geoff wrote:

In message , IMM
writes


Blimye. What a thread. Bloody thought police jumping down the mans
throat because he wants to waste his money.

It's the British talent for envy, cant and hypocrisy coming to the fore
again!


Where? Telling someone he is doing something very stupid is not envy. I
cant see any envy.


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"


well, it is.



We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem


No, youy simply raise the price of energy till its everybodies problem.

IMM wrote:

"geoff" wrote in message
...

In message , IMM
writes

Blimye. What a thread. Bloody thought police jumping down the mans
throat because he wants to waste his money.

It's the British talent for envy, cant and hypocrisy coming to the fore
again!

Where? Telling someone he is doing something very stupid is not envy. I
cant see any envy.



But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem


Many people with money like to show it off. They have a house far too large
for their needs, expensive impractical cars and let people know they can
waste energy. Luckily people now do not sneer the first two, but rightly
sneer the latter. They tend to be not very bright, just happened to have
made a lot of money somehow, and still have this tiny minded attitude of: if
I have the money I can waste it if I like. They can waste it all they like
as far as most are concerned, and spending it is a good thing for the
economy, except where it impacts on the rest of society.


er..spending it to increase the economy does impact teh rest of society..

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "G&M" saying
something like:

I was using waste veg oil or wood.

And this prevents global warming how precisely ?

Who said I wanted to prevent it? I'm all for it - got me a lovely tan
last summer and the skin cancer's cleared up great.
The frostbitten toes will grow back, my GP assures me, after he's done
some more work on his newt experiments.
--

Dave

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

"geoff" wrote in message
...

In message , IMM
writes

Blimye. What a thread. Bloody thought police jumping down the mans
throat because he wants to waste his money.

It's the British talent for envy, cant and hypocrisy coming to the
fore
again!

Where? Telling someone he is doing something very stupid is not envy.
I
cant see any envy.



But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

Many people with money like to show it off. They have a house far too
large
for their needs, expensive impractical cars and let people know they can
waste energy. Luckily people now do not sneer the first two, but
rightly
sneer the latter. They tend to be not very bright, just happened to
have
made a lot of money somehow, and still have this tiny minded attitude
of: if
I have the money I can waste it if I like. They can waste it all they
like
as far as most are concerned, and spending it is a good thing for the
economy, except where it impacts on the rest of society.


er..spending it to increase the economy does impact teh rest of society..

To the positive. Money circulating is better than money laying in banks
where is doe sweet nothing.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
geoff wrote:

In message , IMM
writes


Blimye. What a thread. Bloody thought police jumping down the mans
throat because he wants to waste his money.

It's the British talent for envy, cant and hypocrisy coming to the
fore
again!


Where? Telling someone he is doing something very stupid is not envy.
I
cant see any envy.


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

well, it is.

It isn't OK at all.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

No, youy simply raise the price of energy till its everybodies problem.

What warped logic. So the mass of the lower section of the economic ladder
are financially penalised, taking more into energy poverty, because some
with lots of money waste energy and pollute.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

Where? Telling someone he is doing something very stupid is not envy.
I
cant see any envy.

True, I see you doing stupid things all the tome, but I don't eny you
for it.

What is this tome? And here is a man who built a new house with single
glazing.

"geoff" wrote in message
...


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

So do I.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

It will be their children's and grandchildren's though. Or perhaps they
don't have offspring so that doesn't matter? Other people's children, the
rest of the created world, isn't important to the me-me-now-now way of
thinking.

Mary
--
geoff

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
et...

"geoff" wrote in message
...


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

So do I.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

It will be their children's and grandchildren's though. Or perhaps they
don't have offspring so that doesn't matter? Other people's children, the
rest of the created world, isn't important to the me-me-now-now way of
thinking.

