michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,868
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 6, 2021 23:33:41 GMT
My original point was that a few select and perhaps even niche items have always been spoken about and measured in Imperial and Wickes were simply reflecting that as they are now allowed to do so and that IMO is a good thing. But they were allowed before, and they are allowed today en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_Martyrs . That this might be 'good' that people can buy things in a unit that they have never been educated in is dubious to say the least, but may have some benefits for historical / backwards compatibility reasons; but to say that this is a good thing that is now allowed because of Brexit is misleading to say the least. Like Broadband whose speed/quality is based on miles to the nearest cabinet you mean? Would you rather we moved to Km? Perhaps we should but that's another issue. And who is doing the misleading? I only made my point after a recent visit to a hardware store where I noticed they were selling some stuff using imperial measurement for the first time in decades so I deduced it is very likely to be related to Brexit and so it turned out after further research I'm right. I'm not misleading anyone. Surely it is you doing that by claiming that I am ? Is this Wikipedia page utter rubbish ? The treaty of accession to the European Economic Community (EEC), which the United Kingdom joined in 1973, obliged the United Kingdom to incorporate into domestic law all EEC directives, including the use of a prescribed SI-based set of units for many purposes within five years. By 1980 most pre-packaged goods were sold using the prescribed units.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom You can also see the picture they have there of Tomatoes being sold in 2013 in LBs where they make the point that such signs do not comply with the legislation because they must show the metric equivalent more prominently than the imperial. This is a ridiculous argument where you are claiming 1 plus 1 equals 3 and that I am misleading people for saying it makes 2. I've had enough of this.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,980
Likes: 4,807
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 7, 2021 8:18:07 GMT
...so I deduced it is very likely to be related to Brexit and so it turned out after further research I'm right. I'm not misleading anyone. Yes, you are... But that legislation has not been repealed in the last two months...The current primary weights and measures legislation is still the Weights and Measures Act 1985. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/72The UK was already metricating before that, anyway. Not because of EEC accession, but simply because of the basic reality that being isolated globally was not a good thing. Metric units became legally recognised in this country in 1864... www.sizes.com/library/British_law/27_Victoria_1864.pdfHere's a timeline of all the steps and attempts to make the change... ukma.org.uk/what-is-metric/uk-progress/uk-metric-timeline/Some highlights for your delectation... 1901 The adoption of the metric system in British workshops is proposed at the International Engineering Congress in Glasgow. It is said that, “from time to time, orders have been lost for hardware and textiles, owing to manufacturers not troubling to make them in the standards of other countries.”1904 Lord Kelvin leads a campaign for the adoption of metric measures, and delivers to Parliament a petition of eight million signatures [pop'n 38m - over 20% of the pop'n, equivalent to over 14m now] . The House of Lords debates metrication and votes to make metric compulsory after two years.1907 A Select Committee on metrication recommends a compulsory changeover in 1910, and a Parliamentary Bill is drafted with to affect this. The government takes no action.
1951 The Committee on Weights and Measures Legislation (the Hodgson Committee) concludes that metric conversion is inevitable, and that the long-term advantages which would flow from an organised change would far outweigh the inconveniences of the change itself
1959 A Joint Committee appointed by the BAAS and the Association of British Chambers of Commerce notes the world trend towards the metric system but finds insufficient support in British industry for making the change. In its report entitled, “Decimal currency and the metric system: should Britain change?” it concludes that there would be a 10 to 20 percent saving in mathematics teaching and a five percent overall saving in teaching time for children aged 7 to 11 years from the change.
1963 In October, BSI publishes “British industry and the metric system”, summarising the results of its consultation with industry. This shows that a large majority is firmly in favour of starting a change to the metric system without delay and without waiting for the rest of the Commonwealth and the United States. The report concludes that there is a unanimous desire for decision and that indecision was “acting as a curb to industrial progress”.
1965 In February, the President of the Federation of British Industries (now the CBI) tells Ministers that the majority of its members are in favour of the adoption of metric as the primary measurement system. In May, in response to a parliamentary question, the Government announces that they “… consider it desirable that British industries on a broadening front should adopt metric units sector by sector, until that system can become in time the primary system of weights and measures for the country as a whole …” and that “the Government hope that within ten years the greater part of the country’s industry will have affected the change.”
