There are often issues beyond the obvious. For example, my partner's problems vary considerably. So actually doing paid employment is, in my opinion, impossible. She is able to do useful things - such as manage a website for a charity - simply because she can do that on an as-and-when-possible basis.
And where an employer might put themselves out to help an existing employee, even if it costs them real money, it is asking a lot to take on a new person in this sort of situation.
Anything is "possible". But why would an employer go to all that time and trouble, when there are a host of able-bodied people who wouldn't present any problem at all ? Incidentally, a bigger screen would probably work for about 5 minutes. I experimented hooking a laptop to our 42" TV, and after about 5 minutes my wifes eyes got "fatigued" (her expression) and aggravated her nystagmus.
I'm sure there are. But again, why would an employer ever take on a person who won't be reliable, will require no end of assessments and adjustments, and who can't be as productive as their able-bodied colleagues ?
I'm not blaming employers 100%. At the end of the day, it has to be acknowledged that there are some unfortunate individuals who just cannot work in the currently accepted sense.
Which one?
Exactly. If they can do it for benefits then why can't they do the same for taxation? IIRC, you used to be able to choose to be taxed as individuals or as a couple if you were married.
Joint taxation is politically incorrect in this modern world, so it's impossible to go back to it.
Which is why the earlier problem is so hard to solve
tim
Indeed. In the old days when we still had a manufacturing industry a lot of PCB assembly and small assembly work was done as 'home work' with boxes of bits arrivibng and sub assemblies being taken away for QC - and payment on how many passed QC - the rest came back for rework.
This proved ideal for mums with kids, as work could be dome when they were at school and in the evening.
Good assemblers could make if not fortunes, a steady wage supplement well above 'minimum wage'.
But this kind of ad hoc entrepreneurship is frowned upon these days. Tax it and ban it, say the socialists. Cant have people working outside regulated work environments, in their homes, without paying commercial council tax! Good grief! And we will stop all benefits and tax the work as well, so there!
/you really needed to read the Frank Herbert book first to appreciate the film.
I had.
From that, I assume there was more than one? From where I am now, I cannot be certain, but I'd be surprised if it wren't the first.
There were 2 movies. The first was dire, the second OK-ish-I-guess.
Isn't that a key requirement of the job?
Theres defintely son of dune or something..a TV series possibly. Mate of mine had it on a computer..I've deleted it now so it wasn't a lot of cop.
I thought the book and the film were both a bit dreary really.
Yes, but not to be so obvious about it.
A Bliar clone. But socialists voted for him.
This has nothing to do with faith. The problem is this; you are too stupid to understand how science works. My guru is not stupid, and because of that I understand how science works. It helps to have good gurus.
**Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments, Justin Kruger and David Dunning, Cornell University, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol 77, no 6, p 1121-1134 (1999)
Wiki has this about the term guru:
"Guru (Devanagari ????) is a Sanskrit term for "teacher" or "master", especially in Indian religions. The Hindu guru-shishya tradition is the oral tradition or religious doctrine transmitted from teacher to student. In the United States, the meaning of "guru" has been used to cover anyone who acquires followers, especially by exploiting their naiveté, due to the inflationary use of the term in new religious movements."
I assume you are using it with the US meaning?
You have problems and need help from my guru:
On the contrary Jo, I am so intelligent that I know how science really works. So I dont need a guru.
I cant say whether your guru is stupid. But for sure you are. To have a guru at all.
Exactly so Jo. You are so far behind you thunk your ahead.
Apart from living across the road from Colin around 1980, I worked for the CEGB and his description is essentially correct because the same sort of government rules applied. However, there was (and still is) a bit more design expertise in the nuclear generating companies because the UK regulator insists that nuclear licensees understand the design and the science pretty well. And when the consortium (collection of "traditional" engineering firms) which was building Dungeness B ran into financial difficulties, to all intents and purposes the CEGB was running the design function, although from the original office (in Sutton) so that there was a degree of separation between the customer (Generation Design & Construction Division at Barnwood in Gloucester (where EDF Energy still lives) and the contractor, APC.
The "high level" design concepts and fuel design came from the UKAEA, based on their experience with research and prototype reactors.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.