Mary, Thatcher's children. The tiny minded ones who took notice of her
off-beat ramblings. She said "there is no such thing as society". We are
living with that attitude right now which is ingrained in a whole
generation. Note that the real greenies tend to be older people. You see
them on TV with their Barbour jackets confronting the police over woods
being destroyed and the likes.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:16:27 +0100, "IMM" wrote:




It isn't OK at all.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

No, youy simply raise the price of energy till its everybodies problem.

What warped logic. So the mass of the lower section of the economic ladder
are financially penalised, taking more into energy poverty, because some
with lots of money waste energy and pollute.



Not really. Just pragmatic.

To deal with this issue there are three ways, educate, legislate or
influence economically.

Education is important anyway if you are going to try the other two

Legislation in excess, as the current government is learning, becomes
a vote loser. In this case, somewhat ineffective as well. How
would you prevent people from wasting energy by legislation? Have a
law against putting heating under patios or opening windows?

Increasing the price is almost always the way that works most
effectively and quickly on an issue like this.
It's then very simple to compensate those on the lower rungs of the
economic ladder as is already done. THe usual robbing from the rich
and giving to the poor, but effective nonetheless.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:16:27 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

It isn't OK at all.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's
not
their problem

No, youy simply raise the price of energy
till its everybodies problem.

What warped logic. So the mass of the lower
section of the economic ladder
are financially penalised, taking more into
energy poverty, because some
with lots of money waste energy and pollute.

Not really. Just pragmatic.

As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.

In this case, somewhat ineffective
as well. How would you prevent people
from wasting energy by legislation?

- Have housing, new and renovated at superinsulation levels. Adopt the
German Passiv Solar regs.
- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.
- Better town planning, preventing over use of cars and more homely and to
people scale environments.
- etc

You don't need to be that bright to see what can be done to improve matters
for everyone.

Have a law against putting heating under
patios or opening windows?

You can't put heating in conservatories. They are supposed to be unheated
rooms. Millions do and add to global warming. Many find that 1/3 of their
heating bill is heating a glass uninsulated box at the back of the house.
This is unacceptable.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:



As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.


Not really - just pragmatism.

In this case, somewhat ineffective
as well. How would you prevent people
from wasting energy by legislation?

- Have housing, new and renovated at superinsulation levels. Adopt the
German Passiv Solar regs.

Limited applicability to existing housing stock

- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.

Already being done. Will only be effective as economic measures
influence decisions - not pure legislation

- Better town planning, preventing over use of cars and more homely and to
people scale environments.

At the point that public transport is worthwhile, people will use it.
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.


- etc

You don't need to be that bright to see what can be done to improve matters
for everyone.

Exactly. But legislation alone won't achieve it. People make
decisions primarily based on economic and convenience criteria.



Have a law against putting heating under
patios or opening windows?

You can't put heating in conservatories.

Yes you can. It's quite easy really.

They are supposed to be unheated
rooms.

Says who?

Millions do and add to global warming. Many find that 1/3 of their
heating bill is heating a glass uninsulated box at the back of the house.

That depends on location, construction and design.

This is unacceptable.

That isn't for you to decide.




..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.

Not really - just pragmatism.

So millions of people should die of hypothermia in a very country because of
self centeredness and half baked political ideals.

In this case, somewhat ineffective
as well. How would you prevent people
from wasting energy by legislation?

- Have housing, new and renovated at
superinsulation levels. Adopt the
German Passiv Solar regs.

Limited applicability to existing housing stock

Will make effect in time. We are short of 4 million homes, if all were
German passiv...

- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner
and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.

Already being done.

Prey tell. Where?

- Better town planning, preventing over use of cars and more homely and
to
people scale environments.

At the point that public transport is
worthwhile, people will use it.

My God, he can think.

You don't need to be that bright to see what can be done to improve
matters
for everyone.

Exactly. But legislation alone won't achieve it.

The private sector has not, so legislation it will have to be.

People make
decisions primarily based on economic and convenience criteria.

So legislation is needed to make sure what they buy conforms.

Have a law against putting heating under
patios or opening windows?

You can't put heating in conservatories.

Yes you can. It's quite easy really.

You are not supposed to. If you build a new conservatory and the building
inspector gets to know there is heating in there you are in trouble. Try
and get a conservatory company to install heating in.

They are supposed to be unheated
rooms.

Says who?

The regs.

Millions do and add to global warming. Many find that 1/3 of their
heating bill is heating a glass uninsulated box at the back of the house.

That depends on location, construction and design.

Has anyone made a conservator that is well insulated? A glass box cannot be
well insulated no matter how hard you try.

This is unacceptable.

That isn't for you to decide.

It is, and many millions more think the same way too.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:47:33 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.

Not really - just pragmatism.

So millions of people should die of hypothermia in a very country because of
self centeredness and half baked political ideals.

I didn't say that at all.

I was simply making the point that economics is a far more effective
tool than legislation.

I am not opposed to energy saving in a sensible way at all. I am
opposed to ineffective legislation that is simply done for political
positioning and window dressing, having no basis in practicality and
enforceability and which is out of context with other issues and
methods.



In this case, somewhat ineffective
as well. How would you prevent people
from wasting energy by legislation?

- Have housing, new and renovated at
superinsulation levels. Adopt the
German Passiv Solar regs.

Limited applicability to existing housing stock

Will make effect in time. We are short of 4 million homes, if all were
German passiv...

Well they're not.



- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner
and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.

Already being done.

Prey tell. Where?

Road tax based on ecological factors


- Better town planning, preventing over use of cars and more homely and
to
people scale environments.

At the point that public transport is
worthwhile, people will use it.

My God, he can think.

I don't expect public transport to be worthwhile in less than
geological time, however.



You don't need to be that bright to see what can be done to improve
matters
for everyone.

Exactly. But legislation alone won't achieve it.

The private sector has not, so legislation it will have to be.

It is ompletely pointless to legislate if there is no way to enforce
the legislation unless one is simply window dressing.
This is not a public/private sector issue anyway.



People make
decisions primarily based on economic and convenience criteria.

So legislation is needed to make sure what they buy conforms.

There is already more than enough of that. It can easily be
demonstrated that if something is desirable enough, people will find a
way around the legislation.




Have a law against putting heating under
patios or opening windows?

You can't put heating in conservatories.

Yes you can. It's quite easy really.

You are not supposed to.

Who said?


If you build a new conservatory and the building
inspector gets to know there is heating in there you are in trouble.

Rubbish. As far as I am aware, the only requirements as long as the
conservatory is otherwise exempted from building regulations are to
have glass that is conformant with the safety requirements and to have
separate control for any heating. Exemption does require a thermal
separation from the house as though the divide is to the outside.

Try
and get a conservatory company to install heating in.

No need, it's an easy DIY job.




They are supposed to be unheated
rooms.

Says who?

The regs.

Which "regs". Where? Please provide the reference in the
appropriate Statutory Instrument.



Millions do and add to global warming. Many find that 1/3 of their
heating bill is heating a glass uninsulated box at the back of the house.

That depends on location, construction and design.

Has anyone made a conservator that is well insulated? A glass box cannot be
well insulated no matter how hard you try.

That's a matter of degree. One can specify the glazing to a level
equivalent to that of windows in the house - i.e. low emissivity and
gas filled.



This is unacceptable.

That isn't for you to decide.

It is, and many millions more think the same way too.

You may think that you are in charge of other people's lives, but the
notion is delusory.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

IMM wrote:


As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.


Ther are millions of people who don';t have enough water. I suggest you
personally find them and **** on their heads if ou feel that is teh way
to slove their problems.

My god, think of all those people in the deserts dying of heatstroke
whilst eskimos wantonly smash up ice. Criminal.

Or all those people throwing away meat becuase its a day past 'sell by'
with all those starving ethiopians!

Or all those people watching reality TV when millions of Chinese can't
even watch the Simpsons!

IMM, do you know that somewhere in the world, a woman is having a baby
every 30 seconds?

