politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two thirds of Britons want other parties included in the Brexi

surbiton said:

So your opt-out is that you did not use the word "mastermind". We heard nothing but how Corbyn and McDonnell were friends of terrorists. Maybe, their street cred even went up.

Of course, two month is a long time in politics. The fulsome praise heaped upon Corbyn by May in the 5 Live interview was mind blowing ! This guy was a terrorist lover only a few weeks back !

He has always been a terrorist sympathiser, albeit less so than the truly vile McDonnell. However, as I clearly said before, one of the big errors of the Conservative campaign was not to attack Labour's manifesto sufficiently vigorously, or indeed really much at all. A lot of voters seem to have got the idea that it was some kind of harmless, possibly even vaguely credible, programme. The attacks on it never came.

Mr. Pulpstar, fair enough.

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

It was the day when the Eurosceptic cancer metastasised within its Conservative host.

Not joining the Euro may have seemed like the painless option, but it fostered too many political illusions and set us on the slow path to the catastrophe of Brexit.

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

On the contrary, it was a good election result. Ideally the Tories another dozen down and LDs a dozen up, but a good one that forces the government to listen. May has a tin ear though, so needs to go.

You are one of the many making the error of thinking that the nature of Brexit is somehow determinable by an internal British debate. This is one of the most bizarre, and bizarrely widespread, errors of current politics.

I don't think that. I think that hard WTO Brexit is nailed on, and soft Brexit a delusion. If the opposition parties were to be part of the process then they would see it too.

foxinsoxuk said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

On the contrary, it was a good election result. Ideally the Tories another dozen down and LDs a dozen up, but a good one that forces the government to listen. May has a tin ear though, so needs to go.

You are one of the many making the error of thinking that the nature of Brexit is somehow determinable by an internal British debate. This is one of the most bizarre, and bizarrely widespread, errors of current politics.

I don't think that. I think that hard WTO Brexit is nailed on, and soft Brexit a delusion. If the opposition parties were to be part of the process then they would see it too.

I think this is wrong. Brussels Brexit will prove to be unpalatable and Westminster will spit it our rather than grin and bear it.

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I don't think that. I think that hard WTO Brexit is nailed on, and soft Brexit a delusion. If the opposition parties were to be part of the process then they would see it too.

Now I'm even more puzzled by your position. If a hard WTO Brexit is going to happen anyway, the effect of the election is that the government might be forced into a corner where we end up making concessions (especially on the exit bill) and then get nothing in return.

You are also missing the political reality of opposition, which is that several of the opposition parties, including Labour and the SNP, simply want to cause mischief in the hope of toppling the government in chaos. They are perfectly happy for Brexit to be as disastrous as possible if it further that aim, and the election result has strengthened their capability to be wreckers.

No concessions are needed for WTO Brexit, just some preparations. It is the only solution that we can choose.

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

Then you should sack your proof reader.

foxinsoxuk said:

No concessions are needed for WTO Brexit, just some preparations. It is the only solution that we can choose.

Quite so, but what happens if parliament votes for concessions which then produce nothing? We've even more stuffed than we would otherwise have been. Even if the opposition parties were sincere (ha ha!), you can't negotiate effectively by unilaterally passing parliamentary resolutions, you have to sit in a smoke-free room with the other side and trade concessions for something you want in return. That's why Theresa May was quite right to say that a larger majority would have strengthened her hand, and why it is such a disaster that she didn't get it. We've lost time and credibility, weakened ourselves, and left the EU27 unsure who exactly they are negotiating with and whether the PM can make any deal stick. The disaster really is unmitigated.

Morris_Dancer said:

Good afternoon, everyone.

Bracketing together two wildly different options is statistical shenanigans.

A consultation and on equal basis to the government are hugely different.

F1: just checked the timings and Bottas topped both sessions, with tiny leads over Hamilton. Got to say, if Bottas beats Hamilton this weekend I'd be rather pleased.

Are Ferrari putting a new engine in tomorrow, Mr.D. ? (I seem to remember they have an upgrade due.)
Might make qualifying rather close if so.

williamglenn said:

surbiton said:

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

Black Wednesday only happened because Major's government "talked the pound up" to £1=DM2.95. Clearly, the Tories wanted to lower inflationary pressures. They should have instead gone for £1=DM2.60 or such like and we could have had a permanent or, at least, a long term trade advantage.

If we hit parity with the Euro it could be the opportune moment to join...

Two problems. One is that the media and a lot of politicians see the pound's strength as a sort of national virility symbol, so they'd want to lock us in to too high a rate. The second is there are quite a few on the right who see a high exchange rate as a bulwark against inflation, so they'd want to lock us into the wrong rate as well.

DecrepitJohnL said:

williamglenn said:

surbiton said:

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

Black Wednesday only happened because Major's government "talked the pound up" to £1=DM2.95. Clearly, the Tories wanted to lower inflationary pressures. They should have instead gone for £1=DM2.60 or such like and we could have had a permanent or, at least, a long term trade advantage.

If we hit parity with the Euro it could be the opportune moment to join...

Two problems. One is that the media and a lot of politicians see the pound's strength as a sort of national virility symbol, so they'd want to lock us in to too high a rate. The second is there are quite a few on the right who see a high exchange rate as a bulwark against inflation, so they'd want to lock us into the wrong rate as well.

One factor that might be a consideration these days is wage arbitrage. If we joined at a relatively low level it would reduce incentives for people in low wage jobs to migrate.

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

No concessions are needed for WTO Brexit, just some preparations. It is the only solution that we can choose.

Quite so, but what happens if parliament votes for concessions which then produce nothing? We've even more stuffed than we would otherwise have been. Even if the opposition parties were sincere (ha ha!), you can't negotiate effectively by unilaterally passing parliamentary resolutions, you have to sit in a smoke-free room with the other side and trade concessions for something you want in return. That's why Theresa May was quite right to say that a larger majority would have strengthened her hand, and why it is such a disaster that she didn't get it. We've lost time and credibility, weakened ourselves, and left the EU27 unsure who exactly they are negotiating with and whether the PM can make any deal stick. The disaster really is unmitigated.

May is a very poor negotiator, for the very same reason that her election was so piss poor. She doesn't listen to people.

The stormclouds are gathering, the ship is in full sail. We should be putting up the stormsails and batterning down the hatches, but instead the Captain is arguing with the officers about which harbour to head for, while the crew are in mutiny over the rum ration.

Until all parties are preparing the ship, what should be a survivable storm risks our ship foundering. If we are unprepared and lucky we may get away with just being demasted.

williamglenn said:

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

It was the day when the Eurosceptic cancer metastasised within its Conservative host.

Not joining the Euro may have seemed like the painless option, but it fostered too many political illusions and set us on the slow path to the catastrophe of Brexit.

As I said a few days ago joining the Euro would have destroyed both the UK economy and the Euro itself. If you like the Euro you should be eternally grateful we never joined.

foxinsoxuk said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

No concessions are needed for WTO Brexit, just some preparations. It is the only solution that we can choose.

Quite so, but what happens if parliament votes for concessions which then produce nothing? We've even more stuffed than we would otherwise have been. Even if the opposition parties were sincere (ha ha!), you can't negotiate effectively by unilaterally passing parliamentary resolutions, you have to sit in a smoke-free room with the other side and trade concessions for something you want in return. That's why Theresa May was quite right to say that a larger majority would have strengthened her hand, and why it is such a disaster that she didn't get it. We've lost time and credibility, weakened ourselves, and left the EU27 unsure who exactly they are negotiating with and whether the PM can make any deal stick. The disaster really is unmitigated.

May is a very poor negotiator, for the very same reason that her election was so piss poor. She doesn't listen to people...

You missed out her poor decision making skills, and vulnerability under pressure... amongst other things.

Richard_Tyndall said:

williamglenn said:

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

It was the day when the Eurosceptic cancer metastasised within its Conservative host.

Not joining the Euro may have seemed like the painless option, but it fostered too many political illusions and set us on the slow path to the catastrophe of Brexit.

As I said a few days ago joining the Euro would have destroyed both the UK economy and the Euro itself. If you like the Euro you should be eternally grateful we never joined.

That is certainly conceivable if Gordon Brown had done his worst, but I'm assuming all would not have been equal had we joined.

williamglenn said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

williamglenn said:

David_Evershed said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

stodge said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

There is only one possible course of action for government and the Conservative Party, which is to follow the advice of Winston Churchill and keep buggering on. We need to get through the Article 50 process, sort out as much of the mess as possible, beef up the party organisation and strategy, and leave time for Corbyn to burn out and Labour's unity to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions. Possibly it would have been better to have done all that under a different leader (Phil Hammond), but the moment for a swift coup has passed.

OTOH, you could stick with May, go down to a huge defeat in 2022 and spend the next 20 years in Opposition.

Works for me.

The country will be fine if the Conservatives aren't in Government.

Why post something you know not to be true Every Labour Govt has eventually trashed the economy in the last 50 yrs.

Black Wednesday !

Black Wednesday is the day it became clear we should should not join the Euro so should be called rainbow Wednesday.

It was the day when the Eurosceptic cancer metastasised within its Conservative host.

Not joining the Euro may have seemed like the painless option, but it fostered too many political illusions and set us on the slow path to the catastrophe of Brexit.

As I said a few days ago joining the Euro would have destroyed both the UK economy and the Euro itself. If you like the Euro you should be eternally grateful we never joined.

That is certainly conceivable if Gordon Brown had done his worst, but I'm assuming all would not have been equal had we joined.

Unless you consider membership would have prevented the 2008 world wide financial crisis then I am afraid you are wrong.

TOPPING said:

First off I have no idea what jurisdiction it has. Has it got the power, for example, to extradite Canadian citizens to the US for trial, like it has over us here?

Second, we are talking international trade agreements. While I understand that the ECJ could be seen as being "on their side", we nevertheless need a supranational institution opining on banana curvature if we want to "access" the single market (it is their market, after all).

The Supreme Court of the United States has no jurisdiction in the UK or Canada. It has no power to extradite UK citizens (or anyone else in the UK) to the US for trial. US prosecutors can request extradition but it is the UK that decides whether or not to extradite. The US Supreme Court will not normally have any involvement in the process at all. It cannot force the UK to extradite anyone.

The EU does not just want the ECJ to rule on trade disputes (which should, in any event, be settled by the WTO's dispute resolution procedure, not by what is, in effect, the national court of one party to the dispute). The EU wants the ECJ to rule on the rights of EU citizens resident in the UK, for example. That should not be acceptable to any sovereign state.

TSE quotes the example of the Privy Council which continues to hear appeals from Crown Dependencies, British Overseas Territories and some independent Commonwealth states (including Jamaica. TSE is wrong about them opting out two years ago. The change passed the House of Representatives but it needed to pass the Senate as well and a general election was called before there was a final vote. The election was won by the Jamaican Labour Party which opposes the change and has promised a referendum). The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is not a purely UK affair. It includes judges from the superior courts in some Commonwealth nations who sit when appeals from their own country are being heard. I don't see that as in any way equivalent to the ECJ. Apart from anything else, Commonwealth nations chose to keep the Privy Council as their final court of appeal and can choose to opt out at any time. That is not what the EU is proposing regarding the ECJ. I also don't see any proposal from the EU that UK judges should continue to sit on the ECJ.

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

I was that...before 45. Things have slipped a bit since then.

DavidL said:

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

I was that...before 45. Things have slipped a bit since then.

So it is true... you do get shorter as you age.

RobD said:

DavidL said:

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

I was that...before 45. Things have slipped a bit since then.

So it is true... you do get shorter as you age.

That makes it worse!

I am working on it this holiday but 175 looks a long way off.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Surbiton, isn't that dependent on temperature?

In F1, fuel is measured in weight as density and therefore volumes varies according to temperature, whereas weight is more stable.

Would have thought that the volume the fuel was going to have in the fuel tank might have been useful information...

Mr. L, unnecessary. No refuelling and maximum 100kg of fuel per race now.

DavidL said:

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

I was that...before 45. Things have slipped a bit since then.

I once went for a check up at the Dr's and found, much to my surprise, I was an inch taller than I had thought for nigh on 25 years (not having actually been measured since 18 and must've had a late inch added when I was about 19 I guess). The extra inch brought my BMI below 25.

Losing weight is so old hat. Gaining height is a much better option!

Mr. Tyndall, ah, I did not know that (obviously).

Incidentally, Divinity Original Sin 2 (that is a damned clunky title) has had its release date announced. 14 September, PC only (initially, at least, the first game did get console versions). Looks quite interesting.

surbiton said:

Ishmael_Z said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For temperature, 16=61 and 28=82, once you know that you can pretty much interpolate. Driving abroad I no longer translate distances, I just treat all the numbers as miles and find that journeys go pleasingly quickly, though caution is required over speed limits.

Many roads in Ireland used to show distances in miles and speed limits in kilometres ! I do not want to write anything more on this.

Have you avoirdupois?

Richard_Tyndall said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Surbiton, isn't that dependent on temperature?

In F1, fuel is measured in weight as density and therefore volumes varies according to temperature, whereas weight is more stable.

No. Water is a non compressible fluid. Changes in pressure and temperature do not cause changes in volume/density in its liquid form, only when it changes state.

Interestingly it has a unique property in that it's density decreases slightly when it changes from liquid to solid. In almost all other materials density increases with this change of state. It is the reason that ice floats and is also therefore one of the reasons life can exist on earth.

I don't believe in God but I have always thought that the many weird properties of water are one of the best arguments for some sort of divine intervention. As you say it is somewhat oddly less dense in its solid state allowing ice to float. It being white in the solid state has prevented the world from overheating reflecting a lot of the heat we would otherwise absorb from the sun. It has a remarkably high latent heat which makes it ideal for cooking etc. as well as ensuring that ice and snow melt is a gradual process allowing a steady flow of melt over an extended period. It has a very high specific heat which allows it to be a tremendous store of heat keeping the climate far more moderate than it would otherwise be. It has a remarkably high surface tension which inhibits its tendency to evaporate. It is generally known as the universal solvent which is key to much of our food. So many remarkable properties so useful to facilitate life. It is thought provoking.

RobD said:

surbiton said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-40604375

EasyJet picks Austrian base for post-Brexit plan

Not really...

The parent company - EasyJet PLC - will retain its London Stock Exchange listing and its Luton headquarters.

They also said no jobs will be moved from or lost in the UK.

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

That is a reasonbly good rule of thumb over the normal height range.

I have shed 10kg over 10 weeks, but another 6 to go. Current BMI 25.7.

11 stone = 70 kg for those who think in stones but measure in kg.

foxinsoxuk said:

surbiton said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_Cooke said:

surbiton said:

CarlottaVance said:

surbiton said:

eek said:

You didn't negotiate that well if it started off a £400 a sq m and you are now paying £220 a sq ft.. (hint there are 10.7sq ft to a sq m)

OK. Smart Alec. Sq.m all the way.

I thought you were a closet LEAVER there, pining for Imperial.......

Sadly, feet and inches is what I think about instinctively. But using 2.5cm = 1 inch I am converting to metric in my thinking. Since I have been using weighing scales in kgs, sooner or later you get used to it. Temperature is now in C for a long time. We don't need to hear 80's but 25C is enough [ 77F ]. I am pretty good in mental arithmetic.

Metric is definitely better.

For Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion and back again, the reverse numbers are easy to remember and use (and equate to "warm-to-hot border" and "cool-to-chilly border"):

28 (reverses to 82)
16 (reverses to 61)

Those are fairly exact swaps as well: 28C is 82 F [technically 82.4], and 16C is 61F [well, 60.8]; they're accurate to 2 sig figs.

Every day is a school day on PB!

Over the typical northern temperature range "double it and add 30" is a close approximation.

The best such approximation I have heard about in metric is the thumbs rule relationship between height and weight.

So, if your height is 180 cm, your desired weight should be 80 kgs.

In old money, 5'11" ~ 176 lbs.

That is a reasonbly good rule of thumb over the normal height range.

I have shed 10kg over 10 weeks, but another 6 to go. Current BMI 25.7.

Those with this problem should follow the basic advice on dietdoctor.com or diabeticmediterraneandiet.com. The NHS could save a fortune by advising diabetics and pre-diabetics what they can do for themselves.

Richard_Nabavi said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I don't think that. I think that hard WTO Brexit is nailed on, and soft Brexit a delusion. If the opposition parties were to be part of the process then they would see it too.

Now I'm even more puzzled by your position. If a hard WTO Brexit is going to happen anyway, the effect of the election is that the government might be forced into a corner where we end up making concessions (especially on the exit bill) and then get nothing in return.

Who is saying that we should 100% commit to "concessions" unless/until we get a deal that we want?

The argument is that we should show willingness to make concessions, if the EU plays ball with us. As opposed to May's hardline approach in January of essentially saying that total opposition to the ECJ or budget contributions or being bound by Customs Union rules are total red lines, no matter what. Obviously we shouldn't unileratelly commit to those things before we know we're getting something in return.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Surbiton, isn't that dependent on temperature?

In F1, fuel is measured in weight as density and therefore volumes varies according to temperature, whereas weight is more stable.

No. Water is a non compressible fluid. Changes in pressure and temperature do not cause changes in volume/density in its liquid form, only when it changes state.

Interestingly it has a unique property in that it's density decreases slightly when it changes from liquid to solid. In almost all other materials density increases with this change of state. It is the reason that ice floats and is also therefore one of the reasons life can exist on earth.

That is not correct. Water does change volume with temperature changes.It has an odd property in that it contracts up to 4C (where it has its greatest density) and then expands as temperature increases.

kjh said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Surbiton, isn't that dependent on temperature?

In F1, fuel is measured in weight as density and therefore volumes varies according to temperature, whereas weight is more stable.

No. Water is a non compressible fluid. Changes in pressure and temperature do not cause changes in volume/density in its liquid form, only when it changes state.

Interestingly it has a unique property in that it's density decreases slightly when it changes from liquid to solid. In almost all other materials density increases with this change of state. It is the reason that ice floats and is also therefore one of the reasons life can exist on earth.

That is not correct. Water does change volume with temperature changes.It has an odd property in that it contracts up to 4C (where it has its greatest density) and then expands as temperature increases.

The change to ice gives a relative density of 0.92. Water is marvelous stuff.

foxinsoxuk said:

kjh said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Surbiton, isn't that dependent on temperature?

In F1, fuel is measured in weight as density and therefore volumes varies according to temperature, whereas weight is more stable.

No. Water is a non compressible fluid. Changes in pressure and temperature do not cause changes in volume/density in its liquid form, only when it changes state.

Interestingly it has a unique property in that it's density decreases slightly when it changes from liquid to solid. In almost all other materials density increases with this change of state. It is the reason that ice floats and is also therefore one of the reasons life can exist on earth.

That is not correct. Water does change volume with temperature changes.It has an odd property in that it contracts up to 4C (where it has its greatest density) and then expands as temperature increases.

The change to ice gives a relative density of 0.92. Water is marvelous stuff.

Yep. If you type in to google 'expansion graph for water' you can see the expansion behaviour / density change. It is probably true that life would be much less likely without this odd behaviour, but it only occurs in a very short temperature range of 4 degrees while in liquid form, but it also changes dramatically on freezing. We should really expect ice to be at the bottom of ponds not on the top of them if not for this oddity.

nichomar said:

It will all be ok in two years time we can have pounds and ounzes, miles not kilograms and go back to pounds shillings and pence. There will be flat beer watching cricket on the village green an cucumber sandwiches for tea with the vicar. The tories will retain their destinly in life to rule over us and everything will be ok. We can call a q**** a q****r and a *** a *** but it will be wonderful

You really do have a very warped view of the world and your fellow man.

AndyJS said:

"Labour's 2017 election campaign worst in almost 70 years at turning votes into seats, analysis finds

Jeremy Corbyn secured a similar vote share to Tony Blair in 2001 – but won 151 fewer seats"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-election-campaign-vote-seats-won-share-worst-70-years-jeremy-corbyn-tony-blair-a7840231.html

That's a pretty stupid analysis. 40% of votes didn't translate into lots of seats because the conservatives got 42% and its a first past the post system.

nichomar said:

It will all be ok in two years time we can have pounds and ounzes, miles not kilograms and go back to pounds shillings and pence. There will be flat beer watching cricket on the village green an cucumber sandwiches for tea with the vicar. The tories will retain their destinly in life to rule over us and everything will be ok. We can call a q**** a q****r and a *** a *** but it will be wonderful

Quite good satire but you have to remember about a third of the posters on here are Faragists and they'll be salivating.

....and Easyjet moving it's HQ to Austria. The good news just keeps coming

Casino_Royale said:

geoffw said:

11 stone = 70 kg for those who think in stones but measure in kg.

I think in stones and measure in stones.

I can't manage when Americans quote someone's weight* in pounds - I can't divide by 14 in my head.

*Strictly mass, but I am using lay-language.

Ouch !

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/dimon-says-being-an-american-abroad-is-almost-an-embarrassment