers too)

They both convert 100% of the electricity into heat.

The plastic one may have less loses unless the expensive one has extra
insulation.

You can't work it out from the info you provided but I would guess the
£5 one does the job better.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

I'd say on balance there is more informed opinion about the short term
effects of leaving being bad for the majority than the other way.

Well, you would say that, wouldn't you?

Well - *anyone* would say that: DP's comment is merely a statement of
the simple truth. The experts (and also the non-experts) have masses of
data to go on, when predicting negative outcomes of an exit; they have
nothing whatever to go on, when predicting positive outcomes - only the
outlines of castles built in the sky by the Brexiteers.

J.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 13/05/16 09:38, Capitol wrote:
The key point is that it is unnecessary legislation. This costs the
taxpayers money in ensuring conformity. IE MORE TAXES IF YOU DON"T VOTE
LEAVE!

+100

This is the real key thing: At what point does it cost more to tax you and
pay bureaucrats to give it back to you in terms of services you would
rather either not have, or could easily have chosen and paid for yourself
if you hadn't had the tax money removed in the first place.

Is the purpose of government to create make-work and redistribute income
from those that earn it to those that frankly don't, or is it to provide
uniformly (bad) services to everyone at a high price in terms of taxation,
or its it to keep the peace, mend the roads and stop johnny foreigner
wandering in and creating mayhem etc?

It's all of those, and to stop the locals crating mayhem too.

And to do some stuff like providing health care at a much lower
cost than when other than government does it. That's why the US
spends TWICE as much per capita as any other modern first world
country does and gets a worse result in the measures that matter
like longevity, infant mortality and years in good health.

It used to be simply the latter,

That's a lie with govt schools alone, let alone the postal service etc.

until the Glorious Socialism of the 60s onwards assumed that we all wanted
high taxes (as long as someone else got taxed) free services (even if they
were worth what you paid for them) and lots of chaps with speed cameras
and parking tickets going around telling you that you couldn't do the
sensible thing...

And a health care system that left what we had before the war for dead,
particularly with health care for say the bottom third of the country.

And left the previous approach of workhouses etc for dead too.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 08:11:55 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:



What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that in teh UK do we.


Since when have short sleeved shirts been banned?


G.Harman

In article ,
wrote:

On Fri, 13 May 2016 08:11:55 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

What's personal freedom the right to bare arms, well we don't have that in
teh UK do we.

Since when have short sleeved shirts been banned?

Apparently they came for them soon after the kettles.

Local Councils have, as usual, been tasked with drawing up
interpretations and enforcement of this Regulation (or is it just a
Recommendation at the mo?).

Also as usual, the UK Government, while devolving (i.e. shucking off)
responsibility to the local councils, are threatening said councils with
another reduction in monies, if the regulation is not enforced, via
officials, and collection of fines. The national CCTV network will be
used to enforce it. Expect a NIP through your door "momentarily", what
with all this weather we've been having.

However, while bare arms are banned in the UK, as with most other things
the other EU countries can pick and choose what suits them, so them warm
Latino countries, inc France, are waving two fingers (or the official EU
equivalent) at this rule.

John

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 13 May 2016 15:03:28 UTC+1, Clive George wrote:
On 13/05/2016 14:34, whisky-dave wrote:

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides
to effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

Have you looked to the west of where you live at all? You'll have to
cross some water, but not an ocean.

You mean the part that isn't England or the UK I think it's called
Republic of Ireland and is a seprate country. I don;t remmebr being asked
to vote on such a thing even though the Republic of Ireland is in the EU,
so where's the democray that is spoken so highly off in the EU.



If you are still talking about abortions, on demand abortions are illegal in
NI

tim

whisky-dave wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
whisky-dave wrote

When you switch a kettle off it doesn't stay boiling for very long does
it.

No reason why it should - if you only boil enough for your immediate
needs.

That can't be done

Even sillier than you usually manage.

you need to biol more water as it evaporrates as it boils

Not enough to matter and you just put in the amount that leaves
you with what you need when you pour it into the cup etc.

and any steam coning out reduces efficiency,

Not by enough to matter.

and yuo get bits of lime scale in yuor cup
if yuo use every ml of water you boil.

Not if you aren't in a hard water environment.

Ideally you'd use one of those boiling water taps

Those lose some by evaporation too.

then no one would need a kettle would they,

I personally use the microwave but
they aren't as efficient as most kettles.

but I don't believe those taps are as efficient as a kettle anyway.

Corse they aren't, because they have to keep the water hot
for when you turn on the tap and so lose some heat that way.

"Dave W" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip
And a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK if
we do leave.

--
*What do you call a dinosaur with an extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"a considerably lower standard of living for the majority in the UK if we
do leave"?

