Discussion:
Numbers for PTD boink please
Add Reply
Katy Jennison
2018-07-04 07:07:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.

(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
--
Katy Jennison
Katy Jennison
2018-07-04 07:08:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
--
Katy Jennison
charles
2018-07-04 07:32:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the M25 +
Park & Ride.
Post by Katy Jennison
--
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Katy Jennison
2018-07-04 08:56:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the M25 +
Park & Ride.
Good! But check the trains - the main Oxford station is closed for a
couple of weeks. Ox
--
Katy Jennison
Katy Jennison
2018-07-04 08:58:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the M25 +
Park & Ride.
Good! But check trains: the main Oxford station is closed for two
weeks, although Oxford Parkway is open and there are buses from there to
the centre of Oxford.
--
Katy Jennison
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-04 12:18:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the M25 +
Park & Ride.
Good! But check trains: the main Oxford station is closed for two
weeks, although Oxford Parkway is open and there are buses from there to
the centre of Oxford.
It seems I get to take the bus from Heathrow to Oxford on Sunday morning (I
will be met). How long is that ride?

And then from Oxford to Brighton "early" Wednesday morning (or might that be
a train).
Jerry Friedman
2018-07-04 13:00:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
...

My MC worked fine in England.
--
Jerry Friedman
Tony Cooper
2018-07-04 13:36:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:00:31 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
...
My MC worked fine in England.
The credit card companies advise cardholders to notify the credit card
company before traveling out of the US if the card is to be used. A
regular Visa or Mastercard is usually accepted, but may be rejected if
the company hasn't been notified in advance. It's not that the card
is invalid, but that some sort of possible fraud is caught by an
algorithm.

A simple phone call to the number on the back of the card will reveal
all, or is that another area of "too difficult research"?

I had to laugh when reading "If paying is involved". If? Local
attendees may have to do a whip-round if it is anticipated that
foreign guests eat free.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Kerr-Mudd,John
2018-07-04 14:26:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:00:31 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought
to book the restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or
MasterCard work?
...
My MC worked fine in England.
The credit card companies advise cardholders to notify the credit card
company before traveling out of the US if the card is to be used. A
regular Visa or Mastercard is usually accepted, but may be rejected if
the company hasn't been notified in advance. It's not that the card
is invalid, but that some sort of possible fraud is caught by an
algorithm.
A simple phone call to the number on the back of the card will reveal
all, or is that another area of "too difficult research"?
I had to laugh when reading "If paying is involved". If? Local
attendees may have to do a whip-round if it is anticipated that
foreign guests eat free.
PTD is clearly an esteemed guest of honour, and will not have to put his
hand in his pocket. </typical PTD conclusion-jump>
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-04 15:30:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:00:31 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought
to book the restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or
MasterCard work?
My MC worked fine in England.
The credit card companies advise cardholders to notify the credit card
company before traveling out of the US if the card is to be used. A
regular Visa or Mastercard is usually accepted, but may be rejected if
the company hasn't been notified in advance. It's not that the card
is invalid, but that some sort of possible fraud is caught by an
algorithm.
A simple phone call to the number on the back of the card will reveal
all, or is that another area of "too difficult research"?
I had to laugh when reading "If paying is involved". If? Local
attendees may have to do a whip-round if it is anticipated that
foreign guests eat free.
PTD is clearly an esteemed guest of honour, and will not have to put his
hand in his pocket. </typical PTD conclusion-jump>
Hey Shithead, if you're not attending, keep your trap and your lying
fingers shut.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-04 15:28:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:00:31 -0600, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
My MC worked fine in England.
The credit card companies advise cardholders to notify the credit card
company before traveling out of the US if the card is to be used. A
regular Visa or Mastercard is usually accepted, but may be rejected if
the company hasn't been notified in advance. It's not that the card
is invalid, but that some sort of possible fraud is caught by an
algorithm.
A simple phone call to the number on the back of the card will reveal
all, or is that another area of "too difficult research"?
I had to laugh when reading "If paying is involved". If? Local
attendees may have to do a whip-round if it is anticipated that
foreign guests eat free.
The only whipping needs to be of you.

It's very impressive that you're familiar with the policies of the
establishment that Katy has proposed: your certainty as to which cards,
if any, they might accept. Does that go back to your visit 50 years ago
in your sandals-with-black-socks?
charles
2018-07-04 17:38:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the
M25 + Park & Ride.
Good! But check trains: the main Oxford station is closed for two
weeks, although Oxford Parkway is open and there are buses from there
to the centre of Oxford.
It seems I get to take the bus from Heathrow to Oxford on Sunday morning
(I will be met). How long is that ride?
supposedly 90 minutes
Post by Peter T. Daniels
And then from Oxford to Brighton "early" Wednesday morning (or might that
be a train).
Train might be best; Oxford > Reading > Gatwick > Brighton. This avoids
travelling through London.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Katy Jennison
2018-07-04 18:26:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
If paying is involved, will cash be needed? Do foreign Visa or MasterCard
work?
No, yes. (That earlier sentence should of course read Tuesday -- I
apologise if anyone was misled.)
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the M25 +
Park & Ride.
Good! But check trains: the main Oxford station is closed for two
weeks, although Oxford Parkway is open and there are buses from there to
the centre of Oxford.
It seems I get to take the bus from Heathrow to Oxford on Sunday morning (I
will be met). How long is that ride?
Depends on the time and day; Sunday morning probably not much more than
an hour and a half.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
And then from Oxford to Brighton "early" Wednesday morning (or might that be
a train).
Could be either, but in either case it means going via London. The
train would leave from Oxford Parkway, whither you'd need to get a bus
form central Oxford.
--
Katy Jennison
charles
2018-07-04 17:30:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by charles
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Oops, make that TUESDAY 17 July.
In which case - yes. count me in. I'll come by train, easier than the
M25 + Park & Ride.
Good! But check trains: the main Oxford station is closed for two
weeks, although Oxford Parkway is open and there are buses from there to
the centre of Oxford.
Thanks for that.

