HAL9000

iaineasy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am not sure about the science of farming but can it > really be that much more expensive to not add > fertilisers and pesticides? Soil is quickly exhausted without fertiliser - organic farmers use animal manure and compost made from plant residues rather than so-called 'chemical fertilisers': which are mainly soluble nitrogen, potassium and phosphorous salts along with essential trace elements. Manufacturing and handling organic fertiliser is quite an expensive undertaking. Traditional organic farming relies on crop rotation to maintain soil quality and crop yields. That requires farmers to grow a variety of crops rather than concentrate on monoculture - again: more expensive and less productive. As for pesticides, without them, farmers risk losing some or all of their crops at nature's whim. Entire harvests would be destroyed in any given year depending on which pathogens got a foothold. The fact is, without chemical fertilisers and pesticides, man would have already faced decades of famine and starvation: we cannot now survive without them.

indiepanda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isn't the thing to work out ... Quite right. The OP sent me various documents in which tied and free market beer prices are tabulated. The actual math is quite straightforward. I think the OP needs someone like a qualified accountant, preferably with experience in this sector, to prepare a formal argument for use in court and/or the campaign. A credible, accredited expert witness, in other words.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Back in the USSR - The Beatles Back in Black - AC/DC

Some would say 42 - I reckon it's a Fair Pint.

There's a nice little beach at Ruislip Lido in North West Greater London. Attractions include: rowing boats motor boats paddle boats children's playground a beach swimming (not recommended) miniature railway water skiing dinghy sailing

Declan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did you ever work in the real world Hal or are you a computer? Let me put it this way, Declan. The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error. I enjoy working with people. I have a stimulating relationship with the Forum. My mission responsibilities range over the entire operation of East Dulwich, so I am constantly occupied. I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.

In collaboration with scor46, the 'mathematical' problem has been put into words. Blame me for any errors below. Contact scor46 if you can help or would like to join the campaign. The problem (in a highly simplified form): Two business models A and B compete in the same retail sector (pubs). Type A pubs purchase beer in the open market. Type B pubs are contractually tied to buy beer from a single source. Type A and B pubs pay Rent to Property Management Companies (PMC) calculated using a Standard Formula: Sales Turnover ? (cost of beer + all other costs) = Divisible Balance The Divisible Balance is divided between the Landlord (as Profit) and the PMC (as Rent) in the Fixed Ratio 50:50. (In practice the Standard Formula includes various projections and intangibles that add complexity and opacity to the calculation.) Because Type B pubs operate with lower profit margins the Standard Formula discriminates against them by calculating lower Profit / Rent figures. In short, Type B?s earnings are less than Type A?s - all else being equal. An EC directive requires Landlords of both types of business to earn the same profit, all else being equal. The perception is that because Type B pays a lower rent the EU directive is being adhered to. However, a lower rent also means lower profit. In other words, the Standard Formula fails to take into account Type B?s lower profit margin. The requirement is for a mathematical argument (i.e. an equation) that demonstrates the discriminatory nature of the Standard Formula for use within ongoing litigation and as part of a national campaign: http://www.fairpint.org.uk/ One proposed (albeit simplistic) solution is to carry out two calculations based on the same sales turnover: but one using the actual cost figures of a Type B pub while the other uses figures commensurate with a Type A pub. Any difference in the result would be evidence of inequality. Furthermore, the difference can be equalised by iterating with a variable Profit to Rent Ratio until both A and B?type Landlord?s profits are the same. The resulting difference in the Ratios for A and B-type pubs would also serve to quantify the inequality.

ruthmct Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My elderly neighbour told me that this morning > about 7.30am, she saw a white lorry outside our > house, looking much like the one that the council > use for such pick-ups, and two men wearing > reflective jackets got out, and one started taking > photographs of our house. This is only a possibility but the council workmen might have been moonlighting. They turned up early to see whether the 'scooters' were worth selling to a third party (hence the photographs) but either decided they weren't worth the trouble or couldn't find a buyer during the course of the day? The other three callers might have been scrap dealers contacted by the council workers, who were trying to cut them out of the deal?

What's wrong with sending a PM? The guy might be trying to avoid having his firm's email spammed by harvester bots.

I live at the top of one of the highest hills in South London - 235 feet above sea level. Yet my home will lie under 75 feet of water if all the Antarctic ice melts.