My problem with the numbers that they are spouting out is the (un proven)
assumption that making the "cake" bigger (or smaller) affects everyone
equally.

It doesn't.

It might have done in the 50/60/70/80s, but since the rise in globalisation
it has been very unfairly dished out with 90% of the increased size of the
cake being gobbled by 10% of the population.

I suspect that if the cake were to contract due to Brexit that effect would
be seen on the way back down again and the top 10% who have "unfairly"
benefited from the recent increase will be disproportionately affected by
the contraction. The absolute share of the (now smaller) national wealth of
the average hoi-polloi will likely be completely unaffected.

tim

"Another John" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

I'd say on balance there is more informed opinion about the short term
effects of leaving being bad for the majority than the other way.

Well, you would say that, wouldn't you?

Well - *anyone* would say that: DP's comment is merely a statement of
the simple truth. The experts (and also the non-experts) have masses of
data to go on,

These would be the same people who have so far mucked up Osborne's growth
estimates 10 out of the last 10 times they have tried to calculate them.

tim

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:52:48 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 11/05/2016 23:08, Capitol wrote:
Chris B wrote:
On 11/05/2016 18:30, Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:03:29 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Then they came for vacuum cleaners, soon kettles and toasters.

Oh, that 2014 fabricated scare-story's come out of hibernation, has
it?

What a surprise.

Even the Telegraph backtracked on it a few months ago.

Well its not come out of hibernation yet - its been put on the "back
burner" (If we are still allowed to have such things) until after the
referendum in case it makes people vote to leave.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/36642906-d...#axzz48NVyRLIh


But after the referendum I will wager its "full steam ahead" (well
partial steam ahead anyway from our new low power kettles).


Oh dear, back to buying for stock again! I'm sure the real reason
is
to lower electricity demand as the generating capacity is being
destroyed by the EU eco warriors. Back to coal fires people.

But will lower powered kettles, ovens, toasters and other heating
devices lower demand?

That's the 'logic' I just don't get.

That's always been obvious.

if I have a kettle that is half the power it will take twice as long
to heat up, so it'll be on twice as long possible more due to loses.

Yes, but with the longer ad breaks like half time in the world series finals
etc, when tens of millions all choose to put the kettle on at the same time,
clearly if all the kettles have half the power, that will see that peak
halved
and since the power generation system finds it harder to handle the peaks
than the baseload, that will help with power generation when its done with
the generating capacity that is slow to ramp up.

Not such a problem with the national grids that have enough pumped
water hydro that can be used to ramp up very quickly for just the peaks.

The power of each will be lower, but as each will need to be on
for longer, there is likely to be a greater overlap and therefore
more operating at any one time. It *might* have an effect at the
ad break in a major event, but that's about all - and that is already
planned for and places like Dinorwig are brought online for the surge.

yes and I'm not sure a 300 watt kettle would
actually boil enough to make a decent cup of tea.

Corse it would if you dont mind waiting long enough and its well insulated.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Well - *anyone* would say that: DP's comment is merely a statement of
the simple truth. The experts (and also the non-experts) have masses of
data to go on, when predicting negative outcomes of an exit; they have
nothing whatever to go on, when predicting positive outcomes - only the
outlines of castles built in the sky by the Brexiteers.

What castles are these, then? The important factor is that we will be
able to control our destiny again.

The only way we could control our destiny would be if this country was
self sufficient in everything. Like food and energy, for a start. And
those days are long since gone.

This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so very
much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK is no
longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the UK for its
headquarters?

--
*When you get a bladder infection urine trouble.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
tim... wrote:
I suspect that if the cake were to contract due to Brexit that effect
would be seen on the way back down again and the top 10% who have
"unfairly" benefited from the recent increase will be
disproportionately affected by the contraction. The absolute share of
the (now smaller) national wealth of the average hoi-polloi will likely
be completely unaffected.

You think? Can't see this Tory government allowing their pals to suffer as
much as the general population if there is an even greater recession after
BREXIT. They protected them well after the last one.

--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2016 18:20:25 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
When you switch a kettle off it doesn't stay boiling for very long
does it.

No reason why it should - if you only boil enough for your immediate
needs.

That can't be done you need to biol more water as it evaporrates as it
boils and any steam coning out reduces efficiency, and yuo get bits of
lime scale in yuor cup if yuo use every ml of water you boil.

So if you can't use all the water in the kettle, why the concern about
what remains cooling down quickly?

Because if you use the kettle quite often, its better if it has
the water you didn’t use previously as hot as possible, stupid.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Friday, 13 May 2016 14:12:28 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It used to be simply the latter, until the Glorious Socialism of the
60s
onwards assumed that we all wanted high taxes (as long as someone else
got taxed) free services (even if they were worth what you paid for
them) and lots of chaps with speed cameras and parking tickets going
around telling you that you couldn't do the sensible thing...