I think you should go and stop her.

Before its too late.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:


As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What self
centeredness.


Ther are millions of people who don';t have enough water. I suggest you
personally find them and **** on their heads

snip drivel

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:47:33 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What
self
centeredness.

Not really - just pragmatism.

So millions of people should
die of hypothermia in a very rich country because of
self centeredness and half baked political ideals.

I didn't say that at all.

You DID!

I was simply making the point that
economics is a far more effective
tool than legislation.

Soemtimes. In other situations it is not.

I am not opposed to energy saving
in a sensible way at all.

Well what are you on about then?

In this case, somewhat ineffective
as well. How would you prevent people
from wasting energy by legislation?

- Have housing, new and renovated at
superinsulation levels. Adopt the
German Passiv Solar regs.

Limited applicability to existing housing stock

Will make effect in time. We are short
of 4 million homes, if all were
German passiv...

Well they're not.

Go away..

- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner
and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.

Already being done.

Prey tell. Where?

Road tax based on ecological factors

I see no measures to improve the efficiency of vehicles.

You don't need to be that bright to
see what can be done to improve
matters for everyone.

Exactly. But legislation alone won't achieve it.

The private sector has not, so
legislation it will have to be.

It is ompletely pointless to legislate
if there is no way to enforce
the legislation

Car makers can easily be legislated. House building can be easily
legislated. Boier are to be 86% in ayears time - legislation.

People make
decisions primarily based on
economic and convenience criteria.

So legislation is needed to make
sure what they buy conforms.

There is already more than enough of that.

There isn't as we are choking ourselves and running out of fossil fuel.

Have a law against putting heating under
patios or opening windows?

You can't put heating in conservatories.

Yes you can. It's quite easy really.

You are not supposed to.

Who said?

If you build a new conservatory and the building
inspector gets to know there is heating in there you are in trouble.

Rubbish. As far as I am aware, the only requirements as long as the
conservatory is otherwise exempted from building regulations are to
have glass that is conformant with the safety requirements and to have
separate control for any heating. Exemption does require a thermal
separation from the house as though the divide is to the outside.

Try
and get a conservatory company to install heating in.

No need, it's an easy DIY job.

Poinless comment.

They are supposed to be unheated
rooms.

Says who?

The regs.

Which "regs". Where? Please provide the reference in the
appropriate Statutory Instrument.

Go to the council and ask about conservatories and heating in them.

Millions do and add to global warming. Many find that 1/3 of their
heating bill is heating a glass uninsulated box at the back of the
house.

That depends on location, construction and design.

Has anyone made a conservator that is well insulated?
A glass box cannot be
well insulated no matter how hard you try.

That's a matter of degree.

I repeat: "A glass box cannot be well insulated no matter how hard you try."

This is unacceptable.

That isn't for you to decide.

It is, and many millions more think the same way too.

You may think that you are in charge
of other people's lives,

I do think, or want, to be in charge of others lives. I don't other
people's lives effecting me, and us, and the future generations.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

public transport .
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.

How would you know?

:-)

Mary

IMM wrote:



Poinless comment.


No change there then

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:45:35 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:47:33 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

As millions die of hypothermia. My GOD! What warped logic. What
self
centeredness.

Not really - just pragmatism.

So millions of people should
die of hypothermia in a very rich country because of
self centeredness and half baked political ideals.

I didn't say that at all.

You DID!

I Know what I said..... You created the conclusion.


I was simply making the point that
economics is a far more effective
tool than legislation.

Soemtimes. In other situations it is not.

I am not opposed to energy saving
in a sensible way at all.

Well what are you on about then?

I explained that quite clearly in the material that you snipped.




- Legislate that cars are to be cleaner
and more economic, ridding ourselves
of the 19th century technology we drive around on.

Already being done.

Prey tell. Where?

Road tax based on ecological factors

I see no measures to improve the efficiency of vehicles.