I have checked and there are some trains running from Reading to Oxford;
buses (from Didcot) are only replacing this service for one train an hour,
leaving 2 per hour as rail.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
charles
2018-07-04 07:24:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Katy

do you mean Wednesday 18th or Tuesday 17th? If the latter, I can come, but
I am not free for the former.

Charles
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Paul Wolff
2018-07-04 14:12:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at 1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
I can't say yet. It's in my diary, but there's also a challenging
two-day tournament near Salisbury that I really want to play in.
However, I've been given a hard stare and told I can't spare the time
from work for yet more croquet, so maybe a few hours in Oxford will be
an acceptable compromise. We'll see.
--
Paul
Richard Tobin
2018-07-04 14:13:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming? We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
I won't be able to make it down to Oxford.

-- Richard
the Omrud
2018-07-04 16:45:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.

As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home Counties
traffic. That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
--
David
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-04 17:14:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home Counties
traffic. That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event --
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.

Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
--
athel
the Omrud
2018-07-04 21:52:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home
Counties traffic.  That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event --
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure. I suppose we should ask about filming in the hallowed
halls.
--
David
Janet
2018-07-05 12:46:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <Dkb%C.1011795$***@fx27.am4>, ***@gmail.com
says...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home
Counties traffic.  That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event --
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure. I suppose we should ask about filming in the hallowed
halls.
Forget pictures, what AUE wants is sound recordings of all the boink
accents/dialects.

Janet.
Lewis
2018-07-05 12:53:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home
Counties traffic.  That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event --
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure. I suppose we should ask about filming in the hallowed
halls.
Forget pictures, what AUE wants is sound recordings of all the boink
accents/dialects.
With particular attention to how everyone says cot caught and mary marry
merry.
--
If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.
a***@gmail.com
2018-07-05 18:33:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Janet
says...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished by
means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful Home
Counties traffic.  That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event --
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure. I suppose we should ask about filming in the hallowed
halls.
Forget pictures, what AUE wants is sound recordings of all the boink
accents/dialects.
Janet.
I think that would be amazing! I second that!

Respectfully,
Navi
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-05 18:43:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by a***@gmail.com
Post by the Omrud
Post by the Omrud
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from> > >>>
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to> >
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the> >
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Bodleian website.)
Yes, presumably you already have me on the guest list.
As reported elsewhere, I may be a little late for the lecture because>
Post by the Omrud
the last stage of the rail journey is actually to be accomplished
by> > >> means of a bus, which will have to negotiate the dreadful
Home> > >> Counties traffic.  That'll be me sneaking in at the back.
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event -->
Post by the Omrud
the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure. I suppose we should ask about filming in the
hallowed> > halls.
Forget pictures, what AUE wants is sound recordings of all the boink>
accents/dialects.
Janet.
I think that would be amazing! I second that!
I third it.
--
athel
the Omrud
2018-07-05 19:04:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by a***@gmail.com
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I hope we're going to be seeing some photos of this historic event
--> the boink, I mean, not your late arrival.
Maybe a video of part of the lecture.
Photos, I'm sure.  I suppose we should ask about filming in the
hallowed halls.
Forget pictures, what AUE wants is sound recordings of all the boink>
accents/dialects.
I think that would be amazing! I second that!
I third it.
I'll see what I can do, although it will probably be noisy in the
restaurant.
--
David
the Omrud
2018-07-05 14:11:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0

I imagine it will have changed.
--
David
Harrison Hill
2018-07-05 14:52:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
In Oxford a "slum" was defined as (what looks to be) a "very nice area
with wide streets"? :)

My father-in-law was one of nine surviving children, The family (of eleven)
lived in a two-up two-down in the Bricklayers Arms slums of SE London - and
that house was shared with another (related) family, who had the top floor.

He went on to become a successful Engineer - and that was thanks to the
Grammar School system; which gained him a place into Wilsons Grammar,
which is nowadays in Croydon.

That is why people flock to London. Nothing here is impossible.
Harrison Hill
2018-07-05 15:35:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
In Oxford a "slum" was defined as (what looks to be) a "very nice area
with wide streets"? :)
My father-in-law was one of nine surviving children, The family (of eleven)
lived in a two-up two-down in the Bricklayers Arms slums of SE London - and
that house was shared with another (related) family, who had the top floor.
He went on to become a successful Engineer - and that was thanks to the
Grammar School system; which gained him a place into Wilsons Grammar,
which is nowadays in Croydon.
That is why people flock to London. Nothing here is impossible.
To complete this story, which must be typical of many poverty-stricken
London slum children:

The entire family of children prospered. Their father survived the 1st
World War, but died shortly afterwards of consumption. To lose the
breadwinner would normally be catastrophic; but the eldest brother then
took control of the family. These were the three ways he guided them all
to prosperity:

1) Grammar school.
2) Newspaper Printing (if they were male), well-paid and heavily Unionised.
3) Marriage to a suitable husband.

They have no fond memories of him but he rescued them all :)
Tony Cooper
2018-07-05 16:27:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 07:52:54 -0700 (PDT), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
That is why people flock to London. Nothing here is impossible.
Really? Including finding a place to park?
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
charles
2018-07-05 16:34:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 07:52:54 -0700 (PDT), Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
That is why people flock to London. Nothing here is impossible.
Really? Including finding a place to park?
Nothing is impossible - if you're rich enough.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Stefan Ram
2018-07-05 17:12:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
That is why people flock to London. Nothing here is impossible.
Quoting (translated into English) sentences containing
"London" from a German-language article I read recently:

|London
[after Trump's rise and the Brexit]
...
|is losing value for companies and thus also attractiveness,
|but it is still too expensive to return to mixed urban life,
|where people not only work but also live.
...
|Jeremy Cliffe (office manager of "The Economist" in Berlin)
|says, Berlin must never become a victim of his own success,
|like London, for many no longer habitable.

