From: Mxsmanic on
Keith W writes:

> In Britain if you live in a cable tv enabled area you change
> the local loop provides in a day or so for nothing

What is the connection between cable TV and the local loop?

Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on
Keith W writes:

> Incorrect

Explain how multiple providers can serve multiple, distinct customers
and accurately track power consumption using only one physical set of

> In the UK the infrastructure (the wiring or piping for gas) is run by a
> heavily regulated company that charges the provider a fixed fee. The provider is
> hooked into the infrastructure as is the customer.
> As a customer all I need to do to switch provider is make a phone call.

How does the provider measure your power consumption?

Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Keith W on

"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic(a)> wrote in message
> David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and
> deansgate writes:
>> Not really. It's more common in the UK to refer to MSF in the singular.
> Most organizations are referred to in the plural in the UK, for
> reasons I have already explained.

You mean like

The AA
The Dept of Pensions
The Duchy of Lancaster
The Inland Revenue

In fact I have a hard time bringing any single organisations
to mind that are referred to in the plural with the exception
of HM Customs and Excise


From: Jordi on

Tchiowa wrote:

> >
> > 40-44 for men, 45-49 for women, thats quite near retirement.
> What are you talking about? Standard retirement age is 66 in the US.

An hyperbole, we can set it at halfway through if you insist.

> > Thats a good 14 and 19 years over your numbers.
> 40 is 14 years over???

28 + 14 = 42 (40 - 44 age group)
28 + 19 = 47 (45 - 49 age group).

> > Not again, less than half the males aged 35-39 have 4-week holidays
> > (even less females). Again, the breakpoint is at 40-44 for men and
> > 45-49 for women.
> And those older have more. And if you look at 35 to retirement then
> it's quite clear that *more than half* get the full complement.

So? Under 40-44 ames or 45-49 females aren't worth discussing? They
made up the bulk (and most productive part) of the workforce.

> > If the majority of people get their first 4-week vacation at 40-44,
> > that means they took the job between 35-39, which contradicts you
> > earlier claims that 'after 28 people don't normally change jobs'.
> Work on your math. If people get 4 weeks vacation at 40 and it takes 10
> years employment to get the 4 weeks then they started that job at 30.
> Awfully close to 28. Sorry about the 2 year error in my approximation.

First you said 5, now you said 10? Which one you got wrong?

No age group in the chart you provided (not even 50-54) has a median
length of job over 10 years. Check that again.

> Your exact words were "BLS statistics show that most Americans don't
> stay in their jobs enough to get a 4-week vacation even at mature ages
> so your earlier statements
> about 'most people' are wrong. "
> Post from 2 August.

We were commenting a BLS chart that stopped providing data at 38 years
of age (thus 'mature'), in a 'people start having their permanent jobs
at 28' discussion. Please check context.


From: The Reid on
Following up to Mxsmanic

>> It was irony, numbnuts.
>Are you sure?

we are all sure except (so it seems) you NN.
Mike Reid
Walk-eat-photos UK "" <-- you can email us@ this site
Walk-eat-photos Spain "" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap