On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:53:15 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:56:13 -0000, "Capitol"
wrote:

An American friend's definition of the USA was "350 million people
motivated
by greed". The results are impressive. They have a population with a work
ethic from childhood. They still have a democracy that works, we sadly
don't! Their local and national politicians are much more responsive to
the
electorate than ours and know they are expendable. The people also
respect
success, want to know how to achieve it and don't descend into envy,
which
sadly is always the case here.

On those points I'd broadly agree.

They unfortunately have not yet achieved the
UK's biggest success, the NHS (with most of it's faults being caused by
political interference).

On this one, I wouldn't

The NHS is fab.



Riiiight.........

---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:43:12 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:49:31 +0000, Ben Blaney
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:

No. But then we've moved on from the days when Scargill and his
union cronies held the country to ransom.

We've moved to the days where big business and the politicians in their
pockets hold the country to ransom. Progress?


Let's see now.

Do I see coal strikes? No.
Electricity 3 hours on, 6 off? No.
3 day week? No.
Factories idle due to steel strike? No.
6% statutory annual pay increase? No.
Sterling crisis? No.
Rescue package from IMF? No.

I'd say we've progressed from there......

Blair is doing very well.


You must be easily pleased.





---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:10:33 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Blair is doing very well.

You must be easily pleased.

Something please explain to me - which newsreader is IMM using? I
wasn't aware that there was one available for the visually (or is it
mentally) impaired!

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:55:23 UTC, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

Let's see now.

Do I see coal strikes? No.
Electricity 3 hours on, 6 off? No.
3 day week? No.
Factories idle due to steel strike? No.
6% statutory annual pay increase? No.
Sterling crisis? No.
Rescue package from IMF? No.

You missed the flared trousers!

And Clodagh Rodgers....

--
Bob Eager
rde at tavi.co.uk
PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3,
P70...

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:33:08 +0000, PoP
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:10:33 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Blair is doing very well.

You must be easily pleased.

Something please explain to me - which newsreader is IMM using? I
wasn't aware that there was one available for the visually (or is it
mentally) impaired!


Unless of course he means that Blair is doing very well in the "taking
care of No. 1. sense" ?

I'd agree with him there.


PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Most of the mines were viable.
What mines were these then?
I thought viable meant capable of success or continuing effectiveness.

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

--
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
* old email address "btiruseless" abandoned due to worm-generated spam *
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

"Colin Wilson" wrote in message
t...
Most of the mines were viable.
What mines were these then?
I thought viable meant capable of success or continuing effectiveness.

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Getting rid of mines was political not economical.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:43:12 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:49:31 +0000, Ben Blaney
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:

No. But then we've moved on from the days when Scargill and his
union cronies held the country to ransom.

We've moved to the days where big business and the politicians in
their
pockets hold the country to ransom. Progress?


Let's see now.

Do I see coal strikes? No.
Electricity 3 hours on, 6 off? No.
3 day week? No.
Factories idle due to steel strike? No.
6% statutory annual pay increase? No.
Sterling crisis? No.
Rescue package from IMF? No.

I'd say we've progressed from there......

Blair is doing very well.

You must be easily pleased.

No. I just remember: Heath, Douglas-Home and Thatcher.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"PoP" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:10:33 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Blair is doing very well.

You must be easily pleased.

Something please explain to me - which newsreader is IMM using? I
wasn't aware that there was one available for the visually (or is it
mentally) impaired!

Another brainwashed Little Middle Englander raises its head.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:33:08 +0000, PoP
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 02:10:33 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Blair is doing very well.

You must be easily pleased.

Something please explain to me - which newsreader is IMM using? I
wasn't aware that there was one available for the visually (or is it
mentally) impaired!


Unless of course he means that Blair is doing very well in the "taking
care of No. 1. sense" ?

I'd agree with him there.

Andy is a self confessed brainwashed Little Middle Englander.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:40:10 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Says it all. If there's one person that I distrust more than a
government minister it's King Arthur.

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 23:57:20 -0000, "IMM" wrote:



Most service I know that is geared to make money is poor. In some cases you
may loose on the call because of misdiagnosis or whatever. Those geared to
make money will rip off in some way or other.


So you get better service and cheaper prices from Asda than the Coop?

--
Niall

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 13:45:33 -0000, "IMM" wrote:




Anyone who anything about BG will tell you different. It has been
privatised for 20 years now. The service side had so called experts from
the private sector brought in to sort it out. What they meant was provide
greater profit for little outlay. Service levels were alien to them.

The culture at BG, and other privatised industries is firmly a private let's
rip em off culture.


The key word here is privat*ised*. Many such are run by people who are
trying to outdo what they *think* is the private sector ethos. They
are wrong.

--
Niall

"PoP" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:40:10 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Says it all. If there's one person that I distrust more than a
government minister it's King Arthur.

I trust Arthur Scragill.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"PoP" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:40:10 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines
open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

The main by product of burnt coal is CO2. And that is no good for running a
submarine or bombing the Middle East.

--
Adam

In article ,
Niall wrote:
It's amazing how many people who rail against the concept of profit
still think that *they* should be well paid for the work they do.

Most people 'rail' against excessive profit for poor service. Or things
like directors awarding themselves a 20% pay rise plus perks while
restricting their workforce who make the profits for them to 2% *and*
reduce their 'perks' in the form of longer working hours, etc.

--
*Two many clicks spoil the browse *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
PoP wrote:
If there's one person that I distrust more than a
government minister it's King Arthur.

Shows the power of the press and media. His job was as a union leader, and
he did his very best for his members. If 10% of our politicians did the
same we'd be the best country in the world in every way.

And I *have* met the man, and would be proud to have him as a friend.

--
*With her marriage she got a new name and a dress.*

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
IMM wrote:
I trust Arthur Scragill.

A world record. I agree with Adam.

--
*Caution: I drive like you do.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article , Andy Hall
writes
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:53:15 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:56:13 -0000, "Capitol"
wrote:

Snip

On this one, I wouldn't

The NHS is fab.



Riiiight.........

---

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

So say the (not very) small army of pen pushers who are being 'employed'
in this ever-increasingly overstaffed public service. It's all very well
increasing the amount of money being spent on it, but unless we have
something to export how is it going to be paid for ? - not by issuing
Gilts, since that is a tax on future generations. (Council tax up
another 800% anyone).

How many of you have heard of Mr Grainger ??. He is the NHS IT 'guru'
appointed by T Bliar on a salary of £250,000 and he is dishing out IT
contracts that are going to cost us over £4 BILLION - for computers
would you believe. In doing so he is scrapping all the existing IT
systems that have been developed over the last 30-odd years, and buying
in the usual American Dross. The details of these contracts have been
almost covered by the official secrets act, such is their determination
to prevent any form of public scrutiny. Can you imagine the government
deciding to allow Heathrow T5 without any independent scrutiny ??.

What the NHS needs is to spend 4 billion on basic repairs, and buying
new MEDICAL equipment.
--
Andrew

In article , geoff
writes
In message , Capitol
writes
An American friend's definition of the USA was "350 million people motivated
by greed". The results are impressive. They have a population with a work
ethic from childhood. They still have a democracy that works, we sadly
don't! Their local and national politicians are much more responsive to the
electorate than ours and know they are expendable. The people also respect
success, want to know how to achieve it and don't descend into envy, which
sadly is always the case here. They unfortunately have not yet achieved the
UK's biggest success, the NHS (with most of it's faults being caused by
political interference).

They are also the world's biggest polluters, they have really bad social
problems, they have a massive national debt propped up only because oil
etc are traded in dollars, which is the only reason that the dollar is a
strong currency.


The Dollar is currently suffering from benign neglect and is now very
weak. (£1 = $1.79). Most economists are worried that this parallels the
period up to Jimmy Carters presidency. My 2p FWIW, in 5 years we will be
back to hyper inflation and interest rates of 10% +, once the Federal
Reserve belatedly try to correct the problem.
--
Andrew

In article , Andy Hall
writes
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:49:31 +0000, Ben Blaney
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:

No. But then we've moved on from the days when Scargill and his
union cronies held the country to ransom.

We've moved to the days where big business and the politicians in their
pockets hold the country to ransom. Progress?


Let's see now.

Do I see coal strikes? No.
No pits !!
Electricity 3 hours on, 6 off? No.
Try living in East Anglia in the 24/7 region :-)
3 day week? No.
When productivity actually went up.
For 50% of men over 50, its now a 0 day week.
Factories idle due to steel strike? No.
What factories, don't we import all our cars,steel,coal,food now ?
6% statutory annual pay increase? No.
18% statutory council tax hike in West Sussex.
Sterling crisis? No.
It's freely floating, so not relevant
Rescue package from IMF? No.
If any other country allowed its currency to do what that USD does, the
IMF would have been sent in and forced up the domestic price of water,
gas, food etc. long ago. However the Yanks can say, "It's our dollar,
but
YOUR problem".

I'd say we've progressed from there......




.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

--
Andrew

In article , Andy Hall
writes
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:55:23 GMT, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 22:49:31 +0000, Ben Blaney
wrote:

Andy Hall wrote:

No. But then we've moved on from the days when Scargill and his
union cronies held the country to ransom.

We've moved to the days where big business and the politicians in their
pockets hold the country to ransom. Progress?


Let's see now.

Do I see coal strikes? No.
Electricity 3 hours on, 6 off? No.
3 day week? No.
Factories idle due to steel strike? No.
6% statutory annual pay increase? No.
Sterling crisis? No.
Rescue package from IMF? No.

You missed the flared trousers!
But they are back !.

.. and the cheesecloth shirts and the other kind with curved tips to
the collars.




I'd say we've progressed from there......
Spice Girls ????

Adam


.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

--
Andrew

In article , Huge
writes
Colin Wilson writes:
Most of the mines were viable.
What mines were these then?
I thought viable meant capable of success or continuing effectiveness.

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Except the Government have signed up for the Kyoto accord, so fossil fuel
use has to decrease.

Complete waste of time unless the US and China are onboard
--
Andrew

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.
Except the Government have signed up for the Kyoto accord, so fossil fuel
use has to decrease.

Kyoto came much later didn`t it ?

--
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
* old email address "btiruseless" abandoned due to worm-generated spam *
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:53:37 +0000, Huge wrote:

Colin Wilson writes:
Most of the mines were viable.
What mines were these then?
I thought viable meant capable of success or continuing effectiveness.

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Except the Government have signed up for the Kyoto accord, so fossil fuel
use has to decrease.

....and you can't make nuclear weapons from coal whilch was likely the real
reason to subsidize the nuclear industry.


--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html

I can agree with this, if you go to an american gp, the practice likely has
it's own blood testing facility and maybe it's own cat scan! I was very
surprised to find a cat scan facility in the local shopping area last year,
with a cost of $500 for a complete cat scan.
Regards
Capitol

Andrew wrote in message ...
What the NHS needs is to spend 4 billion on basic repairs, and buying
new MEDICAL equipment.
--
Andrew

Andrew wrote in message ... etc

Complete waste of time anyway, more European cars( + eastern Europe) and
with bigger engines, more central heating all over, a throwaway western
economy and massive economic/population growth in the east, mean Kyoto is
doomed to failure.
Regards
Capitol

I can agree with this, if you go to an american gp, the practice likely h=
as
it's own blood testing facility and maybe it's own cat scan! I was very
surprised to find a cat scan facility in the local shopping area last yea=
r,
with a cost of $500 for a complete cat scan.

One of my colleagues was told he had a 6 month wait for an appointment=20
for a cat scan, but he could have it done the NEXT DAY at THE SAME PLACE=20
if he paid ~=A3300

a) this is extortion / blackmail courtesy of the NHS

b) it turned out he had cancer in the spine, and a mutual friend says=20
he`ll be lucky to make it to March...

Now, looking at (b) - he would still not have had the scan from the NHS,=20
so the only treatment by then would be "here are some painkillers, go=20
home and die"

--=20
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
* old email address "btiruseless" abandoned due to worm-generated spam *
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 22:20:29 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

I can agree with this, if you go to an american gp, the practice likely has
it's own blood testing facility and maybe it's own cat scan! I was very
surprised to find a cat scan facility in the local shopping area last year,
with a cost of $500 for a complete cat scan.

One of my colleagues was told he had a 6 month wait for an appointment
for a cat scan, but he could have it done the NEXT DAY at THE SAME PLACE
if he paid ~£300

a) this is extortion / blackmail courtesy of the

Certainly it is in the context of the way the NHS is set up to
operate. It is the notion that treatment should be free of charge at
the point of delivery that is wrong. In other countries with
socialised medicine, it is normal to pay something for treatment.
For example, I was somewhat surprised to learn from a friend in Sweden
that one pays to visit the GP.



b) it turned out he had cancer in the spine, and a mutual friend says
he`ll be lucky to make it to March...