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Mar 7, 2021 8:22:09 GMT
And who is doing the misleading? I only made my point after a recent visit to a hardware store where I noticed they were selling some stuff using imperial measurement for the first time in decades so I deduced it is very likely to be related to Brexit and so it turned out after further research I'm right. I'm not misleading anyone. Surely it is you doing that by claiming that I am ? Is this Wikipedia page utter rubbish ? The only thing that is utter rubbish is your deduction. Perhaps you can point to the law or statutory instrument that has been allowed to be introduced since Brexit that allows this? I'll give you a head start, the link is here: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2021?page=1 and you'll find that there has been no legislation or statutory instrument introduced to allow this. Simply because we have left the EU does not mean that all EU regulations that were previously introduced have been expunged from the statute books or been reversed. I'm sorry, but you are wrong, and you are misleading to suggest either that this is allowed due to Brexit or that this is a beneficial move. Even if it were the case, it might not be harmful, but beneficial? no chance.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,980
Likes: 4,807
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 7, 2021 8:28:54 GMT
...but simply because of the basic reality that being isolated globally was not a good thing. michaelc - You related the rollback of metrication to Brexit. I said they were unrelated. I was, to a certain extent, wrong. They are related... Both stem solely from the UK forgetting this basic reality in the belief that this small, damp, lump of rock off the north coast of the European continent - home to just 1% of the world's population - has some kind of right to punch above its weight.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Mar 7, 2021 10:20:39 GMT
...but simply because of the basic reality that being isolated globally was not a good thing. michaelc - You related the rollback of metrication to Brexit. I said they were unrelated. I was, to a certain extent, wrong. They are related... Both stem solely from the UK forgetting this basic reality in the belief that this small, damp, lump of rock off the north coast of the European continent - home to just 1% of the world's population - has some kind of right to punch above its weight. Yet people are risking and losing their lives daily in their desperate attempts to make it to the shores of this small, damp and insignificant lump of rock for some reason...
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,871
Likes: 2,309
|
Post by keitha on Mar 7, 2021 10:29:03 GMT
I bought a pair of shoes today. Anybody want to get into that peculiar nonsense? I have always worn a 9, had to buy a 10 maybe the foot got slightly aroused at the thought of something new. If you are gonna do that for pitys sake don't start on Ladies dress sizes. as in why are UK sizes 2 bigger that UK so a US size 2 is a UK 6. and why ladies find that a size 14 from shop A fits well whereas from shop B they need a 16 or even an 18. Actually to make you giggle, and we all need a laugh at the moment, I was in a shop last week that sells all sorts of stuff and their was a larger ( to put it politely )lady asking if she could change the size 12 jeans she'd purchased as she couldn't get in them.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,980
Likes: 4,807
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 7, 2021 10:49:39 GMT
michaelc - You related the rollback of metrication to Brexit. I said they were unrelated. I was, to a certain extent, wrong. They are related... Both stem solely from the UK forgetting this basic reality in the belief that this small, damp, lump of rock off the north coast of the European continent - home to just 1% of the world's population - has some kind of right to punch above its weight. Yet people are risking and losing their lives daily in their desperate attempts to make it to the shores of this small, damp and insignificant lump of rock for some reason... Because we're wealthy. Because we speak the global default language, English. And because we're viewed as not being as racist as some countries. And because they already have community groups here. And it's actually relatively few - way below our "fair share". The UK gets about 20% the number of asylum applications as Germany, 25% of France, 25% of Spain, 40% of Greece. In total, there's about 135k refugees and 60k people seeking asylum in the UK. Turkey has 3.5m, Pakistan and Lebanon each 1.5m (and Lebanon's population is <7m!). One thing's for sure - it's got nothing to do with what units of measurement we use...
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,868
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 7, 2021 13:46:19 GMT
...but simply because of the basic reality that being isolated globally was not a good thing. michaelc - You related the rollback of metrication to Brexit. I said they were unrelated. I was, to a certain extent, wrong. They are related... Both stem solely from the UK forgetting this basic reality in the belief that this small, damp, lump of rock off the north coast of the European continent - home to just 1% of the world's population - has some kind of right to punch above its weight.Ahhh interesting. THAT is an issue I might actually agree with you on. I don't understand why we actually want to "punch above our weight". Performing well economically, educationally, socially etc is surely far more important than having a seat at the security council and getting involved militarily in conflicts far away without UN requests for help. Norway, Switzerland, Sweden to take a few countries close by seem to be doing very well and they don't care to get involved intoo many wars behaving like some secondary "policeman" to the US. The only reason I can possibly think of that we want to retain that military significance, is so that our PM, his ministers, ambassadors and their staff can feel important as they swan around the world.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 7, 2021 13:50:34 GMT
michaelc - You related the rollback of metrication to Brexit. I said they were unrelated. I was, to a certain extent, wrong. They are related... Both stem solely from the UK forgetting this basic reality in the belief that this small, damp, lump of rock off the north coast of the European continent - home to just 1% of the world's population - has some kind of right to punch above its weight. Ahhh interesting. THAT is an issue I might actually agree with you on. I don't understand why we actually want to "punch above our weight". Performing well economically, educationally, socially etc is surely far more important than having a seat at the security council and getting involved militarily in conflicts far away without UN requests for help. Norway, Switzerland, Sweden to take a few countries close by seem to be doing very well and they don't care to get involved intoo many wars behaving like some secondary "policeman" to the US. The only reason I can possibly think of that we want to retain that military significance, is so that our PM, his ministers, ambassadors and their staff can feel important as they swan around the world. Performing well economically is obviously not that important either otherwise we wouldn't have Brexited.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,868
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 7, 2021 14:01:19 GMT
Ahhh interesting. THAT is an issue I might actually agree with you on. I don't understand why we actually want to "punch above our weight". Performing well economically, educationally, socially etc is surely far more important than having a seat at the security council and getting involved militarily in conflicts far away without UN requests for help. Norway, Switzerland, Sweden to take a few countries close by seem to be doing very well and they don't care to get involved intoo many wars behaving like some secondary "policeman" to the US. The only reason I can possibly think of that we want to retain that military significance, is so that our PM, his ministers, ambassadors and their staff can feel important as they swan around the world. Performing well economically is obviously not that important either otherwise we wouldn't have Brexited. Don't tempt me !!!!!
