MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 06/10/2021 17:34, charles wrote:
>> however a vey significant part of the UK population live there.
>
> A lot of them but "significant"?
>

That’s their belief :)

On 06/10/2021 16:55, MB wrote:
> On 06/10/2021 14:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>> Enjoying the food and petrol distribution problems, are you?
>> What on earth does that have to do with Brexit? The distribution problems
>> are at least Europe wide, we are free now to come up wit
>
> What petrol problems, seems to be only around London and no one in their
> right mind would want to go near there.
>
>

There has not been enough fuel in possibly much of Kent. Today was the
first day I was able to pass a petrol station with fuel and no queue.
Last week, after driving past several stations without fuel I thought it
would be sensible to fill my car up when I did come to a station which
did have fuel. There were several people managing the three queues,
letting cars enter in turn.

In article <sjkm29$v86$4@dont-email.me>,
MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 06/10/2021 17:34, charles wrote:
> > however a vey significant part of the UK population live there.

> A lot of them but "significant"?

depends how you interpret 'significant'. I consider 18 million people to be
a significant number - those that make up that number don't have to be
significant themselves.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"Michael Chare" <mUNDERSCOREnews@chareDOTorg.uk> wrote in message
news:sjkol2$14qa$1@gioia.aioe.org...
> On 06/10/2021 16:55, MB wrote:
>> On 06/10/2021 14:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>> Enjoying the food and petrol distribution problems, are you?
>>> What on earth does that have to do with Brexit? The distribution
>>> problems
>>> are at least Europe wide, we are free now to come up wit
>>
>> What petrol problems, seems to be only around London and no one in their
>> right mind would want to go near there.
>
> There has not been enough fuel in possibly much of Kent. Today was the
> first day I was able to pass a petrol station with fuel and no queue. Last
> week, after driving past several stations without fuel I thought it would
> be sensible to fill my car up when I did come to a station which did have
> fuel. There were several people managing the three queues, letting cars
> enter in turn.

Even though supplies have apparently returned to normal outside the
south-east (I live in east Yorkshire) prices are *considerably* higher than
they were. My local garage which I drove past today is a small "unbranded"
garage (ie not BP, Shell, Esso or a supermarket) and I noticed that diesel
was now 149 p/litre. I think petrol was about 138 p/litre, but as our cars
both take diesel, that's what I was concentrating on. I wonder why the
increase for diesel is so much greater than for petrol: normally that garage
has about 2-3 p/litre difference (petrol < diesel). Also, it's intriguing
that the price didn't go up very much during the problem, and has only
increased sharply after the panic is over. I wonder if the price will go
down again to around 135 p/litre (for diesel) as it was before the panic.

[later]
Actually, looking at petrolprices.com for my area, my local garage is the
exception: most garages are charging about 137-139 p/litre. I imagine the
local garage hasn't got as much buying power and is at the mercy of
suppliers ripping them off because they won't be able to buy in bulk as part
of a chain. Normally it's a few p/litre more, rather than over 10 p/litre
more.

On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 13:28:59 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
>For myself, I'm looking forward to the day when I can order decent
>coffee and frozen veg from Tesco's again, and so avoid having to
>contribute unnecessarily to global warming by driving out to search for
>basic foodstuffs.
So you don't mind Tesco's vans' contribution?
--
Dave

On 06/10/2021 23:58, Dave W wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 13:28:59 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> For myself, I'm looking forward to the day when I can order decent
>> coffee and frozen veg from Tesco's again, and so avoid having to
>> contribute unnecessarily to global warming by driving out to search for
>> basic foodstuffs.
>
> So you don't mind Tesco's vans' contribution?

Obviously it's undesirable, but given that I'm just one on a round
serving multiple other customers, the contribution to global warming
from Tesco supplying me is much less than me driving out to find and buy
stuff for myself, especially as, though the local convenience shops
aren't too bad, the nearest decent supermarket is 35 miles away.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

In article <59771149ccbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> Of course they couldn't see bias, there's only one truth and the BBC
> have it.

> It's not only Brexit of course, the BBC has one view on everything and
> expands everything in the news that support that view and diminishes or
> even doesn't report everything that doesn't.

Read the 'Bible' (sic) on Climate I recommended you read, yet, Bob?

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:53:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>>> The government has resisted those calls until now, with Transport
>>> Secretary Grant Shapps previously saying: "We do have to stand on our
>>> own two feet as the United Kingdom".
>>
>> Absolutely, we have around a million vacancies for our own people, they
>> need to train and get working. Stopping social security benefits would
>> also be a good idea.
>
>There's the question of how many people on SS would actually make good
>lorry drivers, and the time taken to train those that are suitable:
>
>https://www.hgvtrainingcentre.co.uk/become-hgv-driver/
>
>"Be competent in English and Maths
>Be over 18
>Hold a full car license
>Have good eyesight
>Pass a medical examination
>Possess a driver CPC qualification"

I wonder if they expect you to be sufficiently competent in English to
know how to spell "licence"?

Rod.

"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:beaslgd6lraaukandvn9lb1aihf1plt2pg@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 13:28:59 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>For myself, I'm looking forward to the day when I can order decent
>>coffee and frozen veg from Tesco's again, and so avoid having to
>>contribute unnecessarily to global warming by driving out to search for
>>basic foodstuffs.
>
> So you don't mind Tesco's vans' contribution?

The goods need to travel from the shop to your house *somehow*. Leaving
aside people who buy very little at one time and so can use a bicycle or can
walk or go by bus, that means either the purchaser driving to the shop or
the van driving to the purchaser.

It is probably more fuel efficient for one van to delivery to many houses
than for a car from each house to travel to the shop.

Tesco do seem to have a big problem with delivery slots at the moment. My
wife couldn't get a slot for several weeks, recently, so chose Sainsburys
instead who had several slots within a day or so of when she ordered things.

One of the main problems with any queuing system, whether it's for
supermarket deliveries or an appointment to see a doctor (assuming that GPs
are working as they used to be fore Covid) is when you can't queue far
enough ahead. Sometimes, you don't mind that you may have to wait a while
for the delivery/appointment, but you want to book it today (for a couple of
weeks' time). A lot of places work on the principle of "if there isn't an
appointment within the next week, you will have to phone back tomorrow and
the next day (ad infinitum) until you can get an appointment".

Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:53:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>>> The government has resisted those calls until now, with Transport
>>>> Secretary Grant Shapps previously saying: "We do have to stand on our
>>>> own two feet as the United Kingdom".
>>>
>>> Absolutely, we have around a million vacancies for our own people, they
>>> need to train and get working. Stopping social security benefits would
>>> also be a good idea.
>>
>> There's the question of how many people on SS would actually make good
>> lorry drivers, and the time taken to train those that are suitable:
>>
>> https://www.hgvtrainingcentre.co.uk/become-hgv-driver/
>>
>> "Be competent in English and Maths
>> Be over 18
>> Hold a full car license
>> Have good eyesight
>> Pass a medical examination
>> Possess a driver CPC qualification"
>
> I wonder if they expect you to be sufficiently competent in English to
> know how to spell "licence"?
>
> Rod.
>

Most people can’t. It is a lost cause. Mind you, I don’t see how it affects
someone’s ability to drive.

On Wed, 06 Oct 2021 17:58:11 +0100, charles <charles@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

>> Actually, panic buying is unfair. Apart from some extreme examples, most
>> people have acted extremely rationally. If a politician says don‘t panic
>> buy you know most people will do that, so the only response to protect
>> your interests is to attempt to fill up. I suppose it wasn‘t helped by
>> being near the end of the month. I suspect a lot of people were running
>> their tanks down, waiting for pay day.
>
>in these days of credit cards, is "pay day" significant? Anyway I used tto
>get my salary in the middle of the month, half in arrears and half in
>advance.

I used to get my salary every four weeks, i.e. about thirteen times
per year instead of the usual twelve. During the year it would slowly
drift in and out of sync with the calendar months, and therefore most
utility bills. For about half the year I felt rich, but had to
remember not to spend it.

Rod.

In article <597718a5c8noise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <59771149ccbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
> <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> > Of course they couldn't see bias, there's only one truth and the
> > BBC have it.

> > It's not only Brexit of course, the BBC has one view on
> > everything and expands everything in the news that support that
> > view and diminishes or even doesn't report everything that
> > doesn't.

> Read the 'Bible' (sic) on Climate I recommended you read, yet, Bob?

No Jim, I've seen the data myself I don't need an activists viewpoint
but thanks for personalising.

But It's not only CC Jim it's a whole range of idiocy.
It's now dangerous to say things that are simple facts like:

Only women have cervixes and and only woman can be pregnant.

That's how insane the world has become led by people with more time
and money on their hands than is good for them.

I think most people now are well aware of the likes of professor
wrong on everything, pants down Ferguson and the danger of activist
computer modellers. These people make sure their model's prediction
matches their desire. Politics now leads science in many areas, sad
but true.

A good proportion of all the "problems" in our society now are caused
by spoilt, privileged, wealth, 'educated' idiots looking for and
causing trouble with problems that don't exist.

I suppose the abandonment of organised religion is in part to blame,
some people need a cause and a belief.

Bob.

In article <sjkm1c$v86$3@dont-email.me>,
MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 06/10/2021 17:20, Tweed wrote:
> > Not reported by the BBC?

> You can usually be sure that when someone claims "not reported by the
> BBC" ...

> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58643717

Can you find a story about how the Great Barrier Reef is doing at the
moment? :-)

Bob.

On 07/10/2021 10:25, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> Only women have cervixes and and only woman can be pregnant.
>

+1

Were there to be somebody claiming that their right arm was alien to
them and was wanting to have it amputated, then that someone would be
a candidate for the loony bin and not a candidate for the surgical ward.
The same should be true for a man wanting his penis cut off or a woman
wanting her breasts removed.

Take a blood sample from the bone marrow of any of these so-called
trans-sexuals and Lo! And Behold! from the DNA analysis there would
be no change of sex from that of their birth!

A hospital treats problems with the biological body and so no
men, whatever there sexual mindsets, should be in a woman's ward.

> I suppose the abandonment of organised religion is in part to blame,
> some people need a cause and a belief.

_ALL_ religion, without exception is make believe, and those who conduct
their lives in a spirit of make-belief are candidates for the loony bin
and should not ever be in positions of responsibility, whether as
magistrates or as heads of state.

(It is very bad luck to be superstitious :-) )

On 07/10/2021 09:40, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> I used to get my salary every four weeks, i.e. about thirteen times
> per year instead of the usual twelve. During the year it would slowly
> drift in and out of sync with the calendar months, and therefore most
> utility bills. For about half the year I felt rich, but had to
> remember not to spend it.
>
I've noticed the same with my mother's State Pension payments. Similar
phase discrepancies occur when I'm looking after her bills.

On 07/10/2021 10:50, gareth evans wrote:
> The same should be true for a woman wanting her breasts removed.

That is too broad a statement. It depends on *why* the woman wants her
breasts removed.

There is a genetic defect in some women, passed down from their parents,
which results in an almost certain bout of breast cancer long before old
age. Those who have seen their mother and grandmother die of breast
cancer can reasonably assume that they are at considerable risk of
suffering the same fate, and having both breasts removed before the
cancer develops significantly increases their chances of escaping it.

Your assumption that they are candidates for the loony bin is wide of
the mark

Jim

On 07/10/2021 11:26, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 07/10/2021 09:40, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>
>> I used to get my salary every four weeks, i.e. about thirteen times
>> per year instead of the usual twelve. During the year it would slowly
>> drift in and out of sync with the calendar months, and therefore most
>> utility bills. For about half the year I felt rich, but had to
>> remember not to spend it.
>>
> I've noticed the same with my mother's State Pension payments. Similar
> phase discrepancies occur when I'm looking after her bills.

State pensions are calculated on a weekly basis, so 52 payments per year
in batches of 4 weeks makes sense.

