HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Ship of Fools
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:00:08 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Glasgow, Scotland.
In-reply-to: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk's message of 15 Oct 92 19:01:08 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.190108.9714@infodev.cam.ac.uk> ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:

   Like the British Oxygen Company, you mean?  Seems to me HMG has gone out
   of its way to _avoid_ monopolies when privatising, e.g. creating two 
   power generating companies.  Of course, they can form cartels, but so
   can petrol companies.  In no case has HMG created monopolies by 
   privatisation.

This is not true. BT was sold off as 1 company. It has little or no
competition. Mercury is too small to compete with BT head-on. British
Gas was sold off as 1 company - consumers have no choice of service
provider. This is also true of the regional water companies and
electricity companies - consumers can't choose which ones they want as
their service provider. (If they could, Thames Water would go bust
because nobody would want to pay for the foul-tasting, coliform-ridden
water they provide.) 

There is only 1 company manufacturing steel in the UK: British Steel.
All the nation's main international airports (save for Manchester) are
owned by BAA. British Airways has a strangehold on Heathrow and most
international air routes out of the country. Rivals like Virgin or
British Midland only get the crumbs. All of these are examples of
outright monopolies or de facto monopolies created by privatisation.

Incidentally, the Monopolies and Mergers Commission are supposed to
act when a company controls 30 or 40% of the market. So far the MMC
has not acted against the outright monopolies like British Gas or
the regional water and electricity companies or those like BAA and BT
who control a helluva lot more than 40% of their market.

   >3. Subsidies for nuclear power

   Far less than in any other nuclear country (e.g. France).  And Britain's
   nuclear programme over the last 40 years means it is now one of, if not  
   the, world leaders in nuclear reprocessing.  So you're wrong again.

This is hardly something to boast about. Aside from the environmental
arguments, the nuclear industry is moving away from reprocessing. It's
much cheaper and safer to store the waste unprocessed at the reactor
site. [It now looks likely that this is what will happen with the
waste from Britain's nuclear reactors. Sellafield's THORP will likely
be a very expensive white elephant.] There is a glut of uranium at
present which means nobody (save for the likes of Saddam Hussein)
wants or needs to extract plutonium and other fissile material from
used fuel. 

   >4. Neglect of manufacturing in favour of service industries. 

   Neglect in what way?  You mean not pouring more money into British Leyland?

That was one, largely exceptional example. If BL had gone to the wall,
so would most of the Midlands and an awful lot of Tory-held marginal
seats.

A classic example of government neglect - some might say deliberate
government policy - is what has just happened to the coal industry (RIP).

		Jim
From: erck03@castle.ed.ac.uk (John Wexler)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Car Boot Levers (Definitely not: Re: Currency Problems)
Date: 7 Oct 92 13:36:29 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University Computing Service

In article <1992Oct7.114350.24738@its.bt.co.uk>,
tjo@its.bt.co.uk (Tim Oldham) writes:
|> I've always been dubious of the utility of this feature; how can
|> you lock something in the boot to keep it safe(r), if you can get into
|> the boot just by pulling a lever?
My car (Honda, c.7 years old) has this feature, plus a lock on the
lever. I almost never use the lock on the lever, but if I feel paranoid
when I take the car for service, I can lock the lever to prevent the
garage people from getting into the boot.  But, you say, don't they have
to get the key anyway so that they can start the engine?  Ah, yes, well,
the clever Japanese have thought of that one.  There's a
differently-abled key which I can give them, and it will work the
ignition but not the boot locks!
    John Wexler
    Edinburgh
From: dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Morning)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Edinburgh
Date: 8 Oct 92 13:36:42 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.

h.jonkers@et.tudelft.nl (Henk Jonkers) writes:

>cbas38@vaxa.strath.ac.uk writes:

>>In article <BvrCJx.oA@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v064myby@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Christophe J Quaranta) writes:
>>> 
>>> 	Can anyone tell me how you're supposed to pronounce Edinburgh?
>>> Every Scot I talk to seems to say Edinboro!  I assume they're not referring
>>> to Pennsylvania.

>>	Try Edinburry !!! 

Ed'nbra. I would have thought Sandy from Strathclyde Yoonie in Glasgow
would know this!!.
Alternative is Embra. Pronunciation depends on whether you live in Kelvinside
or Pollock.

>To me, the Scottish pronunciation sounds more like "Enbruh".

>>now a little tester:: try these names of Scottish towns,

>>1. Strathave
> 
>I thought this was spelled Strathavon

That's "Straven' south west of East Kilbride you're thinking of.
I've no idea where this place Sandy is is referring to. A typo Sandy?

>>2. Milngavie 

>Also one of my favourites; since it's one of the end destinations of
>Glasgow's west bound low-level trains, I've heard the right
>pronunciation quite a few times.
>Another one of my favourites is Culzean Castle (or Glamis).

or Kircudbright, Kircaldy (sometimes known as 'Raith' by BBC sports
commentators :-) ) or Auchenshuggle or Marycoulter (near Aberdeen)
Dalziel(Clue: Tam)

>By the way, something different, what's the correct pronunciation of
>the name "John Menzies"?

Mingus, but its hardly used. The John Menzie's bookstore is usually referred
to as 'Menzie's" or 'John Menzie's' locally.

Mingus is usually used if it's someone's name. The bookstore get's a different
pronunciation but don't ask me why!!


Dave

--
From: gray@rz-berlin.mpg.de (Struan Gray)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Gissa Job Mate
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:25:42 GMT
Organization: Rechenzentrum MPG Berlin


  Since we seem to be able to sustain rational discussion at present
let me attempt to start a thread.  British Coal announced on Monday
that half its remaining pits are to close.  There are towns in the
UK that as of tonight have 70% or more unemployment.  In all, 30,000
people will be made directly unemployed in the middle of a recession
and in a country with an appalling record of shoddy adult education
and retraining.

  How do netters feel?  I have always been a supporter of markets
and free enterprise, but so many firms in Britain ignore the
responsibilities of employment and have managements that are still
trapped in the them-and-us furrow of the nineteenth century.  Where
are the exceptions, the John Lewis's and Cadburys of today?

  Of course, in Britain coal is a highly political issue, and rather
like Northern Ireland seems to engender polaristion and knee-jerk
opinions rather than calm consideration.  Whether the soon to be
closed pits are truly uneconomic has already been discussed here
to some extent, and should be further investigated, not least
by those miners who are talking of using their redundancy money
to take their mines private.  Perhaps someone who knows more about
it than I do can provide some information.

  What I don't need anyone to tell me is that the manner in which
the closures were announced is positively revolting.  Unacceptable
faces indeed.


Struan
From: ag129@cus.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Ship of Fools
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:01:08 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Oct15.160958.14904@meiko.com> davol@twinheadmeiko.co.uk (David Wilson) writes:
>1. The creation of private monopolies

Like the British Oxygen Company, you mean?  Seems to me HMG has gone out
of its way to _avoid_ monopolies when privatising, e.g. creating two 
power generating companies.  Of course, they can form cartels, but so
can petrol companies.  In no case has HMG created monopolies by 
privatisation.  In fact the largest monopoly-creating exercise in this
country was Attlee's nationalisations (a good thing in many cases, but
a disaster in others, such as control of seaports).

>2. Agricultural subsidies (set-aside)

Set-aside is an EEC policy, and fairly inevitable.  HMG could do more to
encourage better uses of set-aside land, but that would mean more subsidies!

>3. Subsidies for nuclear power

Far less than in any other nuclear country (e.g. France).  And Britain's
nuclear programme over the last 40 years means it is now one of, if not  
the, world leaders in nuclear reprocessing.  So you're wrong again.

>4. Neglect of manufacturing in favour of service industries. 

Neglect in what way?  You mean not pouring more money into British Leyland?
From: pascal@apd.cpg.sony.co.jp (Pascal Goguey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Spoonerisms
Date: 13 Oct 92 07:09:34 GMT
Distribution: soc.culture.british
Organization: Sony Corporation,Communication Products Group Audio Products
	Div,Atsugi,Japan.


	Hi, everybody!

	I'm a froggy interested in spoonerisms. I know one in
English :

	I'm not the pheasant plucker,
	I'm the pheasant plucker's son,
	and I'm only plucking pheasants
	till the pheasant plucker comes.

	Does anybody have a book reference on that subject?
Please reply by e-mail. Thanks!

				Pascal
--
  Pascal Goguey  Sony Corporation  ($@GC9%7Z(J  $@8d7](J)
  Communication Products Group Audio Products Div
  Atsugi TEC, Japan

  Aucun homme n'est jamais assez fort pour ce calcul.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.motorcycles
From: cam@syzygy.DIALix.oz.au (Cameron Newham)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Salaries
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 14:32:10 GMT
Organization: Baldrick Fan Club
Reply-To: cam@syzygy.DIALix.oz.au


In article <1992Oct13.114941.7543@bnr.uk> agc@bmdhh286.bnr.ca writes:

 > S.W. England is variable when it comes to house prices/cost of living. 
 > For example, in Bristol it's big city prices all the way, but around Stroud, 
                                                                        ^^^^^^
 > where everyone is a hippy :-) and you are closer to the agricultural base,
 > you can live more cheaply.
 > 
 >    Alan
 > 

And what mind bending drugs are you on, Alan?

:)

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:14197 soc.culture.celtic:6824
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
Subject: Re: Irish Rejects Associated (IRA)
Date: 15 Oct 92 11:57:44 GMT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #1, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Warning : levelling nuke on its way:

ulick@stravinsky.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford) writes:

-
- In more sparkling English Yaya from the tundra spouts shite.  You must be
- Canadian since you are posting from Canada.  Americans, like me :-), have
- as much right to 'fell` some way about the situation of the IRA setting
- off 'boms' in London as Canadians like you.  Is your native tongue some
- Inuit dialect, and does that explain your lousy English (and French)?
-
  Nice try, USer.  I am a Briton from Surrey, and I personally CANNOT stand how
the US is getting to be as bad as the former USSR when it comes to history.
First we have some from Harvard who got badly lambasted on his history on
Canada from a US point of view now you!!
  And frankly I am fed up.  Many Irish and British peoples that I know of finds
the whole IRA situation a disgrace!!  And I have to side with these moderates,
esp the Irish, because these people get more of a black eye than anyone else.
I suggest that you talk to some Irish moderates, BEFORE your next posting !!

TO fellow netters, sorry for the harsh tone!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- + 'There was a  master come unto the earth, + Ulick Stafford, PP-ASEL       +
- +    born in the holy land of Indiana,      + Dept of Chemical Engineering, +
- + in the mystical hills east of Fort Wayne'.+ Notre Dame, IN 46556          +
- +      B'fhearr liom bheith ag eitilt.      +    ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu   +
- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-


Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Canadians: send a clear message to the government!  ON Oct. 26, Abstain
From: matt@castle.ed.ac.uk (M P Taylor)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Information needed
Date: 12 Oct 92 16:02:35 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <Bvz6B0.4qz@nic.umass.edu> s1006420@titan.ucc.umass.edu (If you want peace work for justice) writes:
>I am doing a project concerning existing men's groups or organizations
>that deal with violence against women - such as one here in the
>States called 'Men Against Violence Against Women'. Can anyone inform
>me of any such groups in the u.k.? (address or contact info appreciated)
>
Errr - the police; just dial 010-44-999 and ask for them.

[Yeah I know I'm an idealist but what the heck...]

	Matt
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.celtic
From: ulick@stravinsky.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Subject: Re: Is there any need for that struggle(Re: Irish Rejects Associated (IRA))
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:43:16 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.141311.2320@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>
>Well, there is no divorce or abortion in the Republic of
>Ireland, people have the Gaelic language forced down their
>throat at school, there is no honour paid to Mrs. Elizabeth
>Windsor, etc, etc. Little things, maybe, but they are what
>culture is all about.

