Abes

Originally posted by: saltandsauce Originally posted by: Abes Originally posted by: toxicpiano Originally posted by: Merlin of Flyote Personally, none of that should be able to be claimed if the average person can not claim it. Why should they get any special exceptions? quote> Because they have to have somewhere to live in London. It's not practical to go 300 miles everyday. The majority of MPs aren't rich.quote> Of course it's practical to travel 300 miles a day. People manage in practically every other country. In Japan, you have people commuting DOUBLR that distance 6 days a week by Shinkansen (Bullet Train). And it's the UK, jthey can just take a train..... That's what HSTs, IC225s and the Pendolino are FOR. quote> umm, you do realise that in Japan, trains are on time. this is the UK where trains go where they want and charge what they like £50 one way fares. (could you afford that every day). don't talk about travel distances, talk about travel TIMES. plus there are places away from the west coast of the UK i think the evil Tories are behind this. Ever since Tony Blair has left office the media have had it in for Labour (Tony Blair was a tory before he was elected and this explains a LOT) and this is making a mountain out of a molehill. Public services always struggle and politicians are corrupt. (Tony Blairs nickname is teflon, Gordon Browns is Velcro, everything sticks to him) it's not like the corruption is very major. In Italy you get a different government every 11 months. In China, officials do whatever they want (kill opposition). In France, corrupt mayors (on charges of corruption) become president and the trial of mayoral corruption is shelved until the ruling term is over and you can't hold the trial since the actual corruption is too far in the past to be held so he is innocent. ourcorruption is pitiful in comparison with the USA, they take bribes of several million dollars to block anti tobacco legislation etc. (it happened with the labour party taking money from tobacco to allow advertising in formula one events so the UK isn't perfect) It's good that we are frying politicians at this level because if we don't then our standards will drop i actually wonder if Gordon Brown will go insane since it seems he has been left out in the cold by everyone he could shout "et tu" to everyone. He is still a person believe it or not quote> The only reason trains are on time in Japan, and other countries is because that's what the PUBLIC demands. I still think 50 Pounds per trip is cheaper than the cost of letting the taxpayers pay for them to buy another house in London. And they earn more than I do........ Perhaps if your MPs were actually FORCED to commute into London like everyone else you'd actually see an increase in rail efficiency....... The reason trains sit in the middle of nowhere doing nothing is because Network Rail STILL doesn't know what it's doing, and your Train Operating Companies charge what they like because Labour privatised your rail system. But trains don't have the same traffic problems that roads do, so I don't see why your rail network is in even more of a mess than your road network...... And by the way, I believe the cause of corruption is usually the fact that the people don't take enough interest in what the corrupt are doing....

Originally posted by: toxicpiano Originally posted by: Merlin of Flyote Personally, none of that should be able to be claimed if the average person can not claim it. Why should they get any special exceptions? quote> Because they have to have somewhere to live in London. It's not practical to go 300 miles everyday. The majority of MPs aren't rich.quote> Of course it's practical to travel 300 miles a day. People manage in practically every other country. In Japan, you have people commuting DOUBLR that distance 6 days a week by Shinkansen (Bullet Train). And it's the UK, jthey can just take a train..... That's what HSTs, IC225s and the Pendolino are FOR.

Originally posted by: Merlin of Flyote Originally posted by: Jezus53 Why should they be paid to have a second home while some are struggling to even have a place to stay? I understand that most politicians have to live in their district then go to the capital to do national business, but there should be a better way. How about a complex for the officials, or maybe have them live in paid apartments when they come to the capital. It's just ridiculous what they try to cheat the people out of. If they get to claim all of that stuff, then why should we pay them? What's the point of their salary if they get to "claim" everything the spend? quote> Well said! On top of a wage which I believe is about £60,000 they can claim:- 2nd home allowance £24,000 2 Offices allowance £100,000 Office consumables £24,000 30 tickets for their family to come to London to visit them (Whilst a) they go home each weekend, b) they have long holidays. I'm thinking of two words:- Gravy Train.quote> Thi is the UNITED KINGDOM, for goodness' sake! The whole COUNTRY is within a day's train ride or flying time from London, so why should the taxpayers be paying for them to travel??? As they are supposed to live in their constituencies, not London, just pack 'em off to London on an HST in Standard Class and be done with it....... Of course, thanks to "New Labour", British Rail doesn't exist anymore...... In my opinion, (and this goes for my homeland Australia too!) they should, as members of parliament either: a) drive themselves, or use public transport, just like the rest of us..... And they should pay for it out of their own pocket. And if they need accomodation in London, the Government ought to set up a MANDATORY dormitory for them somewhere. They are SUPPOSED to be the servants of the people, not the other way around!

