From: Mxsmanic on 3 Aug 2006 04:58 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 3 Aug 2006 05:00 Keith W writes: > Incorrect Explain how multiple providers can serve multiple, distinct customers and accurately track power consumption using only one physical set of wires. > 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 3 Aug 2006 05:04 "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:rj73d2pug26s63k7dseb7e21ga9rkvsrda(a)4ax.com... > 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 RSPCA The AA The RAC The NHS The Dept of Pensions The Duchy of Lancaster The PDSA 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 Keith
From: Jordi on 3 Aug 2006 05:09 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. J.
From: The Reid on 3 Aug 2006 05:17
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 "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap |