10 Sucks !

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 10:19:46 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:


Plus insurance and regular maintenance. If I lived in a city, I wouldn't
own a car. Most people haven't clue how much their vehicle actually
costs them. I suspect that deep down they have an inkling, but they
don't want to add up the numbers and find out....



It's not just a matter of cost, but also heavy traffic, problems
finding a parking space, etc.

I would love to live in NYC, but I can't afford the cost of a
decent-sized apartment in good condition in a nice part of town. But
if I could afford to live there, like you I wouldn't have a car. I
would walk to close places, and take a taxi or Uber to the more
distant ones.

And one other thing that would drive the cost up substantially: I
would go south for the winter; I don't want to deal with cold, snow,
and ice.

nospam wrote:
In article , Commander Kinsey
wrote:


Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not to
buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

you're ignoring the cost of the driver and taxi licensing.

that's why uber/lyft are killing the taxi industry. they're usually
cheaper and a lot more convenient to use too.

Lyft doesn't exist outside of N America and uber doesn't exist outside of
London. Not very practical.

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:37:19 -0000, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:44:15 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

You must have really cheap taxis. Every time I've used a taxi it's
cost a bloody fortune.

You must have very cheap cars! Include the depreciation when you do
the arithmetic. My taxi journeys are very short and seldom now I've
given up work. There wasn't that much difference before I gave up
working if I include fuel, depreciation and parking. The parking in
Manchester was £3.00 a hour and it's gone up since I retired. For
commuting taxis only charge for miles unless you want the taxi to hang
around all day. Only very rich people do that or have a chauffeur.

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not
to buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

It's not the cost per journey, but the annual cost. It's a balance between
convenience and frequency. If you took that 20 quid journey four times a
week it'll still be cheaper than running anything other than a rust bucket.

In article , Chris
wrote:

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not to
buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

you're ignoring the cost of the driver and taxi licensing.

that's why uber/lyft are killing the taxi industry. they're usually
cheaper and a lot more convenient to use too.

Lyft doesn't exist outside of N America and uber doesn't exist outside of
London. Not very practical.

there are similar services in most places. here's a few:
https://www.techworld.com/startups/a...-alternative-r
ide-hailing-apps-3656813/

the point is that ride sharing services are very popular and are
impacting taxi service, to the point where the taxi companies are
trying to ban them outright rather than compete on a level playing
field and offer a better product. they will lose that game.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 19:09:48 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:37:19 -0000, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:44:15 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

You must have really cheap taxis. Every time I've used a taxi it's
cost a bloody fortune.

You must have very cheap cars! Include the depreciation when you do
the arithmetic. My taxi journeys are very short and seldom now I've
given up work. There wasn't that much difference before I gave up
working if I include fuel, depreciation and parking. The parking in
Manchester was £3.00 a hour and it's gone up since I retired. For
commuting taxis only charge for miles unless you want the taxi to hang
around all day. Only very rich people do that or have a chauffeur.

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not
to buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

It's not the cost per journey, but the annual cost. It's a balance between
convenience and frequency. If you took that 20 quid journey four times a
week it'll still be cheaper than running anything other than a rust bucket.

Bull****. 80 quid a week for four half hour journeys? Any car is way cheaper than that. You're talking about £320 a month!

Just think about it, a taxi IS a car. So you're paying for his car AND him.

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 19:09:48 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:37:19 -0000, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:44:15 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

You must have really cheap taxis. Every time I've used a taxi it's
cost a bloody fortune.

You must have very cheap cars! Include the depreciation when you do
the arithmetic. My taxi journeys are very short and seldom now I've
given up work. There wasn't that much difference before I gave up
working if I include fuel, depreciation and parking. The parking in
Manchester was £3.00 a hour and it's gone up since I retired. For
commuting taxis only charge for miles unless you want the taxi to hang
around all day. Only very rich people do that or have a chauffeur.

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not
to buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

It's not the cost per journey, but the annual cost. It's a balance between
convenience and frequency. If you took that 20 quid journey four times a
week it'll still be cheaper than running anything other than a rust bucket.

Bull****. 80 quid a week for four half hour journeys? Any car is way
cheaper than that. You're talking about £320 a month!

Just think about it, a taxi IS a car. So you're paying for his car AND him.


Yes, but you're only paying for them when you're using them. For a bought
car you're paying for it even when you're *not* using it. Insurance, tax,
depreciation, etc. Ok it's a bit extreme an example, but there are
situations when a taxi is cheaper.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 22:06:10 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 19:09:48 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:37:19 -0000, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:44:15 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

You must have really cheap taxis. Every time I've used a taxi it's
cost a bloody fortune.

You must have very cheap cars! Include the depreciation when you do
the arithmetic. My taxi journeys are very short and seldom now I've
given up work. There wasn't that much difference before I gave up
working if I include fuel, depreciation and parking. The parking in
Manchester was £3.00 a hour and it's gone up since I retired. For
commuting taxis only charge for miles unless you want the taxi to hang
around all day. Only very rich people do that or have a chauffeur.

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not
to buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

It's not the cost per journey, but the annual cost. It's a balance between
convenience and frequency. If you took that 20 quid journey four times a
week it'll still be cheaper than running anything other than a rust bucket.

Bull****. 80 quid a week for four half hour journeys? Any car is way
cheaper than that. You're talking about £320 a month!

Just think about it, a taxi IS a car. So you're paying for his car AND him.

Yes, but you're only paying for them when you're using them. For a bought
car you're paying for it even when you're *not* using it. Insurance, tax,
depreciation, etc. Ok it's a bit extreme an example, but there are
situations when a taxi is cheaper.