That does indirectly since manufacturers design cars to meet income
tax and road tax cost breakpoints.




the legislation

Car makers can easily be legislated. House building can be easily
legislated. Boier are to be 86% in ayears time - legislation.


Appliances can be easily. New house building can be to a point.
Additions and changes to existing properties are much harder to
control via legislation unless you plan to employ a whole load of
eco-inspectors going door to door with power of entry.

I don't somehow see that going down too well.


People make
decisions primarily based on
economic and convenience criteria.

So legislation is needed to make
sure what they buy conforms.

There is already more than enough of that.

There isn't as we are choking ourselves and running out of fossil fuel.

Everything is relative. Economic measures will have an impact on
that far more quickly than can be achieved by mountains of legislation
that is unenforcable.




Try
and get a conservatory company to install heating in.

No need, it's an easy DIY job.

Poinless comment.

So why did you make it?



They are supposed to be unheated
rooms.

Says who?

The regs.

Which "regs". Where? Please provide the reference in the
appropriate Statutory Instrument.

Go to the council and ask about conservatories and heating in them.

No. You tell me where, in law, or even in Approved Documents (which
remember are a guideline on *one* or a few ways to do things and do
not have force of law) this is stated.



Has anyone made a conservator that is well insulated?
A glass box cannot be
well insulated no matter how hard you try.

That's a matter of degree.

I repeat: "A glass box cannot be well insulated no matter how hard you try."

That depends on your definition of "well". Personally I prefer to
see out and to be able to breathe fresh air when I want - not to sit
in a hermetically sealed box.


This is unacceptable.

That isn't for you to decide.

It is, and many millions more think the same way too.

You may think that you are in charge
of other people's lives,

I do think, or want, to be in charge of others lives. I don't other
people's lives effecting me, and us, and the future generations.


More confused meander....


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Nick Brooks" wrote in message
...

IMM wrote:

Poinless comment.

No change there then

I know, most of your comments are pointless.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:53:29 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

public transport .
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.

How would you know?

:-)

Mary


I recently went on a bus, a train and the London Underground.

On a brand new train, the seats are ripped, there's graffiti on the
walls and there are bogies parked on the backs of the seats.

It would take two buses running at infrequent and erratic times to go
to the next town with a time of nearly an hour. Why would I want to
do that when I can be there in ten minutes in the car when I want to
go?

In a Sunday supplement not long ago, there was an article about the
world's metropolitan underground railways.

The Moscow metro was described as "Trains let loose in a subterranean
winter palace"

The Tube was described as "Trains let loose in a public toilet".

That sums it up.

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

I see no measures to improve the efficiency of vehicles.

That does indirectly since manufacturers
design cars to meet income
tax and road tax cost breakpoints.

They make cars to make the most profit.

the legislation

Car makers can easily be legislated. House building can be easily
legislated. Boiler are to be 86% in ayears time - legislation.

Appliances can be easily. New house building can be to a point.
Additions and changes to existing properties are much harder to
control via legislation unless you plan to employ a whole load of
eco-inspectors going door to door with power of entry.

You have a check each time the house is sold. Doe the electricity come up
to standard, gas , etc, including the insulation vales, etc. Simple.

People make
decisions primarily based on
economic and convenience criteria.

So legislation is needed to make
sure what they buy conforms.

There is already more than enough of that.

There isn't as we are choking ourselves
and running out of fossil fuel.

Everything is relative.

I repeat: "There isn't as we are choking ourselves and running out of fossil
fuel.

I repeat: "A glass box cannot be well
insulated no matter how hard you try."

That depends on your definition of "well".

Nowhere near current insulation regs never mind the forthcoming stricter
ones.

Personally I prefer to
see out and to be able to breathe
fresh air when I want - not to sit
in a hermetically sealed box.

What the hell are you on about?

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
et...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

public transport .
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.

How would you know?

:-)

Mary, exactly. Little Middle Englanders just don't know.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:53:29 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

public transport .
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.

How would you know?