Originally posted by: SuburbianNightmare "Something doestn't have to be physically wrong with an airliner to cause accidents. I read on Wikipedia a few weeks ago that an engine fault on a newer Boeing 737 doing a flight from London Heathrow to Glasgow led to the plane crashing onto the M1 Motorway during an emergency landing, and although one engine had caught fire (the flight crew were not trained on the newest variant of that airliner) the Captain shut down the WRONG engine, then increased the load on the damaged engine, which promptly exploded, causing the airliner to lose all power and fall out of the sky, crashing onto the southbound cariageway of the M1 Motorway, about 100 metres short of the runway the captain was aiming at." ~~Abes I remember that! I was being driven down the M1 by my Dad. We were near the front of the queue caused by the aircraft crash. Anyway I completetly agree about the plane being structually weak. It's most like a series of events that led up to it. quote> What was the rubber-necking like? In both Australia and China even a person changing a flat tyre creates rubbernecks (ques of them in Australia's truly pathetic motorways). Anyway, I was just trying to point out that pre-existing structural weakness isn't the ONLY reason airliners go down. I read a report from USA Today (I think) on Thursday that said that particular Air France Airbus had a perfect safety and maintenance record, which is why I think it was probably brought down by massive hull failure caused by the weather the plane was flying through at the time. Such as a massive lightning strike causing a spark or short circuit somewhere in the fuel system, leading to an explosion. Of course, since all of this is monitored for the flight crew, and they didn't even get out a distress call (apart from the electronics tracking systems' reporting system crashes and failure), I'm betting it was a combination of several unusually strong weather phenomenon that caused the plane to break up in mid air. It happens..... As I said in a previous post, we still can't make aircraft able to resist absolutely everything the atmoshpere can throw at you, but our modern airliners are so safe and stable usually that we forget that the possibilty is always there for weather induced crashes, especially in cases of extreme weather and turbulence.

The view that marriage is about love is NOT a new viewpoint. It is actually a very OLD viewpoint, but for a long time, people have been playing with it, and have mutilated marriage to try to serve their own ends. SkiGeek, I KNOW that throughout history, various Holy Books have been "interpereted" in one way or another to try and deny rights to parts of the population, in almost every country. I also know it is not just American conservatism that creates this, but Americans (and the rest of the world too, for that matter) must start trying to (finally) put an end to this and all the other inequalities in our societies. But I want to single out America here for a second, whether we, as citizens of the world agree with it or not, much of the rest of the world still looks to the United States of America as being the most adanced country on earth, from a social standpoint, but when we start to actually find out what America is like, we discover that it is not at all what we imagined. And yes, SkiGeek, you are right, these small minded idiots ARE in their own little bubbles, happy to believe that they must be in the right. I know it takes a lot of effort to get these people to understand that theirs is not the only way, but I think that it might just be a good idea to try and educate the population about diversity. Thank goodness I was taught from a young age to love and respect others for who they are, that the world opens up to you when you take the effort to understand things that are not in your background. I was born in Australia, and today I live in the People's Republic of China, I have embraced the differnces here, and the differences in my Chinese friends, and it has made me so happy to live here and be a part of the society. If I was one of those narrow minded idiots with blinders on to everything outside my little bubble, I'd still be delivering pizzas in Brisbane, Australia...... P.S: I love China, but I also am very fond of America, I don't want to offend any Americans, I'm just trying to point out that nobody's perfect, and I think we all have a lot to learn from one another.

30,000 dead in a terror attack on a famous sports stadium, and the President of the country responded by saying "Dang!"??? I like that...... Is he related to Mater in the movie Cars? Seriously, NICE cities, and the story is kinda cool!

Originally posted by: Duke87 Shouldn't it be pretty obvious from the nature of the debris what it' from? I mean, pieces of an airplane would be distinctly different from garbage thrown away by ships or whatever. It does seem that the plane likely exploded midflight. The question then is, of course, what caused the explosion? There's plenty of jet fule aboard an airliner, but it's in tanks with what I'd imagine would be a very limited exposure to oxygen, so a spark wouldn't just ignite it. An explosion could initiate in one of the engines, tearing a hole in the wing which then leaves the rest of the fuel exposed to oxygen and kaboom it goes, though I don't know that there's be enough fuel in the engine itself at any given time to explode with enough force for that. ...unless there was a bomb of some sort, it'd be a pretty freak occurence for something like this happen to a plane that was in proper working order. Something was likely wrong with the plane structurally, mechanically, and/or electrically prior to the incident. quote> Something doestn't have to be physically wrong with an airliner to cause accidents. I read on Wikipedia a few weeks ago that an engine fault on a newer Boeing 737 doing a flight from London Heathrow to Glasgow led to the plane crashing onto the M1 Motorway during an emergency landing, and although one engine had caught fire (the flight crew were not trained on the newest variant of that airliner) the Captain shut down the WRONG engine, then increased the load on the damaged engine, which promptly exploded, causing the airliner to lose all power and fall out of the sky, crashing onto the southbound cariageway of the M1 Motorway, about 100 metres short of the runway the captain was aiming at. If the flight crew had known what they were doing the airliner could have made it's emergency landing safely.

Originally posted by: Barbarossa Originally posted by: Yoman3 On a side note....Africa has radar?quote> I'm sure you just didn't think about that comment before posting (it happens to all of us), but it sounds quite bigoted. Of course "Africa" has radar. How do you think planes land? By good feelings? Barbarossa quote> Barbarossa, I agree! How could you line-up and land a Boeing 747-400 without radar? Airports HAVE to have radar, or the air traffic control simply couldn't do it's job!

Originally posted by: Duke87 I've always wondered why it is that, when someone's standing on a bridge considering jumping, that the authorities feel the need to close the bridge off. Why not just let traffic keep flowing while he stands there pondering his fate? And, if you must, have cops approach him to try and talk him down from the ledge by using the sidewalk (or if the car's gotta be there, one lane) rather than hogging the whole bridge? Then we wouldn't have this problem. quote> Haizhu Bridge is 3 road lanes wide....... At the southern end it has 2 lanes northbound and one southbound, but on the northern end it has 2 lanes southbound ane one northbound, with a lane swap in the middle..... the Avenue feeding onto it from the southern end has 3 lanes each way with bus/taxi reserves on either side, and the northern end of the bridge leads to a horribly complicated interchange built around a public plaza...... Half of which is currently closed to all traffic because of the expansion of Haizhu Square subway station, which is being converted into an interchange between Line 2 and the new Line 5. Which means that if the cops closed one lane, it would mean one direction would be paralyzed...... Of course, the sidewalks on Haizhu Bridge are at least 2 lanes wide on either side, so I can't see why they didn't just stop pedestrians..... Since it was a pedestrian who eventually pushed him off! Unfortunately, the sidewalks aren't strong enough to have cars or trucks sitting on them. And Jezus53, if you think being charged with obstructing the operation of Guangzhou seems a tad totalitarian, he would have had the same charge in Australia...... In Australia ANYTHING that obstructs regular business, industry and transport is technically illegal...... It's pretty stupid, I agree, but the law can often be a very strange thing.....

If they have nukes capable of hitting Tokyo and Seoul, then they could also hit Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin, 3 of the biggest cities in China........ And that's what's making the PRC so concerned about NK's nuclear potential....... Not to mention the fact that many Chinese, INCLUDING many people in power are concerned over the secrecy and censorship that exists to serve the State in NK. Remember that frieght train that crashed in NK a few years ago? it was only some 20 kilometres south of the Chinese border, and NK only admitted that the train was carrying extrememely hazardous material AFTER China's Government issued health warnings to communities along the border, and requested information from NK about the inquiry into the train crash, to help it's own citizens and the SEPA (State Environmental Protection Agency) to clean up the train crash's environmental consequences in China.

You all seem to have fogotten one detail, the White Star Line's engineers had designed the Olympic Class Liners to be "unsinkable"...... Lifeboats were thought to be a useless addition, but were tacked on at the last minute to satisfy the Board of Trade...... The Liners obviously WEREN'T unsinkable, but it was the beginning of the 20th Century, and the Western World was convinced that they were the smartest, most advanced beings in the universe, so it's sort of forgivable. The Titanic, Olympic and Brittanic were all designed with 12 segment hulls that could be sealed into watertight comparments, and even if 4 of them (or one third of the hull) were breached, the ships were supposed to be able to remain afloat. Unfortunately, in a cost-cutting measure from the Irish shipbuilder, the tops of the watertight chambers weren't sealed properly, so water was able to enter the supposedly "safe" portions of the hull.... Another reason so many passengers and crew went down with the ship. Remember, alot of the passengers lost in the disaster refused to leave the ship until the lifeboats were almost all away, because of their belief that the Titanic was unsinkable. This is another reason why crews of passenger ships today have absolute authority in such situations, so that they can get every lifeboat filled to capacity before sending them on their way.

Great, Another state to give equal rights to one of the most suppressed minority groups in history, or at least the last 2,000 years or so. It's funny, that (particularly Americans) always drag religion into the conversation when they talk about sexuality, and, if they are Conservatives, they always claim that any religion is against homosexuality. And I keep seeing references to books in the Bible.... Though there ARE many, MANY other religions out there. But, if you look at the writings of the Messengers, or Prophets, the people who have given a message from God to humanity, there is nothing about which sexuality is the one God says is right. These things always seem to crop up in all the OTHER dross that ends up being bunged into Holy Books..... The Bible is only half Christian, remember, and the Old Testament is actually more or less the Jewish Torah, much of which is not religious at all, but is actually records of laws and social history of various eras in Jewish history. The same thing goes for the Holy Writings in most religions, only the most recent religion, the Bahá'í Faith has the original, unadulterated writings of it's Prophet Founder and it's important figures in it's own history. And looking at the Kitab-i-Aqdas, the Central Baha'i Holy Text, there is absolutely nothing indicating that God thinks gays are living in sin, unless they are not in faithful monogamous relationships with their spouse. I personally think that it's about time Conservatives STOPPED using the Bible (or any OTHER Holy Books) as an excuse to not permit people that: they don't like, or who's lifestyles, cultures, (or anything else, for that matter) do not connect with their beliefs; to gain the same rights that they enjoy in their society. Why is it that anybody who is trying to make people have a wider view of the world always becomes victims of people prejudices?

Hey, this happened in Guangzhou, where I live... And things like this are a fairly common occurance. People who get into BIG debt decide to try and end it rather than paying back.... so they decide to jump to their deaths. It's uncommon for them to do it from bridges though, since it's REALLY easy for them to get stopped..... The bridge he fell off is the oldest bridge over the Pearl River, and it's a really big bottleneck for traffic. Actually, he sat on the bridge for like an hour trying to work up the courage to do it..... which is why the police were able to set up cordons, but it paralyzed traffic around the West end of Haizhu Disrtrict and the area around Haizhu Square..... One of my freinds was stuck in the ensuing traffic jam... and told me that a lot of drivers who saw Lai push the guy off the bridge were happy that the guy finally got out of the way!!!!! Usually, though, jumpers here try to jump off their balconies or the tops of skyscrapers. I'm not condoning the actions of EITHER of the people involved in the incident, or the drivers who cheered the pusher, but if you had to put up with the sort of traffic in this city as a driver, you'd be frustrated every time someone decides to do something like this is a public place. Oh, and the guy who attempted to jump off the bridge was charged by the police for obstructing traffic and imparing the operation of the city of Guangzhou.......