Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Riedquat

  1. 1 hour ago, skinnylattej said:

    J.i.T. was developed by Toyota, and for a volume manufacturing plant is a godsend, reduces stock and space needed to hold stock, enhances capability and flexibility, and with good partners makes a significant reduction in costs.

    Not so good when there's a war.

    JiT is just another way of being cheap and nasty.

  2. 6 minutes ago, miguel said:

    Can't be long now for the clown show to be over, it's become an avalanche of Tory cries for him to resign. Gove and Coffey just screwing the knife into the clowns blubber. 

    Sure, but since that's just metaphorical rather than physical knife-twisting he'll just ignore it. Can anyone actually see Johnson resigning unless he is quite literally forced to?

    What would happen if a sufficiently large number of Conservative MPs, large enough to be a majority, said "OK then, we're off" and formed a new party?

  3. 1 hour ago, skomer said:

    Largely unreported but looking  at Gridwatch today  https://gridwatch.co.uk/ 6% of our energy generation is currently going to France via the  IC and IC2 interconnectors at the moment.
    Been this way for the past few months now due to issues with French nuclear. If prices are at a record in France and Germany does this mean UK are earning a lot from the French?

    Current gridwatch

    Also noticed that it says we normally import electricity from France in the summer.

  4. 1 minute ago, scottbeard said:

    If it was just the risk of DEATH then I'd agree, but I was more concerned about feeling ill for a week, and if I could have a jab that makes that a lot less nasty that seemed worth the trade off for a 1 in 250,000 chance of a blood clot.

    But I do agree that vaccinations should only be based upon PERSONAL benefit.  It's not acceptable to expect or pressure person A to be vaccinated to help protect person B.

    Even for the risk of feeling ill for a week; my personal preference always actually boils down to preferring the risks as being part of accepting that's just a part of life. I find the idea of going out of my way to take any avoiding action of a risk that I don't find considerable enough to be a worry offensive (probably why I clash so badly with the Health and Safety brigade, whilst also being just as scornful of the reckless and genuinely dangerous).

  5. 41 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

    - Road traffic accident injury and fatality rates are not relevant to whether a medicine is worth taking.  What is relevant is "are the benefits of this medicine likely to outweigh the side effects?" with the advice at the time being a resounding "yes".

    That particular point is where we differ I think.

    The benefits to me personally of being vaccinated were slim, because the risks to me from Covid were slight enough to be at the "couldn't give a sh1t about them anyway" level, and I've never found the "well there's no reason not to" argument remotely convincing; indeed, I find it obnoxious more often than not, and used to justify all sorts of far-fetched crap.

    As a personal choice I decided I didn't mind it as part of a greater picture than just myself, but I don't agree with putting any pressure on people to take a medicine for that reason.

  6. 34 minutes ago, anonguest said:

    It could be argued that most (all?) of the great geniuses in the history of science achieved what they did by not listening to the advice of others.  😉

    Or, perhaps a little more accurately, they did listed to what prevailing thought was first.... and disagreed with it - without concerning themselves about how big so and so's reputation was, etc.

    I don't think it could be argued very successfully though. There are some examples but they're not really the norm for scientific advancement. Anyway most of us aren't great geniuses.

    Just because someone made a fortune putting all their money on one spin of the roulette wheel doesn't mean that the advice not to do that is bad advice.

  7. 17 minutes ago, dances with sheeple said:

    KS is a serial bad actor, his scripted canned lines look weak against BJ`s improvised think on your feet approach,  whatever else BJ is he is definitely a larger than life unique character and that works with the voters up to a point, the point being when you just overreach and they turn on you, not sure BJ has reached that point yet though.

    The electorate turned against Johnson quite some time ago.

  8. 7 minutes ago, kzb said:

    Not if you are a business.  It's excess stock which you must pay to manage. 

    It's not like they are under any kind of obligation to actually keep us supplied with anything.

    JIT is the name of the game.  The other one is 5S.  Get rid of anything you don't need in the next few weeks.  It's often cheaper to bin it and re-buy it should you need it again after that time period.

    A good example of the contradiction of working out what's best economically speaking and what's actually best practically, and why those who think just concentrating on the former is a religious commandment that solves everything are idiots.

  9. 1 hour ago, anonguest said:

    That's a reasonable stance.

    EXCEPT that you have shown a record of still casually dismissing reports from, say, university academics or other similarly presumably suitably qualified and identifiable persons.

    Has he? What I've not seen from scottbeard is to latch on to a small number of academic reports that differ from the majority of them and try to use those to promote FUD. Basic critical thinking in an area you're not an expert in requires recognising where the majority view is, and who actually has anything worthwhile to say on the matter, i.e. a good set of filters. At the risk of over-simplification there are two broad, loud groups without those filters - those who lap up everything they're told after it's been filtered through journalists and politicians who don't understand it, and those who latch on to anything that's contradictory to the mainstream and give it massive undue significance.

    Both groups are fools, although the latter group has a greater chance of being further from sensible reality.

  10. 13 hours ago, kzb said:

    I think these were superfluous after coal gas was replaced with natural gas.  Natural gas is stored in underground caverns or as liquid.  Or it was before someone decided we weren't going to need gas anymore.

    I think they were where the local gasworks stored its output. Doubt there's any reason they couldn't be used for other sources of gas, if they hadn't almost all been demolished, but you'd have the problem of actually getting it to them in the first place.

  11. 14 minutes ago, Pmax2020 said:

    With respect it’s only you that’s focusing exclusively on the economics. The YES movement is about social equality, fairer and more progressive politics, the ability to be wholly responsible for our own affairs, and to be able to trade more freely in Europe.

    No reason to believe you'll get any more of the first two with an independent Scotland, the second's a desire I can sympathise with but Scotland voted against wanting it not very long ago at all, and no reason to believe you'll get the final one either.

    You forgot to mention a short-termist dislike of the current Westminster government (something shared by most of the rest of the UK), which is a lousy reason to leave because you're just as likely to wind up subject to a lousy government in the future that being in the UK would prevent. Scottish politicians aren't fundamentally any less crap than English, Welsh, or Northern Irish ones, we're just stuck with a crap English one right now (just as the UK has also been hammered by a crap Scottish one in charge not all that long ago, as well as some of the SNP's own internal characters being "interesting.") None of which will prevent the rabid anti-English nationalists (you're burying your head in the sand if you believe that's not a large element of it) using bad reasons to try to force their way through, something very dishonest but that's about what I expect.

  12. 1 minute ago, Lucky Larry said:

    The SNP, Alba and the Green Party said a vote for them was a vote for another referendum at the last election , the people voted for them on that basis . They have a mandate to deliver the wish of the people , it's called democracy. Your problem is you won with lies and false promises the last time and now that has been exposed you don't want to play again because the odds are against you , it's called cowardice.

    Drivel, pathetic drivel. But it very much sounds like you're one of the "keep voting until I get the result I want" types, where it's only democracy if it gives the "right" result. Far too many people are stuck with "whatever I want and whatever is done to get it is right and justified." Which includes saying fvck that to democratic results if they don't like the answer. Trump, various Remainers, the SNP, Putin, all cut from the same cloth with their contempt for democracy.

  13. 5 minutes ago, kzb said:

    I can see what you mean, but I honestly think the scots nationalists are believing fantasies, driven primarily by thinking they will be able to stick two fingers up at the English whilst being a lot richer.  That economic case does not stack up at all.

    I've got no problem with pro-Scottish Scottish nationalist sentiment. What I do have a problem with is anti-English sentiment and the sort of spitting on democracy that "keep having votes until we get the result we want" scum loves.

  14. 1 hour ago, Pmax2020 said:

    How are the Tories still in existence in England?! How?! They’ve not even averaged 20% of the vote up here for Holyrood!!!

    Because of the utter ineptness of the Opposition that at the last election they looked like a bloody awful but still least bad choice (and even with the benefit of hindsight I'd hold to that). They need to sod off now though, but even if the alternatives are better they're still utterly dire.

  15. Oh, hang on, just got what the OP was saying when he admitted making a mistake, presumably the same one I did. Which was assume the exact opposite of what it actually said.

    Still not sure I agree with that either, although I've not looked at what it means by "public buildings." It's fine for a very small place to just have a single toilet for everyone.

  16. 53 minutes ago, Warlord said:

    So it looks like Ukraine has lost a key city......................  My prediction is right on: sooner or later they lose this conflict. They should negotiate a diplomatic solution. This is what diplomats are for. We should NOT be sending weapons we should clearly be sending diplomats.

    Diplomats to do what? Persuade Ukraine to hand stuff over to Russia, thank you, your murderous invasion has been (partially) successful? Persuade Russia to stop being murderous arseholes and hand back what they've stolen? Russia can't take the entire country, Ukraine probably can't take back everything either.

    At this point negotiations will only stand a chance if both sides are convinced they're stuck in a going nowhere stalemate, and thus both Russia and the civilised world accept a degree of the unacceptable.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.