There is no abortion in Northern Ireland, either, and divorces are not as 
easily obtained as in Britain.  Also, as regards regions of the UK, NI has
the lowest crime rate, although that is probably due to the heavy handed
and pervasive nature of law enforcement by the RUC, UDR, British Army, and
the IRA.  NI leads the UK is a few other quality of Life
categories as well, although off-hand I can`t remember which.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
+ 'There was a  master come unto the earth, + Ulick Stafford, PP-ASEL       +
+    born in the holy land of Indiana,      + Dept of Chemical Engineering, +
+ in the mystical hills east of Fort Wayne'.+ Notre Dame, IN 46556          +
+      B'fhearr liom bheith ag eitilt.      +    ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu   +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (kevinh)
Subject: Re: Salaries
Originator: kevinh@nath
Reply-To: kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:52:13 GMT


In article <1992Oct13.083506.136@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
|> From: hiscrp@nuscc.nus.sg (C R Pennell)
|> >Question:
|> >       Assume a basic salary of 17,000 pounds a year. Before tax.
|> >       Assume that there is sufficient capital to buy house without
|> >       having to take out a mortgage.
|> >       Is the salary enough to live on in S.W. England (husband, wife
|> >       two small children)?
|> >       What do people think (restrain yourself, Laurence)?
|> 
|> 17,000 is more than many people with families and mortgages or
|> rent to pay earn. It is about the average salary in the UK.


The average salary in the UK was quoted, on TV a few weeks ago, as
being 14,200 pounds a year.

|> Matthew Huntbach

kevinh@hasler.ascom.ch
From: eastwood@inline (David Eastwood)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Guy Fawkes night
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:20:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.164023.22610@osf.org> dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks)  
writes:
> pleach@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Paul Leach) writes:
> |> When I was a kid...in the days of yore....a penny for the guy added  
up to 
> |> some decent money (I used to start as soon as school started.) What  
is the 
> |> cry nowadays as I understand a penny won't take you too far.
> 
> "Bob-a-Job"?
> -- 
> David Brooks					dbrooks@osf.org
> (who remembers slaving in the hot sun for 3 hours and getting paid a
> shilling by a literal-minded old skinflint)

Prime paid you *that* much????

:-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Eastwood  ...I feel better than James Brown.....  Sybase, Inc.
eastwood@sybase.com                                     Emeryville, CA.
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Currency Problems
Date: 7 Oct 92 12:32:02 GMT
	<1992Oct6.160040.11769@maths.nott.ac.uk>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

In article <1992Oct6.160040.11769@maths.nott.ac.uk> anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker) writes:

   >					Six years ago (6 YEARS) the
   >ability to open the car boot (trunk for US readers) from INSIDE the car
   >was standard on the cheapest SUZUKI on the market. There wasn't a car
   >made in Europe below the mid-luxury range which had that device.

	   My second-hand Vauxhall Cavalier is 9 years old (9 YEARS) and
   has that device.

My Dad's 1975 (17 YEARS) Alfasud had that device too.  It annoyed the hell
out of him; he'd much rather have had a normal boot lock.
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)

		
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,misc.jobs.misc
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Salaries
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:11:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.042953.1722@informix.com>, proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) writes:
> In article <1992Oct14.090717.3043@osf.org> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
> >One thing that may have been added in is company cars.  These are worth a
> >lot of money in UK terms but not in US terms. If a company car is worth X
> >pounds for a UK employee it would not cost US employees that to provide
> >themselves with the same car. [...]
> >
> >Simon. 
> >
> 
> Yes, I am sure they were adding this in: they said as much in the text.
> Having gotten a lot of miles out of a cheap car (I think it would bring
> bad luck on the car to mention that actual numbers), I certainly agree
> with your statement. Why don't UK employees say "Look, don't give me a
> car, just give me the money instead. I can buy and run a car more cheaply
> than you can."? Or do you mean that it simply costs more to run a car
> in the UK (petrol costs about four times what gas does) ... ?

As to why employees don't plead for cash instead of cars, is that they
would lose out. Even with the increase in tax on company cars it is
probably worth it. I found that when I had one, it wasn't the money so
much as the convenience. The company bought me a new one every 2 years,
they booked and paid for all the maintenance and I got a rental while it
was in the garage. The insurance and road tax were sent to me in the mail,
all I had to do was drive it and fill it up with petrol from time to time.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
From: reese@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Betting on the Prez
Date: 14 Oct 92 11:07:15 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1992Oct13.152152.3951@ttinews.tti.com>, jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) writes:
> In article <1992Oct12.112046.23258@cas.org> jac54@cas.org () writes:
> (in a thread about betting on elections)
>>	Betting is very limited in the U.S., the only place where betting
>>	on the election would be legal is Nevada.  Betting is generally
>>	otherwise restricted to on-track and gambling is limited to
>>	state lotteries.  There is also some gambling on the Mississippi,
>>	but I don't know how it's regulated.
> 
> Since phone links across the Atlantic are now of such good quality and
> quite inexpensive (~$1 per minute) it seems that the British gambling
> industry could prosper mightily by serving the many avid gamblers in
> the US. Viz: I believe that I could open an account with a UK betting
> organisation or establish credit in some way (Visa card?) and then pursue
> my wagering by phone. I wonder if this is against US law? It probably is
> but first they have to catch me -- they surely can't touch the UK end.
> 
> What a golden opportunity for Britain! But then again being Britain no
> one would have the initiative to expand their business in this non-
> traditional way.

This sounds fine, and maybe you should do it.  But I wouldn't want to be
you trying to get the US betters to pay up!! Also, the speculators will
move in: "OK, $1000 on Clinton. He'll win and then you can keep your share
and send me the amount I've won. That way I don't have to pay in advance,
and you don't have all the tedium of writing to me in the US. Sounds
good for us both, right?"
Wrong.  If there's a system, people WILL abuse it, and you might be the
one who has to pay for that abuse ... in prison.

Jason

> 
> Dick Jackson
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Subject: Re: Service (or lack thereof)
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 13:24:22 GMT

In article <BvwA9w.Dt5@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU> streater@unixjr.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Tim Streater) writes:

>How do smokers there tend to react to requests that they not smoke in your
>house/office/while you are eating? Just curious.

This is one of the areas where I truly believe the quality of life in the
USA is better than almost anywhere else.  Nobody smokes in my house, and
for the past three years nobody has tried - the shift of fashion has gone
from automatic light-up, to asking permission, to finally realising that
if the place doesn't smell of filth from top to bottom your filth simply
isn't wanted.

The building where I work is also smoke free: smoking is prohibited except
in one room with independent ventilation.  Thanks to the Pittsburgh City
Council, all the shops, theatres and cinemas are smoke free; the last
time I saw smoke in a food shop was four years ago.  Most restaurants
keep smokers strictly segregated; the others, I don't visit.  And,
finally, the aeroplanes are smoke free, so at last I don't have to
take off my suit the minute I get home, put it in a plastic bag, and get
it to the dry cleaners the next day.

About the only place left where the stuff still contaminates the air are
a few airports that haven't yet gone over to special smoking zones.  But
they'll come around.

How different from my childhood, when just about everybody smoked.  And
I had almost continual throat and nasal trouble; after an hour in any
enclosed public place my eyes would begin to water uncontrollably; after
two hours the stomach cramps would start - and, of course, everything
smelled vile.

On my last trip to Europe, I was taken to a high quality restaurant, and
halfway through the meal, a man at the next table lit a cigar.  I had to
run out of the place - it was either that or throw up.  It is very hard
for most smokers to understand the misery they inflict; I for one am glad
the habit is dying out.
From: jmb@ukc.ac.uk (J.M.Bremner)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Name of the Royal family ?
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:37:48 GMT
Reply-To: jmb@ukc.ac.uk (Mike Bremner)
Organization: Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Kent

In article <7OCT199211325746@sscvx1.ssc.gov> godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov
(LAURENCE GODFREY) writes (in a characteristically lengthy article):

>The names of the British royal family are :elizabeth windsor (we call her
>Brenda Windsor, her husband is normally known as Stavros as he comes originally
>from Greece [ sometimes he is called Phil the Greek ]), her sister Margaret
>(who we like to call Yvonne), her daughter Anne (who I think retains the

and so on.  What nonsense.  Everyone knows the queen's surname is R --
that's how she signs her cheques.

Who's "we", anyway?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british