. "Not habitable" seems to refer to extraordinary costs
of living and housing in London (reportedly) as far as
I understand it.
the Omrud
2018-07-05 19:00:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
In Oxford a "slum" was defined as (what looks to be) a "very nice area
with wide streets"? :)
My great-uncle, who is the boy in the photos, gave me a detailed history
of the family's life in Oxford (my grandmother died in her early 60s but
her little brother lived to be 98). He said that the family had been
rehoused a little after this photo was taken "as part of the slum
clearances". Certainly, as far as he was concerned, he'd started life
in a slum. The house was clearly solid as it's still standing, but I
suspect the interior was a mess and probably massively overcrowded.
--
David
Paul Wolff
2018-07-05 15:14:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to
book the restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Just a bit, but that piece of road and the bridge are easily
recognisable. The Nag's Head pub on the other side of the road, not
quite in the picture, where the landlord was glassed one evening by an
ungrateful customer, is something else now.
--
Paul
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-05 15:56:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to suggest "slum."
Paul Wolff
2018-07-05 17:39:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to suggest "slum."
On the usage of 'slum': I can't think of any town in Britain now that
has slums, as they used to be when slums were really slums. Soon there
won't be anyone left who remembers them from personal experience. And
I'd be hard put to it to come up with a good definition of a slum. The
OED (Shorter) says "An overcrowded district of a town or city, having
squalid housing conditions and inhabited by very poor people; a street
situated in such a district (freq. in pl.). Also transf., a house
materially unfit for human habitation.

In the photos, the road to the left before the bridge is Upper Fisher
Row, and some of the terrace houses down there could have been at home
in a slum, I think.
--
Paul
Katy Jennison
2018-07-06 06:04:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well.  The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos.  I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to suggest "slum."
On the usage of 'slum': I can't think of any town in Britain now that
has slums, as they used to be when slums were really slums. Soon there
won't be anyone left who remembers them from personal experience. And
I'd be hard put to it to come up with a good definition of a slum. The
OED (Shorter) says "An overcrowded district of a town or city, having
squalid housing conditions and inhabited by very poor people; a street
situated in such a district (freq. in pl.). Also transf., a house
materially unfit for human habitation.
In the photos, the road to the left before the bridge is Upper Fisher
Row, and some of the terrace houses down there could have been at home
in a slum, I think.
The width of a street is not necessarily an indicator. Areas which were
originally built for and inhabited by the better-off sometimes later
became slums. Overcrowding is a salient characteristic, but also the
drainage system or lack of. Rivers and streams are lovely things to
live next to if they're bordered by trees and full of fish, but not so
much after someone upstream has built a factory or a row of houses
discharging into the river.

In the case of Hythe Bridge Street, though, it was this wide not because
it was originally for the rich but because it was where boats and barges
(on the Oxford canal) were loaded and unloaded. Hythe = wharf. The
buildings were warehouses, with dwelling-places above them.
--
Katy Jennison
Paul Wolff
2018-07-06 10:24:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well.  The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos.  I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to
suggest "slum."
On the usage of 'slum': I can't think of any town in Britain now
that has slums, as they used to be when slums were really slums. Soon
there won't be anyone left who remembers them from personal
experience. And I'd be hard put to it to come up with a good
definition of a slum. The OED (Shorter) says "An overcrowded district
of a town or city, having squalid housing conditions and inhabited by
very poor people; a street situated in such a district (freq. in
pl.). Also transf., a house materially unfit for human habitation.
In the photos, the road to the left before the bridge is Upper
Fisher Row, and some of the terrace houses down there could have been
at home in a slum, I think.
The width of a street is not necessarily an indicator. Areas which
were originally built for and inhabited by the better-off sometimes
later became slums. Overcrowding is a salient characteristic, but also
the drainage system or lack of. Rivers and streams are lovely things
to live next to if they're bordered by trees and full of fish, but not
so much after someone upstream has built a factory or a row of houses
discharging into the river.
In the case of Hythe Bridge Street, though, it was this wide not
because it was originally for the rich but because it was where boats
and barges (on the Oxford canal) were loaded and unloaded. Hythe =
wharf. The buildings were warehouses, with dwelling-places above them.
As far as I can remember, the Oxford Canal terminates there. The bridge
crosses not the canal but a mill stream. The Thames/Isis splits into
many streams at Oxford.

Re Hythe: Today's Maidenhead, a town miles downstream of Oxford where
the London to Bath road crosses the Thames, was formerly Maidenhythe.

Oh, and I'll be a definite for the lunch. No disrespect to the speaker,
and although the seats look comfy enough, in my heart I'm still not
enthusiastic about ancient writing systems. I hope PTD's talk goes well,
whether or not I make it there.
--
Paul
Katy Jennison
2018-07-06 15:00:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from
Weston
Post by Katy Jennison
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well.  The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos.  I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to
suggest  "slum."
 On the usage of 'slum': I can't think of any town in Britain now
that  has slums, as they used to be when slums were really slums.
Soon there  won't be anyone left who remembers them from personal
experience. And  I'd be hard put to it to come up with a good
definition of a slum. The  OED (Shorter) says "An overcrowded
district of a town or city, having  squalid housing conditions and
inhabited by very poor people; a street  situated in such a district
(freq. in pl.). Also transf., a house  materially unfit for human
habitation.
 In the photos, the road to the left before the bridge is Upper
Fisher  Row, and some of the terrace houses down there could have
been at home  in a slum, I think.
The width of a street is not necessarily an indicator.  Areas which
were originally built for and inhabited by the better-off sometimes
later became slums.  Overcrowding is a salient characteristic, but
also the drainage system or lack of.  Rivers and streams are lovely
things to live next to if they're bordered by trees and full of fish,
but not so much after someone upstream has built a factory or a row of
houses discharging into the river.
In the case of Hythe Bridge Street, though, it was this wide not
because it was originally for the rich but because it was where boats
and barges (on the Oxford canal) were loaded and unloaded.  Hythe =
wharf.  The buildings were warehouses, with dwelling-places above them.
As far as I can remember, the Oxford Canal terminates there. The bridge
crosses not the canal but a mill stream. The Thames/Isis splits into
many streams at Oxford.
Yes. Wikipedia sums it up thus (and I think would have been corrected
by one of Oxford's many historians if it had got it wrong):