Now, looking at (b) - he would still not have had the scan from the NHS,
so the only treatment by then would be "here are some painkillers, go
home and die"

Very sadly, it doesn't seem as though the prognosis would have been
different. What is wrong about state provided healthcare is that
the state gets to decide on the policy regarding who gets treatment
and who does not and that appears to be based on a perception of the
individual's value to society by virtue of their age and health
record. I don't like the notion of the state playing God in this
way.

There is something very wrong with a system where I, and my company
pay large sums of money into a black hole and receive no level of
service for it, such that I then have to pay again for private health
cover in order to obtain something close to a usable level of service.

I can accept that in a civilised society there needs to be a safety
net for those who cannot afford to pay for their own healthcare. For
the majority, I am sure that they would receive better treatment by
making their own arrangements and not paying 20% of gross income to
the government to do it for them.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:31:04 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Niall wrote:
It's amazing how many people who rail against the concept of profit
still think that *they* should be well paid for the work they do.

Most people 'rail' against excessive profit for poor service. Or things
like directors awarding themselves a 20% pay rise plus perks while
restricting their workforce who make the profits for them to 2% *and*
reduce their 'perks' in the form of longer working hours, etc.


Yeah, and *some* of *them* have to be the people you encounter every
day who take home plenty of money for doing not a lot and that badly.
Many of whom IME work for the public sector.

--
Niall

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 21:24:21 -0000, "Capitol"
wrote:


Andrew wrote in message ... etc

Complete waste of time anyway, more European cars( + eastern Europe) and
with bigger engines, more central heating all over, a throwaway western
economy and massive economic/population growth in the east, mean Kyoto is
doomed to failure.

Just as well, then, given that it's totally unneccesary.

--
Niall

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 22:46:13 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

I can accept that in a civilised society there needs to be a safety
net for those who cannot afford to pay for their own healthcare. For
the majority, I am sure that they would receive better treatment by
making their own arrangements and not paying 20% of gross income to
the government to do it for them.

:evils Advocate Mode ON::

What I find very disturbing is that those people who can afford that,
and attempt to do so, are instantly penalised. If your employer
provides discounted (or free) BUPA health care then you get taxed on
it as a benefit-in-kind.

So if you look at this logically, you subscribe to an insurance scheme
which is going to remove quite a lot of your dependency on the NHS for
any non-trivial medical problem which arises for you and probably your
family. And you get awarded a larger tax bill as a result of your
personal generosity towards the state.

Neat.

Whilst I probably wouldn't go so far as to give people a discount on
their NI bill for taking out insurance I would remove the fiasco of
placing a tax on top of their insurance premium.

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 08:09:46 +0000, PoP
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 22:46:13 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

I can accept that in a civilised society there needs to be a safety
net for those who cannot afford to pay for their own healthcare. For
the majority, I am sure that they would receive better treatment by
making their own arrangements and not paying 20% of gross income to
the government to do it for them.

:evils Advocate Mode ON::

What I find very disturbing is that those people who can afford that,
and attempt to do so, are instantly penalised. If your employer
provides discounted (or free) BUPA health care then you get taxed on
it as a benefit-in-kind.

So if you look at this logically, you subscribe to an insurance scheme
which is going to remove quite a lot of your dependency on the NHS for
any non-trivial medical problem which arises for you and probably your
family. And you get awarded a larger tax bill as a result of your
personal generosity towards the state.

It's actually worse than that.

There is an insurance tax on the premium.

The employee pays tax on the premium as a benefit in kind in effect at
their highest marginal rate.

They pay national insurance on the benefit in kind.

The employer pays national insurance on the benefit in kind.




Neat.

Whilst I probably wouldn't go so far as to give people a discount on
their NI bill for taking out insurance I would remove the fiasco of
placing a tax on top of their insurance premium.

This is why a voucher system makes eminent sense.

It provides a safety net for those unable to make their own provision,
ensures that those who would not otherwise actually do and for those
who wish to contribute more to their healthcare can do so and get
something for it. This could be achieved with far less
administration than is currently used in managing benefits and the
resources spent on actual health provision.

Primary and secondary education should be treated similarly.


PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article ,
Niall wrote:
Yeah, and *some* of *them* have to be the people you encounter every
day who take home plenty of money for doing not a lot and that badly.
Many of whom IME work for the public sector.