Right. So you were disillusioned with the UK .

I've never been frustrated by the UK, I might be disillusioned by some of
the individuals in it or who re making teh laws or whatever.

I was disgusted by jimmy savellie not the UK, I was disillusioned and
disgusted by those that allowed him to do what he did and those that
turned a blind eye to what was happening, for me this didn't reflect on
the UK as a whole but just on those individuals.


Sure I might be long before the EU arrived?
Yet want to go back to the 'old days' before it? Do you ever think before
posting?

You can't seperate these things quite as easily as you imagine.

Do we really want to go back to the days when we could trade with Europe
like we did 2000 years ago, without teh need to give someone in the UK/EU
extra money for doing little if anything.

Do yo want to live in an united Europe where one country alone decides to
effectivley ban abortions (Poland)

It doesnt get to ban abortions in anywhere but Poland.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Well - *anyone* would say that: DP's comment is merely a statement of
the simple truth. The experts (and also the non-experts) have masses of
data to go on, when predicting negative outcomes of an exit; they have
nothing whatever to go on, when predicting positive outcomes - only the
outlines of castles built in the sky by the Brexiteers.

What castles are these, then? The important factor is that we will be
able to control our destiny again.

The only way we could control our destiny would be if this country was
self sufficient in everything. Like food and energy, for a start. And
those days are long since gone.

This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so very
much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK is no
longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the UK for its
headquarters?

because foreign banksters (and their wives) like to live in London

Frankfurt and Zurich just don't have the "pull"

tim

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
So if you can't use all the water in the kettle, why the concern about
what remains cooling down quickly?

Because if you use the kettle quite often, its better if it has
the water you didn’t use previously as hot as possible, stupid.

Forgot you lived in a third world country. In the UK, most prefer and can
afford fresh water when making a cuppa. Not water that has been re-heated
several times.

--
*TEAMWORK...means never having to take all the blame yourself *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
tim... wrote:
This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so
very much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK
is no longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the
UK for its headquarters?

because foreign banksters (and their wives) like to live in London

They do. Because it's a cosmopolitan city. Exactly why the little
Englanders on here hate it so much. As well as it being rather left wing,
of course. If they get their way and change England back into some
fortress where only white UK born are welcome, you'll be left with only UK
controlled industry and financial services. Ie, near zero.

Frankfurt and Zurich just don't have the "pull"

Not since they are on level terms with London, all being in the EU. But if
England pulls out, you can guarantee things will stay the same?

Put it this way. You are in charge of a multinational company with a head
office in a country you've chosen as being the best for your business.
That country then makes a major change in its relationship with a large
part of your market. Would you be happy to just continue as is - or would
you review your options?

--
*CAN AN ATHEIST GET INSURANCE AGAINST ACTS OF GOD?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In t,
Tim wrote:

Well - *anyone* would say that: DP's comment is merely a statement of
the simple truth. The experts (and also the non-experts) have masses of
data to go on, when predicting negative outcomes of an exit; they have
nothing whatever to go on, when predicting positive outcomes - only the
outlines of castles built in the sky by the Brexiteers.


What castles are these, then? The important factor is that we will be
able to control our destiny again.

The only way we could control our destiny would be if this country was
self sufficient in everything. Like food and energy, for a start. And
those days are long since gone.

This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so very
much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK is no
longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the UK for its
headquarters?


Well Boeing have just done so!

On Sat, 14 May 2016 12:46:29 +0100, Capitol wrote:

This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so
very much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK
is no longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the
UK for its headquarters?

Well Boeing have just done so!

Not quite so simple. They've announced an intention to move their
European HQ from Brussels to the UK.

And you can bet that's as much in the expectation that the tax status quo
won't change much post-brexit (if it happens) as anything else.

If the political economy changes markedly, just watch that decision peter
out.

On 14/05/16 12:54, Adrian wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 12:46:29 +0100, Capitol wrote:

This country exists by trading. Much of it financial services. And so
very much of it no longer owned or controlled by the UK. And if the UK
is no longer in the EU, why would an international company choose the
UK for its headquarters?

Well Boeing have just done so!

Not quite so simple. They've announced an intention to move their
European HQ from Brussels to the UK.

And you can bet that's as much in the expectation that the tax status quo
won't change much post-brexit (if it happens) as anything else.

If the political economy changes markedly, just watch that decision peter
out.

If the political economy changes markedly, just watch that decision
being copied by many other multinationals.

All it takes is a favourable tax regime - think Liechtenstein.



--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)