Extreme_biker0

Silent retreat? Sounds like a bunch of fun,but what do you mean by that?

Yeah like the man said, it's not too hard really. Take the old ones out first and measure up the 'holes', then buy ones that fit the holes, that would be the easiest way. You'd pretty much have to be mad as a bag of wasps to start cutting new holes or expanding existing ones in your door if you didn't know what you were doing.

Why are you getting all tarted up for a BMX comp!? Thanks, i'll be here all week. Try the shrimp. Don't forget to tip your service staff.

That ratio (pi) would be different depending on the unit of measurement you used. For example 'feet for the height:square feet for the suface area' would be different to 'meters for the height:square meters for the surface area'. So really that is true for any building, even your house, provided you choose a unit of length that makes it so, like hands, toothbrushes, or maple leafs.

That was an amazing post, a good read! Makes me want to go to the gym right now! Maybe after dinner though.

In my house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics! Compressed air, hydrogen are both just ways of STORING energy, like a battery . The big problem is how to *generate* the electricity. For example, it's easy to get the hydrogen out of water (split it into it's component parts as someone said) using electrolysis, or fill up a compressed air tank with a compressor, but both of these require energy in the first place. Wind, solar, fusion, GM algae that excrete petrol, burning compressed dead animals from millions of years ago (oil), these are all ways of generating useful energy (electricity). You guys seem to not have that distinction clear, as people have been talking about generating electricity with hydrogen. There is no sense in that. Personally I think GM algae are the way to go.

Learning french from tapes in my car on the way to my job and back. Age 22.

I've been a member for nearly 6 years and only have one pip! Woe is indeed, me.

The point is not that either is dangerous, in fact it's that neither should be considered dangerous; someone who smokes weed should not be able to self-reitchously look down on someone who takes pills, for 'putting their life at risk just to have a good time'. At tomturds house?

Ok, how about this link which talks about experts opinions. Also, I thought it was out of order for someone to take the piss out of your dyslexia, but maybe you deserve the affliction you aggressive willy. Oh and wait to edit out the aggressive comment from the post above!

But the point remains - you're just as 'stupid and lame' for trying weed as another person is for trying ecstacy. More stupid and lame in fact, because it's more dagerous.

Touchè on the spelling, but the post was still rubbish. The post contradicts itself, as OBM already pointed out through the medium of perfume AFAIK MDMA is the active ingredient in ecstacy isn't it? Also, Tyler smokes dope, which is suspected to cause schitzophrenia, although correlation is not causation as they say. What is the corresponding mental illness caused by taking ecstacy? If you can't answer the question then you can't justify 'just smoking weed', as it's clearly the more dangerous drug. As confirmed by the earlier graph.

Alcohol is on there. For the record I've never experienced the terrible lows that have been mentioned the day after. Seems a bit suspect to be honest, and I know someone's given an explanation about fatigue in the happiness chemical glands or whatever from being overworked, but alcohol makes you feel happy in exactly the same way. Saying that i'm by no means an expert, and have only used it a couple of times, out of curiosity. I completely agree with the relative 'harm' rating of ecstasy and alcohol though. If i were to succinctly describe the effects from the point of view of the taker of the two it's something like this Alcohol: Happy, confident, assertive Ecstacy: Happy, content, curious Obviously this is my specific feelings, though we're all human so it's gonna be similar. And you can see why someone taking alcohol might be more agressive and start fights. I think the harm level takes this into account. Maybe ecstacy is worse for you (I have no reason to believe it is however), but alcohol, the social acceptableness of absolutely binging on it, and the behaviours it induces, are (IMO) definately more dangerous.

Peep show is excellent, I only recently got hooked and went back on Virgin Catchup TV and watched all 4 series! Thought that the last episode was a bit disappointing though, seemed to get a bit serious with the storyline, a bit of a deviation from the normal light-heartedness.

Born in 1986, 1st sex ed class in year 6. All the girls got free tampons, we had pretty much no idea what they were but wanted free Jonnys! Funny really, we all knew what Jonnys were but not what they were for (properly)! Anyway over the years my experience was pretty much same as everyone else here - the infrequent sex ed classes basically were scare lessons about the consequences. No actual lessons on technique! That's something I picked up trial and error with first gilf, bless her! Pretty much similar to McLuvin's experience on Superbad really! 'oh my god it's in!'

None, thought you might have guessed! I suppose when the graduates start in accountancy they are immediately entered onto the Chartered Accountancy course which is expensive and could be reflected by reduction in their pay. Also the annecdotals you guys have been giving are all very good degrees (Civil Engineering, etc), so in that sense the wages are scewed also towards the higher end of what it's possible to get. Spacemonkee, I wasn't suggesting anyone go work in Morrisons! But work hard in a profession or trade for the three years you could have spent at uni, and you can find yourself in quite an attractive position comparatively, both financially and career-prospects wise. For one, you'll probably avoid the student debt. That is a big thing, despite how much it is played down as being 'easy money'! FWIW my own anecdotal is that out of my friends, the one who's currently (5 years after GCSE's) doing the best for himself is the guy who's worked hard straight from school, worked his way up and is now on a good salary, enough to afford the house him and his girlfriend share, while at the same time others are just finishing their degrees and starting on half his wage, student debt around their neck. People often justify uni with intangible arguments such as that your personality develops so much, and you grow so much more confident, etc etc. But quite honestly I think that between the ages of 18 and 21 that happens anyway. It's exactly how I feel having worked those years of my life. It's true though that working instead of going to uni, both my anecdotal subject and I have missed out on coutless midweek nights-out over the years (or left early, or just taken the hangover hit!). This is a big bummer as some of them turned out to be crackers, or so I heard! ( But you can't have everything. I think you're kidding yourself if you think uni is the way to go for financial or job prospect or even character building reasons. The reason you go is so that you can get pissed midweek, and sleep around a bit more! *Most* career paths have a route of entry that does not require a degree. You make your choice and enjoy yourself either way!

Is that what the course manual says you'll start on though, or what people you *know* are starting on? OBM, at the moment it's not such a big deal, granted. All it means is that, as I calculated earlier, people with the student loan earn between about 500-1000 less than people without the student debt. But as you say, you'll be paying it to retirement, and the terms of the loan say that the 15,000 repayment threshold is not indexed linked. Basically then, come retirement age (+40 years, estimate, esimate 2.5% inflation) the repayment threshold in todays money will be £5,580 (15,000/1.025^40). The debt will not have shrunk as pointed out earlier. The govornment really have students by the balls with this. Nobody in the news covers it though, because just like it took them a year before they figured out the implications for the 10p tax rate band abolition, the journo's don't have a clue. A degree isn't a necessity anyway!

Haha that's what I thought. Nothing like putting all that hard work to good use!

In my profession (accountancy in practice) a new graduate starts on around £16,000 in Sheffield and Leeds. A few weeks ago I showed the latest recruit around the office. She has a degree in Japanese from Oxford University.

You pay it back at the rate of 9% of what you earn over 15,000. We'll go with £20,000 (you'll be lucky to earn that much straight away outside of London unless you're a teacher or doctor). So in a year you repay £450 [(£20,000-£15,000)*9%], or £37.50 deduction from your monthly pay packet. Doesn't sound like much does it? In reality though, this is equivelent to a £624.38 reduction in your salary (£450*(100/80)(for tax) + £450*(100/80*11%)(for National insurance). In other words, if you have student debt and earn £20,000, you actually earn £19,375.62, whereas is you work hard and avoid the debt you'll earn the full £20,000. But hey it's only for a few years until you pay it off... There is interest to take into account on the loan of course. This is now based on RPI rather than CPI a year or 2 ago (RPI is a different measure of inflation and generally a higher one). The rate at March, I believe, decides the rate for the year. This year it is 4.8% I think. So on a 10,000 student debt you'll accrue £480 interest in the year (10,000*0.048). But wait, you only paid £450. So earning £20,000 with a student loan of £10,000, the debt is actually growing and not being paid off at all. Your student loan deductions of 9% above 15,000 mean that deductions from your salary above this rate actually total 40% (20% tax, 11% NICO, 9% student loan). You only get 60p of every £1 you earn! How bad is that!? Avoid it if you can!

You sound like a clever guy. I have a bridge for sale if you're interested?

1. No I am not aware of the rebranding, although i had noticed the 'an aviva company' subscript appearing wherever Norwich Union did, so I suppose if someone had said 'are they planning a rebranding' and i actually thought about it i'd say that yes, they probably are. I love concise answers. 2. Yes 3. They own Norwich Union don't they? And lots of other insurance brand names.

Exactly. Everything goies in your cv. The covering letter basically says Dear The Best People in the World, I am applying for the job reference xxxxxxx, please find enclosed my CV for your consideration. Love and kisses, Name Maybe formalies it with Yours Sincerely if you don;t know the manager that well.

There's no point in signing it! Onzaboymark said! Reducing fuel duty will *NOT* reduce prices at the pump!

+1