:-)

Mary


I recently went on a bus, a train and the London Underground.

On a brand new train, the seats are ripped, there's graffiti on the
walls and there are bogies parked on the backs of the seats.

Andy! Couldn't you control yourself :-)))

It would take two buses running at infrequent and erratic times to go
to the next town with a time of nearly an hour. Why would I want to
do that when I can be there in ten minutes in the car when I want to
go?

That doesn't make them filthy and smelly.

Move to Leeds. Our buses are very good and frequent. Some are pure luxury.
We don't have an underground (although I believe that not all are like the
admittedly horrid London underground) and I've certainly never seen a train
such as you describe.

In a Sunday supplement not long ago, there was an article about the
world's metropolitan underground railways.

The Moscow metro was described as "Trains let loose in a subterranean
winter palace"

The Tube was described as "Trains let loose in a public toilet".

That sums it up.

Well, if it were in a Sunday supplement it must be true.

er - how often do you travel on the Moscow Metro?

Mary

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
et...

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:53:29 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:34:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

public transport .
At present, it is inconvenient, expensive and time consuming to use,
is generally filthy and smelly.

How would you know?

:-)

Mary


I recently went on a bus, a train and the London Underground.

On a brand new train, the seats are ripped, there's graffiti on the
walls and there are bogies parked on the backs of the seats.

Andy! Couldn't you control yourself :-)))

It would take two buses running at infrequent and erratic times to go
to the next town with a time of nearly an hour. Why would I want to
do that when I can be there in ten minutes in the car when I want to
go?

That doesn't make them filthy and smelly.

Move to Leeds. Our buses are very good and frequent. Some are pure luxury.
We don't have an underground (although I believe that not all are like the
admittedly horrid London underground)

Liverpool, Glasgow and Edinburgh have cleaner Undergrounds than London.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 16:53:08 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

In a Sunday supplement not long ago, there was an article about the
world's metropolitan underground railways.

The Moscow metro was described as "Trains let loose in a subterranean
winter palace"

All built with the efforts of kindly volunteers

The Tube was described as "Trains let loose in a public toilet".

I find Le Metro in Paris with it acres of white porcelain tiles
reminds me somewhat of a public convenience.


That sums it up.

I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

cheers,
Pete.

"IMM" wrote
| Liverpool, Glasgow and Edinburgh have cleaner Undergrounds than London.

Edinburgh has an Underground????

It has quite a lot of tunnels, but I don't think the tunnels from Haymarket
to Waverley count as 'Underground'

Owain

"Pete C" wrote in message
...


I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

Aw, so you didn't eat it?

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

They did eat it?

Mary

cheers,
Pete.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
news:407cf847$0$8568 But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the
part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

So do I.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

It will be their children's and grandchildren's though. Or perhaps they
don't have offspring so that doesn't matter? Other people's children, the
rest of the created world, isn't important to the me-me-now-now way of
thinking.

It will probably be theirs too. Latest report published on Thursday shows
the rate of change of weather is accelerating.

"IMM" wrote in
:

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think
it's not their problem

And NHS hospitals allow televisions that can't be switched off! How
much does that waste? (Add costs of a/c in summer.)

Are you saying two wrongs make a right?

Absolutely not. Simply that the OP got a rough ride for what I would regard
as a silly and wasteful plan. And the hospitals and the company involved
are wasting even more and deserve an even rougher ride for being even more
ostrich-like. And that is without considering the other negative aspects of
forcing the television services on patients.

--
Rod

www.annalaurie.co.uk

"Rod Hewitt" wrote in message
...
"IMM" wrote in
:


And NHS hospitals allow televisions that can't be switched off! How
much does that waste? (Add costs of a/c in summer.)

Are you saying two wrongs make a right?

Absolutely not. Simply that the OP got a rough ride for what I would
regard
as a silly and wasteful plan.

Yes.

And the hospitals and the company involved
are wasting even more and deserve an even rougher ride for being even more
ostrich-like.

Yes.