"Hythe Bridge, a flat late 19th century cast iron bridge on Hythe Bridge
Street constructed in 1861, spans the Castle Mill Stream, a backwater of
the River Thames. Just to the northeast is the southern end of the
Oxford Canal. This used to continue south of Hythe Bridge Street to a
basin that is now filled in to form a car park."
Post by Paul Wolff
Re Hythe: Today's Maidenhead, a town miles downstream of Oxford where
the London to Bath road crosses the Thames, was formerly Maidenhythe.
Oh, and I'll be a definite for the lunch. No disrespect to the speaker,
and although the seats look comfy enough, in my heart I'm still not
enthusiastic about ancient writing systems. I hope PTD's talk goes well,
whether or not I make it there.
--
Katy Jennison
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-07-05 23:07:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 08:56:31 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to suggest "slum."
I would need pix of a wider area to make such a judgement. There can be
slum dwellings adjacent to a wide street if the street is for vehicles
going to and from factories, etc.

Where I used to work in the 1960s in Manchester there were
factories/mills scattered around surrounded by small overcrowded houses,
slums. Most of the streets between the houses were narrow but there were
a few wider streets connecting the factories with the outside world.
While at that time the dwellings were classified a slums the living
conditions were not as bad as they would have been a couple of
generations earlier. Apart from some practical improvements and an
increase in real wages since then there had been a reduction in the
average family size. The average minimum income family in the 1960s no
longer had the ten or more children that had once been normal.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Harrison Hill
2018-07-06 13:27:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 08:56:31 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by the Omrud
Post by Katy Jennison
Lunch, probably at 2pm, probably at Quod (walking distance from Weston
Library), on Wednesday 17 July: who's coming?  We ought to book the
restaurant this week.
(To recap: his talk is at  1.00, tickets (free) obtainable via the
Bodleian website.)
Well, well, well. The pedestrian route from Oxford Station to the
Weston Library will take me directly past the door of the (then) slum
where my grandmother and her siblings lived, on Hythe Bridge Street.
And of which, thanks to my then to-be grandfather, I have photos. I'm
chuffed to bits.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0
I imagine it will have changed.
Though there's nothing in those four pix of your ancestors to suggest "slum."
I would need pix of a wider area to make such a judgement. There can be
slum dwellings adjacent to a wide street if the street is for vehicles
going to and from factories, etc.
Where I used to work in the 1960s in Manchester there were
factories/mills scattered around surrounded by small overcrowded houses,
slums. Most of the streets between the houses were narrow but there were
a few wider streets connecting the factories with the outside world.
While at that time the dwellings were classified a slums the living
conditions were not as bad as they would have been a couple of
generations earlier. Apart from some practical improvements and an
increase in real wages since then there had been a reduction in the
average family size. The average minimum income family in the 1960s no
longer had the ten or more children that had once been normal.
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
tough, but I'm not sure I have to worry too much about these people:

<Loading Image...>
the Omrud
2018-07-06 15:04:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
--
David
Harrison Hill
2018-07-06 17:37:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".

To achieve in today's world, I'd suggest:

1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)

2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
David Kleinecke
2018-07-06 18:11:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
Harrison Hill
2018-07-09 15:00:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
Spoken like a mathematician. Here are some maxims:

1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.

2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.

3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-09 16:21:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
Oh dear. Someone needs to tell Harrison about the First Law of Holes.
He seems to think that mathematics is what used to be called Sums when
I was at primary school.

Anyway, I leave it to David to dissect this nonsense.
--
athel
David Kleinecke
2018-07-09 21:02:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
You are confusing mathematics and computer "science". Don't worry -
a lot of that going around. All mathematics and computers have in
common is arithmetic.

Your error started with "Learn Maths." You can't learn Mathematics.
It is a life-long enterprise. You can learn Arithmetic.
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-10 08:45:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[snip]
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
You are confusing mathematics and computer "science". Don't worry -
a lot of that going around. All mathematics and computers have in
common is arithmetic.
You are looking down on Donald Knuth
and the Art of Computer Programming?
Lots of stuff in there that no computer can derive.
Post by David Kleinecke
Your error started with "Learn Maths." You can't learn Mathematics.
It is a life-long enterprise. You can learn Arithmetic.
Harrison is clueless, and attempting to educate him
is wearing out the fingers in vain,

Jan
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-10 12:26:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
You are confusing mathematics and computer "science". Don't worry -
a lot of that going around. All mathematics and computers have in
common is arithmetic.
You are looking down on Donald Knuth
and the Art of Computer Programming?
If his lousy taste in typography typifies his other work, then quite
justifiably. The word "art" in the title suggests something other than
scientific rigor.
Post by J. J. Lodder
Lots of stuff in there that no computer can derive.
Post by David Kleinecke
Your error started with "Learn Maths." You can't learn Mathematics.
It is a life-long enterprise. You can learn Arithmetic.
Harrison is clueless, and attempting to educate him
is wearing out the fingers in vain,
GordonD
2018-07-10 10:40:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
On Friday, July 6, 2018 at 10:37:12 AM UTC-7, Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow
in the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that
children had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of
Liverpool in the 1950s. David's ancestors live in a better
class of slum than that - and I would hope so too! All our
ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very* tough, but I'm
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry).
We've been middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that
time. The next two generations however kept up the "jump a
class every generation" pattern - my son has made up for me
"lagging a generation behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job
unless you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use
computers to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a
trivial calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be
broken down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to do
trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get all
the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus on
the slightly more important things - which are themselves a long
series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
You are confusing mathematics and computer "science". Don't worry - a
lot of that going around. All mathematics and computers have in
common is arithmetic.
Your error started with "Learn Maths." You can't learn Mathematics.
It is a life-long enterprise. You can learn Arithmetic.
WIWAL sitting my O-Grades (early 1970s) Mathematics and Arithmetic were
two separate exams.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
Harrison Hill
2018-07-10 12:51:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
2) Once you are there you will be the only one able to use computers
to do away with math and maths altogether. Maths is a trivial
calculating nonsense - easily computerised,
This is a very naive attitude toward mathematics.
1) No matter how complicated any task is, it can *always* be broken
down into a series of very trivial parts. The difficulty is
knowing what those trivial parts are, and in what order they need
to be done.
2) You don't need a complicated brain to organise a computer to
do trivial things - that is what they do best. Once you can get
all the trivial things done by a computer, you have time to focus
on the slightly more important things - which are themselves a
long series of trivial things.
3) The computer can keep on building - it has no limitations.
Humans do have limitations. The ones that think we don't are the
ones displaying those limitations most clearly.
You are confusing mathematics and computer "science". Don't worry -
a lot of that going around. All mathematics and computers have in
common is arithmetic.
Your error started with "Learn Maths." You can't learn Mathematics.
It is a life-long enterprise. You can learn Arithmetic.
A computer can learn anything that has a pattern; and - unlike a
mathematician - it starts from the point where arithmetic finishes;
having an infinite capacity to calculate anything reliably. If
maths can be explained to you, it can be explained to your computer.
Richard Tobin
2018-07-10 13:01:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
A computer can learn anything that has a pattern;
What makes you think that?

-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-10 13:09:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Harrison Hill
A computer can learn anything that has a pattern;
What makes you think that?
Naivety?

charles
2018-07-06 18:31:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harrison Hill
Post by the Omrud
Post by Harrison Hill
I can remember seeing children playing barefoot in the snow in
the "play streets" (streets closed off to cars - so that children
had somewhere to play safely), in the slums of Liverpool in the 1950s.
David's ancestors live in a better class of slum than that - and I
would hope so too! All our ancestors (not yours athel) had it *very*
<https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6hxsx5ba1ly8eto/AAAiq73_aya6dhIsBG8q5epia?dl=0&preview=O20-034-IMG-120-051_0002.jpg>
By this time my great-uncle had gained a scholarship to a decent school
(as did my grandfather on the other side, in Coventry). We've been
middle class since 1910 or so.
My family were Lower Middle Class railway workers at that time.
The next two generations however kept up the "jump a class every
generation" pattern - my son has made up for me "lagging a generation
behind".
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-06 19:40:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
charles
2018-07-06 21:06:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
an expense, multiple expenses
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2018-07-06 21:47:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
Yes, we use the plural. As here in 1.1:
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expense

expense
noun
[mass noun]

1 The cost incurred in or required for something.
‘conference rooms were equipped at great expense’
‘book into the best hotel you can find and hang the expense’

1.1 expenses The costs incurred in the performance of one's job or
a specific task.
‘his hotel and travel expenses’

1.2 count noun A thing on which one is required to spend money.
‘tolls are a daily expense’

Note that in 1.1 the definition of "expenses" (plural) uses "costs"
(plural). A expenses claim will often include a number of items, hence
the plural.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-06 21:57:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expense
expense
noun
[mass noun]
1 The cost incurred in or required for something.
‘conference rooms were equipped at great expense’
‘book into the best hotel you can find and hang the expense’
1.1 expenses The costs incurred in the performance of one's job or
a specific task.
‘his hotel and travel expenses’
1.2 count noun A thing on which one is required to spend money.
‘tolls are a daily expense’
Note that in 1.1 the definition of "expenses" (plural) uses "costs"
(plural). A expenses claim will often include a number of items, hence
the plural.
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
RH Draney
2018-07-07 01:13:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 12:40:58 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by Harrison Hill
1) Learn Maths. Maths is everything. You won't get a good job unless
you are good at Maths. (USE "Math"?)
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expense
Note that in 1.1 the definition of "expenses" (plural) uses "costs"
(plural). A expenses claim will often include a number of items, hence
the plural.
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
Even if you do, must we follow in your feetsteps?...r
Richard Tobin
2018-07-07 12:39:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expense
[...]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Note that in 1.1 the definition of "expenses" (plural) uses "costs"
(plural). A expenses claim will often include a number of items, hence
the plural.
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".

-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-07 13:31:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
as my employer said " you need maths to fill in your expenses claim form"
_There_ you use the plural! We just have "expense forms."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expense
Note that in 1.1 the definition of "expenses" (plural) uses "costs"
(plural). A expenses claim will often include a number of items, hence
the plural.
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?

Would others pad their "expenses account"?
Richard Tobin
2018-07-07 14:59:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...

-- Richard
the Omrud
2018-07-07 17:54:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.

Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
--
David
LFS
2018-07-08 04:52:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens farmer?
I don't think these are the same.  You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense".  "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years.   What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities.  The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
IME people used to profit from expense claims quite significantly. In
some organisations there was a culture of tacit approval for fiddling
expenses, on the basis that salaries were comparatively low.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-08 08:07:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a pie,
and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in an
expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a technical
term in itself, rather than simply the plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT.
Declaration with paper proof of VAT having been paid
make the VAT reclaimable,

Jan
charles
2018-07-08 10:10:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a
pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in
an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a
technical term in itself, rather than simply the plural of
"expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not one
I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
the Omrud
2018-07-08 11:10:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a
pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in
an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a
technical term in itself, rather than simply the plural of
"expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not one
I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
A VAT invoice does not indicate who has paid, indeed it's entirely
possible that nobody has paid when the invoice is presented for VAT
purposes. Our advice was to give a hotel our company office address,
but in practice common sense prevails.
--
David
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-08 11:34:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a
pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in
an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a
technical term in itself, rather than simply the plural of
"expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not one
I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
I'm not in that business,
but I think this is automatically taken care of
if you pay with a company credit card,

Jan
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-08 12:38:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in a
pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an item in
an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has become a
technical term in itself, rather than simply the plural of
"expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not one
I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we have
(had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly and
necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business activities. The
effect is financially neutral to the individual, although it did allow
me to travel to some interesting places.
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
Paul Wolff
2018-07-08 13:03:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
Is it worth nit-picking over the use of the same word twice? Yes, of
course.