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on Mar 7, 2021 14:48:06 GMT
Performing well economically is obviously not that important either otherwise we wouldn't have Brexited. Don't tempt me !!!!! I would be delighted to see a realistic scenario where this hard Brexit we have chosen makes us better off economically than non-Brexit or soft Brexit.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,868
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 7, 2021 15:37:31 GMT
I would be delighted to see a realistic scenario where this hard Brexit we have chosen makes us better off economically than non-Brexit or soft Brexit. You'd need to ask someone more ideologically aligned to the Brexit movement than I am. I voted leave (just about) and then became much passionate about the events afterwards (2nd referendums with leave off the table being talked about etc). From a selfish point of view I think it was great that we could live and work anywhere in Europe and it was great to meet folk coming over here and boosting our economy. What ruined it to some extent was the way the Commision was run and it felt as though these separate nations were being forced together. Thats as close as I'll bore you with my views on the topic itself - as I say what really fired me up wasn't the in/out but the democratic process surrounding it. I do think however it has not gone nearly as bad so far as staunch Remainers would have had me believe. In fact I do believe had we remained we would not have done our own thing regarding vaccine procurement (no more so than Germany lets say) and we would be in a considerably worse situation re Covid although I accept that was something nobody could see in advance.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,980
Likes: 4,807
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 7, 2021 15:47:26 GMT
(2nd referendums with leave off the table being talked about etc). "Talked about" by whom...? Bear in mind the UK signed all the vaccine deals whilst still within the transition arrangement, and still fully subject to EU rules. So not only could we have done, but we actually did. Remember, the "leaving" in January 2020 was merely technical. Nothing actually changed until the end of December, when the transition came to an end. As could any EU country. Indeed, many have signed their own procurement deals, on top of the joint procurement (which the UK could have joined but decided not to - and which was signed at a FAR lower price than the UK got). Hungary with the Russian vacc, for instance, or... Germany. But, again, this is not the thread for that...
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Mar 7, 2021 16:21:17 GMT
I would be delighted to see a realistic scenario where this hard Brexit we have chosen makes us better off economically than non-Brexit or soft Brexit. You'd need to ask someone more ideologically aligned to the Brexit movement than I am. I voted leave (just about) and then became much passionate about the events afterwards (2nd referendums with leave off the table being talked about etc). <SNIP> I do think however it has not gone nearly as bad so far as staunch Remainers would have had me believe. In fact I do believe had we remained we would not have done our own thing regarding vaccine procurement (no more so than Germany lets say) and we would be in a considerably worse situation re Covid although I accept that was something nobody could see in advance. I don't recall any 'talk' of a second referendum without the option to leave. I actually thing that a second referendum could have been very helpful as it could have helped to define what flavour of Brexit people wanted (if, indeed that is what they wanted) but we are past that point now. On your second point of 'doing our own thing' regarding vaccine procurement, British Governments have previously decided to 'do their own thing' on Schengen, monetary union, and numerous other policies, so I'd suggest that their is significant precedent and indeed likelihood that they would have 'done their own thing' regardless. Indeed, development of the Oxford / AZ vaccine was partly funded by the British taxpayer, which I'd suggest makes the chosen course of action even more foreseeable.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 3,871
Likes: 2,309
|
Post by keitha on Mar 7, 2021 16:42:29 GMT
Kids ( and some adults ) would have to get better at maths to be able to do maths in Imperial
What would 3 and 3/7 hours, @ time and a half, pay at £7 17 shillings and threepence halfpenny an hour.
the payroll system when I started work in 1978 held the hourly rate to 1/1000 of a penny. Which I always said was crazy even if you rounded it to 1/100 of a penny it would make no difference in practical terms to your weekly wages unless you clocked up a lot of overtime in a week.
and of course with 4 weekly pay you have the week 56 effect where on occasions people get 14 4 weekly payments in the year ( and play hell cos payroll allow them 1/14 of the years tax allowance each payment not 1/13 as normal.
The best one though has to be a payment given to police officers that the Unions and Management said was tax free and the tax man said oh no it wasn't
it went something like this year 1 Payment £500, year 2 payment £500 plus £100 to cover the tax on the previous years £500. year 3 £500 plus £120 to cover the tax on the previous years £600 payment.
|
|