And that is without considering the other negative aspects of
forcing the television services on patients.

Yes yes yes yes!

When another grandson was in hospital he had his own personal telly/game
player which swung out over his bed, overhead. All the children in the ward
had them. The theory was that they could choose to have them on or off. The
practice was that their visitors might as well not have gone.

When Spouse was in hospital he had his own telly in his room, the only radio
channels were blah ones. He didn't watch telly, I bought a solar powered
radio for him to listen to. All the other rooms had telly going whether or
not there were visitors.

shudder

Mary

--
Rod

www.annalaurie.co.uk

"Mary Fisher" wrote in
et:

And that is without considering the other negative aspects of
forcing the television services on patients.

Yes yes yes yes!

When another grandson was in hospital he had his own personal
telly/game player which swung out over his bed, overhead. All the
children in the ward had them. The theory was that they could choose
to have them on or off. The practice was that their visitors might as
well not have gone.

When Spouse was in hospital he had his own telly in his room, the only
radio channels were blah ones. He didn't watch telly, I bought a solar
powered radio for him to listen to. All the other rooms had telly
going whether or not there were visitors.

In case anyone is interested, I was specifically referring to:

http://tinyurl.com/2ahvd
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1189276,00.html

Mary, glad you agreed!

--
Rod

www.annalaurie.co.uk

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:09:21 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Pete C" wrote in message
.. .


I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

Aw, so you didn't eat it?

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

They did eat it?

Mary

Great in tempura batter. Light and crunchy




..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:09:21 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Pete C" wrote in message
.. .


I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

Aw, so you didn't eat it?

No, probably some byelaw against consuming the local fauna on LT
property.

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

They did eat it?

Nooo, they all took pictures!

cheers,
Pete.

"Owain" wrote in message
...

"IMM" wrote
| Liverpool, Glasgow and Edinburgh have cleaner Undergrounds than London.

Edinburgh has an Underground????

Sorry, I mean Tynemouth, which is basically a metro system. On the same
side of the country though. I can't tell the accents apart anyway.

It has quite a lot of tunnels, but I don't think the tunnels from
Haymarket
to Waverley count as 'Underground'

"Rod Hewitt" wrote in message
...

In case anyone is interested, I was specifically referring to:

http://tinyurl.com/2ahvd
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1189276,00.html

Mary, glad you agreed!

I didn't know about those cases. It's dreadful that patients can't get some
peace. In the breast care unit I was in there was a telly but it was only on
once in eleven days - for a patient to watch some football match or another.
June 1997 if anyone wants to know which match, I certainly don't! I did my
tablet weaving ...

Mary

--
Rod

www.annalaurie.co.uk

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:09:21 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Pete C" wrote in message
.. .


I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

Aw, so you didn't eat it?

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

They did eat it?

Mary

Great in tempura batter. Light and crunchy

I've only had squirrel done as a pot roast, it's delicious but I'd have
though it would be too stringy for frying.

Mary




.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Pete C" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:09:21 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Pete C" wrote in message
.. .


I went on the District Line the other day and the platform was invaded
by a..... squirrel!

It stopped in front of me and looked me in the eye for a few seconds
before going on it's way down the platform, as I had no spare
hazelnuts on me.

Aw, so you didn't eat it?

No, probably some byelaw against consuming the local fauna on LT
property.

The japanese kids on the other platform appreciated it too.

They did eat it?

Nooo, they all took pictures!

I bet they were taking pictures of him ... :-)

Mary

cheers,
Pete.

Mary Fisher wrote in message
. ..

"geoff" wrote in message
...


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

So do I.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's not
their problem

It will be their children's and grandchildren's though. Or perhaps they
don't have offspring so that doesn't matter? Other people's children, the
rest of the created world, isn't important to the me-me-now-now way of
thinking.

Mary
--
geoff


The real world operates on the basis of the individual doing what pleases
him/her. This is why building and planning regulations(& speed limits) are
regularly ignored world wide. If the individual is rich/idealistic enough to
heat his/her patio/conservatory, that is their decision and is nothing to do
with any other person. Mary kept bees, no real economic/ environmental
justification, it suited her. Bees wax candles are a personal choice item,
ideal for the idiosyncratic individual. I wouldn't dream of telling people
they shouldn't use them as they produce minute quantities of strange toxins
when burned. A beekeepers neighbours may well object to having what they
regard as a hazard in their locality, but in general they don't go around
telling the beekeeper to get rid of the hives.

All this crap about global warming ignores the fact that mankind has
a built in self limiting trait, whereby the weakest go to the wall, the
population drops and the most resourceful survive. Harsh, but that's
reality. Look at Africa with Aids. If you're lucky, you die, before your
children do, but that's all there is to it, luck. It is impossible to
predict the children's future with any degree of certainty, unless you're a
prophet.

There is almost no justification for conservation in either
economic or environmental terms, it is todays PC good idea. If you disagree,
I suggest you go and research it. The only real benefit of the currently
fashionable organic food movement is that it provides employment in the
farming industry, but that is another example of the buyers spending their
income as they please. The pollution caused by growing and delivering it
destroys any environmental benefit the product may well have. The advantage
of global warming may be that the UK has a warmer climate, but on past
history, it will last for less than a century.

IMM claims that we need another 4M homes, I'd disagree, I think we
need 20M fewer people. Before anyone starts to claim that we need immigrants
to sustain our economy, I'd refer them to the old adage about necessity
being the mother of invention. We need problems for our population to solve,
the worse the problem, the better the chance of achieving a solution! Why
the state retirement/pension age is still at 65yrs escapes me, most of our
population, particularly women, are capable of working to at least 75 in
this day and age. Mary is still working.

AIUI the only reason that Thatcher is so unpopular with the PC
brigade (and IMM), is that she was prepared to try to take hard decisions
and attempt to make people face reality. Any manager knows that if you're
lucky 55% of decisions are correct, any more than that and you're close to
being God.

Personally, I'd use a thin film 110V centre tapped electric heater
under a layer of epoxy if I were trying to heat my patio. 55V wont kill the
dogs. Fast warm up, easy repairs if necessary. However, finding a home for
the 30KVA transformer might be a problem.

Regards
Capitol

"Capitol" wrote in message
...

Mary Fisher wrote in message
. ..

"geoff" wrote in message
...


But I see a lack of sense of responsibility on the part of those that
think "If I can afford to waste energy, it's OK"

So do I.

We're heading towards a potential energy crisis and runaway global
warming and the ostriches bury their head in the sand and think it's
not
their problem

It will be their children's and grandchildren's though. Or perhaps they
don't have offspring so that doesn't matter? Other people's children, the
rest of the created world, isn't important to the me-me-now-now way of
thinking.

Mary
--
geoff


The real world operates on the basis of the individual doing what pleases
him/her. This is why building and planning regulations(& speed limits) are
regularly ignored world wide.

Planning ignored in the UK? The planning mafia comes out for you.

If the individual is rich/idealistic enough to
heat his/her patio/conservatory, that is their
decision and is nothing to do
with any other person.

It is when it affects others. Then the government should step in to outlaw
conservatories as cheap extensions, as that is what most are. Extra living
space, not a place for plants.

Mary kept bees, no real economic/ environmental
justification, it suited her. Bees wax candles
are a personal choice item, ideal for the idiosyncratic
individual. I wouldn't dream of telling people
they shouldn't use them as they produce minute
quantities of strange toxins
when burned. A beekeepers neighbours may well
object to having what they
regard as a hazard in their locality, but in general
they don't go around
telling the beekeeper to get rid of the hives.

If bee keeping affects others then people should not do it. There are laws
to prevent nuisance, and they have been improved lately. Good old Tone.

All this crap about global warming

Global warming is an accepted fact by all the world's top scientists.

snip drivel, as it was getting worse