Jim

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 08:40:29 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:53:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> The government has resisted those calls until now, with Transport
>>>>> Secretary Grant Shapps previously saying: "We do have to stand on our
>>>>> own two feet as the United Kingdom".
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely, we have around a million vacancies for our own people, they
>>>> need to train and get working. Stopping social security benefits would
>>>> also be a good idea.
>>>
>>> There's the question of how many people on SS would actually make good
>>> lorry drivers, and the time taken to train those that are suitable:
>>>
>>> https://www.hgvtrainingcentre.co.uk/become-hgv-driver/
>>>
>>> "Be competent in English and Maths
>>> Be over 18
>>> Hold a full car license
>>> Have good eyesight
>>> Pass a medical examination
>>> Possess a driver CPC qualification"
>>
>> I wonder if they expect you to be sufficiently competent in English to
>> know how to spell "licence"?
>>
>> Rod.
>>
>
>Most people can’t. It is a lost cause. Mind you, I don’t see how it affects
>someone’s ability to drive.

Depending on how bad it is, a lack of understanding of English might
affect someone's ability to understand some road signs.

Rod.

Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 08:40:29 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:53:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> The government has resisted those calls until now, with Transport
>>>>>> Secretary Grant Shapps previously saying: "We do have to stand on our
>>>>>> own two feet as the United Kingdom".
>>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely, we have around a million vacancies for our own people, they
>>>>> need to train and get working. Stopping social security benefits would
>>>>> also be a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> There's the question of how many people on SS would actually make good
>>>> lorry drivers, and the time taken to train those that are suitable:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.hgvtrainingcentre.co.uk/become-hgv-driver/
>>>>
>>>> "Be competent in English and Maths
>>>> Be over 18
>>>> Hold a full car license
>>>> Have good eyesight
>>>> Pass a medical examination
>>>> Possess a driver CPC qualification"
>>>
>>> I wonder if they expect you to be sufficiently competent in English to
>>> know how to spell "licence"?
>>>
>>> Rod.
>>>
>>
>> Most people can’t. It is a lost cause. Mind you, I don’t see how it affects
>> someone’s ability to drive.
>
> Depending on how bad it is, a lack of understanding of English might
> affect someone's ability to understand some road signs.
>
> Rod.
>

But that’s got little to do with spelling licence the American way.

On 17:50 6 Oct 2021, Tweed said:

> charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>> In article <sjkgr9$qq2$1@dont-email.me>, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> On 06/10/2021 14:34, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>> Enjoying the food and petrol distribution problems, are you?
>>>> What on earth does that have to do with Brexit? The distribution
>>>> problems are at least Europe wide, we are free now to come up wit
>>
>>> What petrol problems, seems to be only around London and no one in
>>> their right mind would want to go near there.
>>
>> however a vey significant part of the UK population live there.
>>
>
> Which might magnify the effects of panic buying.
>
> Actually, panic buying is unfair. Apart from some extreme examples,
> most people have acted extremely rationally. If a politician says
> don't panic buy you know most people will do that, so the only
> response to protect your interests is to attempt to fill up. I
> suppose it wasn't helped by being near the end of the month. I
> suspect a lot of people were running their tanks down, waiting for
> pay day.

Quite true.

On 17:00 6 Oct 2021, MB said:
> On 06/10/2021 15:45, Bob Latham wrote:
>>
>>
>> No it's wider than that. Reports from the USA of empty shelves in
>> supermarkets and in Europe. Of course you will not see that
>> reported by BBC, doesn't support their position.
>
> As in this from a few weeks ago.
>
> I hate to link to a tabloid like this but it was sent me by a
> friend.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/22/cargo-ships-traffic-j
> am-los-angeles-california
>
> "The bottleneck this week at America's busiest port complex is the
> result of a shortage of trucks and drivers to pick up goods, coupled
> with an overwhelming demand for imported consumer products."

That logjam reflects the increased demand for consumer goods after the
slowdown during Covid.

It can't be equated to problems with deliveries of regular items such as
food, fuel and vaccine which is what we've had.

There a supply chain hiccups from time to time somewhere or another in
the world but structural changes which limit supply of basic provisions
is another matter which only a major downturn like Brexit can cause.

On 10:25 7 Oct 2021, Bob Latham said:

> In article <597718a5c8noise@audiomisc.co.uk>,
> Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <59771149ccbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
>> <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > Of course they couldn't see bias, there's only one truth and the
>> > BBC have it.
>
>> > It's not only Brexit of course, the BBC has one view on
>> > everything and expands everything in the news that support that
>> > view and diminishes or even doesn't report everything that
>> > doesn't.
>
>
>> Read the 'Bible' (sic) on Climate I recommended you read, yet, Bob?
>
> No Jim, I've seen the data myself I don't need an activists
> viewpoint but thanks for personalising.
>
> But It's not only CC Jim it's a whole range of idiocy. It's now
> dangerous to say things that are simple facts like:
>
> Only women have cervixes and and only woman can be pregnant.
>
> That's how insane the world has become led by people with more time
> and money on their hands than is good for them.
>
> I think most people now are well aware of the likes of professor
> wrong on everything, pants down Ferguson and the danger of activist
> computer modellers. These people make sure their model's prediction
> matches their desire. Politics now leads science in many areas, sad
> but true.

Ignoring his politically motivated detractors (anti-vaxers etc), I
thought Ferguson has been remarkably accurate. He forecast scenarios
based on certain assumptions and certain factors. When those factors
changed, the original forecast was no longer valid and a revised one
is needed.

Other forecasters may have kowtowed to political influence but I'm not
sure Ferguson in particular has.

> A good proportion of all the "problems" in our society now are
> caused by spoilt, privileged, wealth, 'educated' idiots looking for
> and causing trouble with problems that don't exist.
>
> I suppose the abandonment of organised religion is in part to blame,
> some people need a cause and a belief.
>
> Bob.

In article <XnsADBC88D1F756E37B93@144.76.35.252>,
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ignoring his politically motivated detractors (anti-vaxers etc), I
> thought Ferguson has been remarkably accurate. He forecast
> scenarios based on certain assumptions and certain factors. When
> those factors changed, the original forecast was no longer valid
> and a revised one is needed.

No. He is famous for being miles out on all his doom laden
predictions going back decades and it got no better with covid.

Look what he said about swine flu, bird flu and mad cow.

Don't forget he's the man who in August said it would be all over by
October and then reversed that in just a week and made outrageous
claims about what would happen when the kids went back to school. But
he was wrong again.

> Other forecasters may have kowtowed to political influence but I'm
> not sure Ferguson in particular has.

No, quite the reverse, that particular college he's part of is very
political indeed.

Bob.

In article <XnsADBC87DF0C26737B93@144.76.35.252>,
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> There a supply chain hiccups from time to time somewhere or another
> in the world but structural changes which limit supply of basic
> provisions is another matter which only a major downturn like
> Brexit can cause.

Oh dear.

Bob.

On 13:44 7 Oct 2021, Bob Latham said:

> In article <XnsADBC88D1F756E37B93@144.76.35.252>,
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ignoring his politically motivated detractors (anti-vaxers etc), I
>> thought Ferguson has been remarkably accurate. He forecast
>> scenarios based on certain assumptions and certain factors. When
>> those factors changed, the original forecast was no longer valid
>> and a revised one is needed.
>
> No. He is famous for being miles out on all his doom laden
> predictions going back decades and it got no better with covid.
>
> Look what he said about swine flu, bird flu and mad cow.
>
> Don't forget he's the man who in August said it would be all over by
> October and then reversed that in just a week and made outrageous
> claims about what would happen when the kids went back to school. But
> he was wrong again.

That's a tabloid reading of Ferguson omitting all his carefully stated
caveats and ignoring the particular model's assumption.

"Up to", "could" and "worst case scenario" have specific meanings, often
ignored by the too casual reporter.

Later in the pandemic many of his politically-motivated critics observed
how accurate his March 2020 modelling was ("Impact of NPIs"). If
anything, his numbers were a bit conservative.

>> Other forecasters may have kowtowed to political influence but I'm
>> not sure Ferguson in particular has.
>
> No, quite the reverse, that particular college he's part of is very
> political indeed.
>
> Bob.

He's at Imperial not LSE. Perhaps you mean Gupta's department at Oxford.