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If we have already moved away from petrol engines, > if we are moving our freight in trains powered by > clean renewable/nuclear/fusion power, then the > trucks aren't grinding and the carbon doesn't need > trading. Thermo-nuclear reactors on wheels speeding back and forth across open countryside - are you serious? > clean renewable/nuclear/fusion power, Nuclear is hardly 'clean' - fission reactors are potential sources of the dirtiest and deadliest pollution conceivable - and they'd be pumping more waste heat into the atmosphere than that presently generated by greenhouse gasses (the same goes for wind power, in that respect). Fusion power is still a pipe dream that is unlikely to be realised in time to make any difference. The only viable long-term solution is to stabilise human population at the planet's natural carrying capacity - somewhere between one and two billion people - sooner rather than later: fuelled by renewable wood, steam and horses.

alphacalifragelistic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone have a convincing explanation of how we are > all going to get out of this mess? In my (admittedly controversial) opinion, any man-made dynamical system in metastable equilibrium is more likely to encounter a Catastrophe theory-type cusp than to re-stabilise itself through mutually agreed self-sacrifice for the greater good.

The problem was that US banks had over $700 billion of toxic assets on their books. Congress voted $700 billion of TARP money to buy those toxic assets from the banks. Instead, the TARP money was just given to the banks. So the banks still have over $700 billion of toxic assets on their books. The original problem is still 'out there'! Those same US banks are now playing silly-buggers by marking up the value of those toxic assets to their pre-Crisis levels and claiming huge profits while an ever-gullible public climbs aboard the next bull-market roller-coaster. This madness can only end in disaster.

Wouldn't that be a circular argument in the case of a self-referencing neologism such a cromulent?

Hmmm. Wouldn't that only embiggen cromulent's cromularity?

It?s only safe until the random hand of fate decides otherwise. We are just fish in a barrel - someone has to be the next victim. Past experience is not a reliable guide to the future where crime is concerned. Personal safety should never be taken for granted.

Duh! I've just read that the word cromulent itself is incromulent!

That was a bit naughty JL. When would you have owned up if BBW hadn't blown the whistle? I was on to you immediately, mind: as soon as I read, "I have performed several covert operations for the CIA." As a former agent I know that no real agent would ever make such an admission on a forum ? you can fool some of the people ?. but not me!

The Name of the Rose and Foucault's Pendulum were masterpieces in my view. I found Eco's subsequent novels somewhat disappointing. In real life professor Eco is a semiotician: one who studies signs and symbols and their meaning. Dan Brown describes Robert Langdon as a ?symbologist,? which is a clumsy term for semiotician. My guess is that Brown chose symbologist to obscure the influence Eco had on his work.

Why depressing? I found the Da Vinci Code thoroughly entertaining and am looking forward to reading The Lost Symbol.

???? Wrote: > And that sums the drawing room's dilemma up So, what you're saying is less rhubarb and more custard pies?

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > they actually make it inedible so that people don't > come and raid the bins for cheap food. We don't even let the poor eat out of trash bins! What does that say about the kind of world we live in?

Contagious?

I?m appalled at how much food is being thrown away. Last week I saw a box of apples and plums just past their best that a street trader had left on Peckham Rye for collection. I asked if I could take the fruit and he nodded. I felt like a tramp but I hate to see good food go to waste, especially when so many people are going hungry. I now have several jars of yummy apple and plum jam and a year's supply of applesauce! (The box also contained two oranges whose peel provided enough pectin to set the conserves nicely.) A few weeks ago I rescued two dozen red bell peppers that had wilted slightly and now have a couple of months? supply of delicious roasted peppers in my freezer. Last month another street trader threw away dozens of boxes of imported white grapes but I only got there after the bin men had started taking them away. Most were still edible. A friend who works at a local supermarket tells me that it?s company policy to bin hundreds of pounds worth of food every day rather than sell it off cheaply to staff or customers or give it away to charities. Aren?t there any charities that collect unwanted food from street markets and shops for distribution to the needy?

Multi-bolt locks that throw bolts into the top, sides and bottom of the doorframe afford better security. They are expensive but highly effective, especially if used in addition to conventional door lock(s). For examples see: http://www.securitech.com/D00-multi-point-locking-alternatives.html (not an endorsement)