"Reclaim" has (technically) different meanings above. I think it's
accurate to say, as Peter did, that on leaving the EU a foreign visitor
can reclaim the tax paid on goods he's taking away with him. I don't
know how it's done, but tax paid by the purchaser during the visit on
certain things for export is refunded on or after leaving. (Though in
the UK, the tax rate for printed books is zero percent, so there's
nothing to reclaim).

The "reclaim" in the first two quoted paragraphs (Jan then Charles)
actually means something like "offset". A VAT-registered person must
collect VAT on his/its sales ("output VAT"), but may offset against that
the VAT it has paid its suppliers ("input VAT") before paying the net
output VAT to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. If input tax exceeds
output tax in a VAT accounting period, then it's correct that an actual
reclaim of that balance is allowed.

Such an interesting topic...
--
Paul
charles
2018-07-08 15:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
Is it worth nit-picking over the use of the same word twice? Yes, of
course.
"Reclaim" has (technically) different meanings above. I think it's
accurate to say, as Peter did, that on leaving the EU a foreign visitor
can reclaim the tax paid on goods he's taking away with him. I don't
know how it's done, but tax paid by the purchaser during the visit on
certain things for export is refunded on or after leaving. (Though in
the UK, the tax rate for printed books is zero percent, so there's
nothing to reclaim).
The "reclaim" in the first two quoted paragraphs (Jan then Charles)
actually means something like "offset". A VAT-registered person must
collect VAT on his/its sales ("output VAT"), but may offset against that
the VAT it has paid its suppliers ("input VAT") before paying the net
output VAT to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. If input tax exceeds
output tax in a VAT accounting period, then it's correct that an actual
reclaim of that balance is allowed.
as happens with our Parish Council. We can reclaim VAT on purchases, but
don't charge any on income - since we don't have an income stream other
than Council Tax.
Post by Paul Wolff
Such an interesting topic...
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-08 17:13:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Wolff
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT having
been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I don't
know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
Is it worth nit-picking over the use of the same word twice? Yes, of
course.
"Reclaim" has (technically) different meanings above. I think it's
accurate to say, as Peter did, that on leaving the EU a foreign visitor
can reclaim the tax paid on goods he's taking away with him. I don't
know how it's done, but tax paid by the purchaser during the visit on
certain things for export is refunded on or after leaving. (Though in
the UK, the tax rate for printed books is zero percent, so there's
nothing to reclaim).
The "reclaim" in the first two quoted paragraphs (Jan then Charles)
actually means something like "offset". A VAT-registered person must
collect VAT on his/its sales ("output VAT"), but may offset against that
the VAT it has paid its suppliers ("input VAT") before paying the net
output VAT to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. If input tax exceeds
output tax in a VAT accounting period, then it's correct that an actual
reclaim of that balance is allowed.
Such an interesting topic...
Especially so if you are on the receiving end...

Jan
charles
2018-07-08 15:12:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a
chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-08 15:37:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
I don't know how much of a fuss the Brexiters made over VAT before the
referendum, but it's something they could legitimately have bitched
about if they understood it. Before the UK joined the EEC there was
purchase tax rather than VAT -- superficially similar to VAT but
different in some very important details. Purchase tax was levied on
wholesale prices, which meant that only a relatively small number of
wholesalers needed to keep proper accounts that could be inspected by
the tax people, instead of the vast army of retailers that now have to
spend a significant amount time keeping their VAT records in order. In
addition, it was relatively easy for the Government to set different
rates of purchase tax for different sorts of product, whereas it's a
lot more complicated with VAT.

Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
--
athel
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-07-08 16:26:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a
chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
I don't know how much of a fuss the Brexiters made over VAT before the
referendum, but it's something they could legitimately have bitched
about if they understood it. Before the UK joined the EEC there was
purchase tax rather than VAT -- superficially similar to VAT but
different in some very important details. Purchase tax was levied on
wholesale prices, which meant that only a relatively small number of
wholesalers needed to keep proper accounts that could be inspected by
the tax people, instead of the vast army of retailers that now have to
spend a significant amount time keeping their VAT records in order. In
addition, it was relatively easy for the Government to set different
rates of purchase tax for different sorts of product, whereas it's a
lot more complicated with VAT.
Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
The Leave campaign was keen to see VAT removed from some items,
particularly domestic electricity and gas, but never campaigned for
scrapping it altogether IIRC. However, the Commons Treasury
Committee is considering whether, post-Brexit, VAT should be scrapped
in favour of a less bureaucratic and more watertight system.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-08 17:06:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a
chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
I don't know how much of a fuss the Brexiters made over VAT before the
referendum, but it's something they could legitimately have bitched
about if they understood it. Before the UK joined the EEC there was
purchase tax rather than VAT -- superficially similar to VAT but
different in some very important details. Purchase tax was levied on
wholesale prices, which meant that only a relatively small number of
wholesalers needed to keep proper accounts that could be inspected by
the tax people, instead of the vast army of retailers that now have to
spend a significant amount time keeping their VAT records in order. In
addition, it was relatively easy for the Government to set different
rates of purchase tax for different sorts of product, whereas it's a
lot more complicated with VAT.
Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
That must have been a very, very long time ago. 30/- = $3.60 (before the
floating -- was that something Nixon did?), and in 1968 when I started
buying records, the list price would be about $7.98 for the full-price
labels. Each label had a budget label at about half that, where they
mostly reissued earlier recordings. Angel was the US outlet for EMI, and
they were notorious for their lousy sound quality. (Modern CD reissues of
1960s EMI items show that the fault was in the record-pressing, not the
recordings.) Its budget label was called Seraphim. Columbia had Odyssey.
RCA's may have been Victor. Early on they had Camden, named for their
home town -- most of Caruso's celebrated recordings were made in Camden, NJ. I don't recall that the three that eventually became Polygram --
Decca (London in the US), DG(G), and Philips -- had special labels for
their lower-priced items, but they were priced variously.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-08 17:30:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a
chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
I don't know how much of a fuss the Brexiters made over VAT before the
referendum, but it's something they could legitimately have bitched
about if they understood it. Before the UK joined the EEC there was
purchase tax rather than VAT -- superficially similar to VAT but
different in some very important details. Purchase tax was levied on
wholesale prices, which meant that only a relatively small number of
wholesalers needed to keep proper accounts that could be inspected by
the tax people, instead of the vast army of retailers that now have to
spend a significant amount time keeping their VAT records in order. In
addition, it was relatively easy for the Government to set different
rates of purchase tax for different sorts of product, whereas it's a
lot more complicated with VAT.
Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
That must have been a very, very long time ago. 30/- = $3.60 (before the
floating -- was that something Nixon did?), and in 1968 when I started
buying records, the list price would be about $7.98 for the full-price
labels.
I was mostly buying records in the UK between about 1962 and 1967.
During that period full-price record prices remained pretty stable at
39/6, which, before Harold Wilson's devaluation in 1967, was about
$5.53 -- significantly less than your $7.98, but not a huge difference.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Each label had a budget label at about half that, where they
mostly reissued earlier recordings. Angel was the US outlet for EMI, and
they were notorious for their lousy sound quality. (Modern CD reissues of
1960s EMI items show that the fault was in the record-pressing, not the
recordings.) Its budget label was called Seraphim. Columbia had Odyssey.
RCA's may have been Victor. Early on they had Camden, named for their
home town -- most of Caruso's celebrated recordings were made in
Camden, NJ. I don't recall that the three that eventually became
Polygram --
Decca (London in the US), DG(G), and Philips -- had special labels for
their lower-priced items, but they were priced variously.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-08 19:26:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
That must have been a very, very long time ago. 30/- = $3.60 (before the
floating -- was that something Nixon did?), and in 1968 when I started
buying records, the list price would be about $7.98 for the full-price
labels.
I was mostly buying records in the UK between about 1962 and 1967.
During that period full-price record prices remained pretty stable at
39/6, which, before Harold Wilson's devaluation in 1967, was about
$5.53 -- significantly less than your $7.98, but not a huge difference.
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax?) to the price, so your figure
is not comparable. A nearly 33% tax is unconscionable.