I'd love to know which part of the public sector gets plenty of money for
doing not a lot. Apart from MPs, of course.

--
*How many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 22:20:29 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

I can agree with this, if you go to an american gp, the practice likely
has
it's own blood testing facility and maybe it's own cat scan! I was very
surprised to find a cat scan facility in the local shopping area last
year,
with a cost of $500 for a complete cat scan.

One of my colleagues was told he had a 6 month wait for an appointment
for a cat scan, but he could have it done the NEXT DAY at THE SAME PLACE
if he paid ~£300

a) this is extortion / blackmail courtesy of the

Certainly it is in the context of the way the NHS is set up to
operate. It is the notion that treatment should be free of charge at
the point of delivery that is wrong. In other countries with
socialised medicine, it is normal to pay something for treatment.
For example, I was somewhat surprised to learn from a friend in Sweden
that one pays to visit the GP.

A low fee in most cases. This prevents the hypochondriacs from cluttering
the surgeries.




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Capitol" wrote in message
...

Andrew wrote in message ... etc

Complete waste of time anyway, more European cars( + eastern Europe) and
with bigger engines, more central heating all over,

Most CH is natural,gas and emissions on boilers are getting better by
legislation. MG is very clean at the worst of time, with high efficiency
burners super clean. The main problem is mainly power stations and car
emissions, with some industry adding too. Domestic CH in the near future
will not be a big problem.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Colin Wilson" wrote in message
t...

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines
open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.
Except the Government have signed up for the Kyoto accord, so fossil
fuel
use has to decrease.

Kyoto came much later didn`t it ?

Much later. There is coal fired systems that are far cleaner than the old
stations. It usually consists of grinding the coal into powder and scrubbed
stacked.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Ed Sirett" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:53:37 +0000, Huge wrote:

Colin Wilson writes:

Most of the mines were viable.
What mines were these then?
I thought viable meant capable of success or continuing effectiveness.

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines
open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

Except the Government have signed up for the Kyoto accord, so fossil
fuel
use has to decrease.

...and you can't make nuclear weapons from coal whilch was likely the real
reason to subsidize the nuclear industry.

Nuclear power was a smoke screen for weapons. It can be said that nuclear
power is cheap as it is a by-product of another system (weapons).


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"PoP" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:40:10 -0000, Colin Wilson
wrote:

Arthur Scargill did an interview about 3 years ago which brought the
situation into sharp relief - the cost to the taxpayer for
subsidising
the nuclear industry was more than the cost of keeping ALL the mines
open
and giving the damn stuff away for free.

The main by product of burnt coal is CO2. And that is no good for running
a
submarine or bombing the Middle East.

Military matters were not in their minds when they finished off the coal
industry. It was spite. They would ruin many people's lives, and affect
the economy, just for spite. If we had a full federal system, central
government would not have been able to do what it did. The regional
assembly, where mines were and their economy depended on them would have
prevented this occurring.




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

IMM wrote in message ...

Domestic CH in the near future
will not be a big problem.


Sadly this is not the case. Heating in the east is still wood/coal/oil
fired. As economic activity increases, the pollution will get much, much
worse. Some forecasts ( I think it was Newsweek) claim that the whole world
will be covered in a carbon particle dust cloud within the next 50yrs.

On another point, Arthur Scargill is a failure as a trade union leader, as
his actions caused the loss of most of his members jobs. Calling a heating
strike as you go into the summer, when the generating stations have been
stocking up for the previous year, was an act of monumental stupidity. Deep
mined coal is uneconomic as a fuel with UK labour rates and more so with
national insurance/tax increases. Surface mined coal is readily available
from all over the world at much lower costs. UK coal in its present form has
only survived courtesy of various government baleouts. Scargill could have
negotiated a controlled rundown of the industry but failed to do so.


Whilst I have reservations about gas and oil fired electricity generation in
their present form, in the long run, nuclear generation is the least
polluting system on the planet, albeit disposal problems at end of life need
improving.

I see we are being subjected to a proposal to bring in the minimum wage for
16 year olds. As IMO the minimum wage was only brought in to increase the NI
and income tax grab( 10% wage increase=30% tax grab increase?), I guess the
same trick is being worked again to fill the holes in Brown's overspent
budget. With income and corporation tax revenues falling (how?, in spite of
pseudo full employnent), one wonders when the bubble will burst?

Regards
Capitol