I don't know what "Wilson's devaluation" is. Before the currencies
floated, but after the exchange rate changed from $5 to $2.40 (i.e.
my whole life; that change had to do with the gold standard, which
has to do with 1933 or 1934), 1d = 1c.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Each label had a budget label at about half that, where they
mostly reissued earlier recordings. Angel was the US outlet for EMI, and
they were notorious for their lousy sound quality. (Modern CD reissues of
1960s EMI items show that the fault was in the record-pressing, not the
recordings.) Its budget label was called Seraphim. Columbia had Odyssey.
RCA's may have been Victor. Early on they had Camden, named for their
home town -- most of Caruso's celebrated recordings were made in
Camden, NJ. I don't recall that the three that eventually became
Polygram --
Decca (London in the US), DG(G), and Philips -- had special labels for
their lower-priced items, but they were priced variously.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-08 20:37:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Incidentally gramophone records were almost the only item for which the
tax component was there for everyone to see -- everyone who subscribed
to the Gramophone, anyway, so one could see that the typical price of a
classical LP was something like 30/- + 9/6 tax.
That must have been a very, very long time ago. 30/- = $3.60 (before the
floating -- was that something Nixon did?), and in 1968 when I started
buying records, the list price would be about $7.98 for the full-price
labels.
I was mostly buying records in the UK between about 1962 and 1967.
During that period full-price record prices remained pretty stable at
39/6, which, before Harold Wilson's devaluation in 1967, was about
$5.53 -- significantly less than your $7.98, but not a huge difference.
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
) to the price, so your figure
is not comparable. A nearly 33% tax is unconscionable.
Unconscionable or not, that's what it was.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't know what "Wilson's devaluation" is. Before the currencies
floated, but after the exchange rate changed from $5 to $2.40 (i.e.
my whole life; that change had to do with the gold standard, which
has to do with 1933 or 1934), 1d = 1c.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Each label had a budget label at about half that, where they
mostly reissued earlier recordings. Angel was the US outlet for EMI, and
they were notorious for their lousy sound quality. (Modern CD reissues of
1960s EMI items show that the fault was in the record-pressing, not the
recordings.) Its budget label was called Seraphim. Columbia had Odyssey.
RCA's may have been Victor. Early on they had Camden, named for their
home town -- most of Caruso's celebrated recordings were made in
Camden, NJ. I don't recall that the three that eventually became
Polygram --
Decca (London in the US), DG(G), and Philips -- had special labels for
their lower-priced items, but they were priced variously.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-09 04:02:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-07-09 15:04:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-09 16:12:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The buyer participates in the sale just as much as the seller.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-09 16:23:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
The buyer participates in the sale just as much as the seller.
--
athel
Ken Blake
2018-07-09 18:23:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:23:11 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Note the word "outrageous" in "the slings and arrows of outrageous
fortune." It has a foot and a half.
Jerry Friedman
2018-07-09 22:05:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:23:11 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Note the word "outrageous" in "the slings and arrows of outrageous
fortune." It has a foot and a half.
:-)
--
Jerry Friedman
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-10 05:55:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken Blake
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:23:11 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Note the word "outrageous" in "the slings and arrows of outrageous
fortune." It has a foot and a half.
OK. That's an answer to PTD rather than to me. Although he clearly
specified "a word" I was thinking of the sort of feet at the ends my
legs.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-10 12:23:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Ken Blake
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 18:23:11 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Note the word "outrageous" in "the slings and arrows of outrageous
fortune." It has a foot and a half.
OK. That's an answer to PTD rather than to me. Although he clearly
specified "a word" I was thinking of the sort of feet at the ends my
legs.
A technique that often leads to amusing statements.

How dull computer engineers must be, with their pervasive insistence on
lack of ambiguity.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-09 21:27:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Nonetheless, "sesquipedalian" is the word.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
The buyer participates in the sale just as much as the seller.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-10 05:56:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
The number of feet is an integer; the number of years in some interval is not.
Nonetheless, "sesquipedalian" is the word.
Did anyone say it wasn't?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
The buyer participates in the sale just as much as the seller.
--
athel
Richard Tobin
2018-07-09 19:38:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You just like sesquipedality. (How can a word have a foot and a half?)
When Horace referred to words a foot and a half long, he didn't mean
metrical feet, but everyday 12-inch ones. The word was
self-referential from the start.

-- Richard
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-09 16:54:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
You seem to have added the "tax" (sales tax)?
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
There must be some deep metaphysical significance to the choice of label,
"sales" vs. "purchase" tax.
Not really. It just states the truth that it is the purchaser not the
seller who pays the tax.
Money goes round in circles, so everybody pays,
and everybody has a share,

Jan
s***@my-deja.com
2018-07-09 23:59:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
VAT is a sales tax.

It is paid in full by the ultimate retail consumer but collected by the authorities at every stage of manufacturing and distribution
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-10 05:57:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
VAT is a sales tax.
OK. I should have written "We've never had 'sales tax'".
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is paid in full by the ultimate retail consumer but collected by the
authorities at every stage of manufacturing and distribution
--
athel
charles
2018-07-10 06:45:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
VAT is a sales tax.
It is paid in full by the ultimate retail consumer but collected by the
authorities at every stage of manufacturing and distribution
but VAT isn't only a sales tax, it's a tax on services, too.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Mark Brader
2018-07-10 07:16:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by s***@my-deja.com
VAT is a sales tax.
but VAT isn't only a sales tax, it's a tax on services, too.
It's a sales tax on services, too.
--
Mark Brader "This must be a serious issue!
Toronto It's spawned a new interjection!"
***@vex.net --Steve Summit
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-07-10 10:55:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark Brader
Post by charles
Post by s***@my-deja.com
VAT is a sales tax.
but VAT isn't only a sales tax, it's a tax on services, too.
It's a sales tax on services, too.
--
athel
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-10 11:18:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@my-deja.com
VAT is a sales tax.
Mark Brader systematically falsifies all attributions,
to such an extent that he can't even keep track of what he did himself.
After his interventions the only way to find out who wrote what
is to go back to an unfalsified pre-Mark posting.

And again:
Dear Mark, can you PLEASE mend the errors of your ways?

Jan
Paul Wolff
2018-07-10 12:59:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark Brader
Post by charles
Post by s***@my-deja.com
VAT is a sales tax.
but VAT isn't only a sales tax, it's a tax on services, too.
It's a sales tax on services, too.
No point in arguing whether to attach it to the sale or to the purchase.
It's simply a transaction tax collected by a party who receives payment
(terms and conditions apply).
--
Paul
J. J. Lodder
2018-07-10 08:45:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Purchase tax. We've never had sales tax, and at that time we didn't have VAT.
VAT is a sales tax.
There is more to the economy than sales.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is paid in full by the ultimate retail consumer but collected by the
authorities at every stage of manufacturing and distribution
In theory yes, in practice no.
A business will have a VAT number,
and will charge another business
(if they trust it) ex-VAT prices,
while quoting their VAT number.

All this transfer of money to and from the taxman
is (almost always) in computers or on paper only.
The taxman will accept an accountants report, usually.
Brexit may change that, for Britain,
which by itself will already be a good reason
for moving business to elsewhere in the EU,

Jan

PS Last weeks newspaper had an article about Tim Cook
being really worried about Trumps equally clueless tariffs.
Apple's iPhones are 'designed in the USA, assembled in China'.
In reality parts come from all over the world, including the USA.
A trade war may hit Apple's core business quite hard.
Unlike VAT, those tariffs are cumulative.
For the short term Apple is stockpiling parts.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-07-08 16:57:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by charles
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by charles
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
In article
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Do you enjoy blueberries pie? Might you get your eggs from a
chickens far
mer?
Post by the Omrud
Post by Janet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
I don't think these are the same. You will find a blueberry in
a pie, and a chicken in a farm, but I would not refer to an
item in an expenses claim as "an expense". "Expenses" has
become a technical term in itself, rather than simply the
plural of "expense".
Even if you are so conscientious as to submit only a single receipt?
Yes.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Would others pad their "expenses account"?
I believe that "expense account" is a fixed phrase, but it's not
one I've ever had occasion to use...
Next to nobody has had an expense account for 40 years. What we
have (had - I'm retired) is the right to reclaim expenses wholly
and necessarily incurred in the fulfilment of our business
activities. The effect is financially neutral to the individual,
although it did allow me to travel to some interesting places. Any
"expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT. Declaration with paper proof of VAT
having been paid make the VAT reclaimable,
in the UK, VAT can only be reclaimed if the bill been paid by the VAT
registered company. so individual's hotel expenses can't be covered -
unless the company is charged directly. It usen't to be like that, I
don't know when it changed.
Maybe it's/has been different in Britain, but both times I returned from
Germany, along with the customs declaration to prepare for the US agent
there was a form to claim return of VAT, but since I only purchased a
book or two at a museum shop, the amount was too small to bother with
(maybe even below a certain threshold?).
here, VAT is not charges on books - so nothing to refund.
In the unlikely event that I pick up a discounted Royal Wedding souvenir
(at least his beard finally grew in), would I or would I not be entitled
to reclamation of the VAT on it?

If you ever get around to Brexing, will you try to make it as different as
possible from how it works in Europe?
s***@gowanhill.com
2018-07-08 18:51:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by the Omrud
Any "expenses" which were not necessary are taxed (in the UK anyway) as
income.
Another effect of having VAT.
Declaration with paper proof of VAT having been paid
make the VAT reclaimable,
There was a joke about executives travelling with their secretaries and pretending they were travelling with their wives.

Then they had to travel with their wives and pretend they were their secretaries.

Owain
Loading...