A car costs **** all when you're not using it. It's not wearing out, it's not using fuel. The only cost is tax and insurance which is bugger all compared to taxi fares.

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 22:06:10 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 19:09:48 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:37:19 -0000, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:44:15 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

You must have really cheap taxis. Every time I've used a taxi it's
cost a bloody fortune.

You must have very cheap cars! Include the depreciation when you do
the arithmetic. My taxi journeys are very short and seldom now I've
given up work. There wasn't that much difference before I gave up
working if I include fuel, depreciation and parking. The parking in
Manchester was £3.00 a hour and it's gone up since I retired. For
commuting taxis only charge for miles unless you want the taxi to hang
around all day. Only very rich people do that or have a chauffeur.

Last time I took a taxi it was £20 for half an hour's journey. It costs
nothing like that to run a car, especially if you're sensible enough not
to buy a new one, then you get bugger all depreciation.

It's not the cost per journey, but the annual cost. It's a balance between
convenience and frequency. If you took that 20 quid journey four times a
week it'll still be cheaper than running anything other than a rust bucket.

Bull****. 80 quid a week for four half hour journeys? Any car is way
cheaper than that. You're talking about £320 a month!

Just think about it, a taxi IS a car. So you're paying for his car AND him.

Yes, but you're only paying for them when you're using them. For a bought
car you're paying for it even when you're *not* using it. Insurance, tax,
depreciation, etc. Ok it's a bit extreme an example, but there are
situations when a taxi is cheaper.

A car costs **** all when you're not using it. It's not wearing out,
it's not using fuel. The only cost is tax and insurance which is bugger
all compared to taxi fares.

Don't forget depreciation. The newer the car the worse it is.

All I'm saying is that a car is always the cheapest option. It depends on
personal circumstances. For most people that means needing a car, but for
some it doesn't.

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 00:06:19 -0000, David B. "David wrote:

On 21/01/2019 22:57, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 22:43:14 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 21:19, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:03:09 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 20:31:11 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 18:36, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 18:33:15 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 20:55:29 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 15/01/2019 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:30:42 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:
[....]
Randy Knobloch was listed on LinkedIn as a Security Consultant

In fact, we messaged one another!

You mean LinkedIn is a real place? I just get spam from them
from
people I've never heard of wanting to engage in some kind of
conversation about a business I'm not in.

It is! :-)

Here's the site of my protégé, a fellow of whom I'm enormously
proud.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathan...orth-97498226/

You'll even find a 'Recommendation' from me there! ;-)

I don't know how I ever got a linkedin account, but I
constantly get
messages from people wanting to "connect" with me whatever that
means.
So what's the purpose of this site?

A bit like Facebook for business. And a glorified business card.

Is it like a lonely hearts thing for businessmen?

Yeah, kinda

So no real purpose then. I'm quite sure a business finds customers
without that ****.

One principal purpose is for recruitment.

Recruitment is traditionally done through newspapers, or their online
equivalent. I've always looked for jobs in for example s1jobs.com

It's for the opposite purpose. Employers looking for staff!

Surely they should advertise through the usual channels?

I'm sure they do that too! LinkedIn enables potential employers to
directly contact people who they consider might fit their needs. I've no
doubt that recruitment agencies trawl the membership too.

I've never seen the need myself. Plenty job adverts through traditional
channels.

This might come as a surprise to you, but advertisements in the press or
magazines is really the end of the line. Most people are recruited for a
job well before it comes to advertising a position.

Doesn't work that way in the UK. I've never been given a job offer by floating my CV about, but I've got several jobs by responding to adverts.

Are you employable? Professionally qualified? If so, in what field?

Computer technician, although I've got a degree in Physics.

Wow! My late son got a good Physics degree from Manchester University
then worked for ICL as a computer whizz until his tragic death.

Yip, Physics degrees are useless, no jobs available. I got my computer
jobs solely based on my hobby of computers. My first job, I applied for
an Electronics Technician. Somebody else got it, then 2 weeks later the
boss phoned me and said he'd seen I played with computers a lot as a
hobby (on my CV) and would I like a new post they'd just created. That
lasted 6 years till I got fired for ****ing off the upper management.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:14:20 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

Footnote: Car dealer ads now quote purchase installments in dollars
"every two weeks", and lately I've seen more and more ads quoting them
in dollars per week. Eg, a Hyundai Tucson at "only" $99/week. Makes it
look more affordable.

I don't watch commercials or even read ads in magazines or newspapers.
My trouble is that my wife is just the opposite and often tells me
what we can afford. I convinced her years ago that we didn't need a
car because we don't go anywhere far. Now she is into buying a winter
home in Spain with a double garage. That's a whole new country to
explore and so she says we will need two cars!

Steve

--
http://www.npsnn.com

Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:14:20 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

Footnote: Car dealer ads now quote purchase installments in dollars
"every two weeks", and lately I've seen more and more ads quoting them
in dollars per week. Eg, a Hyundai Tucson at "only" $99/week. Makes it
look more affordable.

I don't watch commercials or even read ads in magazines or newspapers.
My trouble is that my wife is just the opposite and often tells me
what we can afford. I convinced her years ago that we didn't need a
car because we don't go anywhere far. Now she is into buying a winter
home in Spain with a double garage. That's a whole new country to
explore and so she says we will need two cars!

Good on her! (Except for the *two* cars bit [1].)

[1] OTOH, we also have two cars, but they're 17,000 km apart.

On 25/01/2019 15:36, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 00:06:19 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 22:57, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 22:43:14 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 21:19, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:03:09 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 20:31:11 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 21/01/2019 18:36, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 18:33:15 -0000, Chris
wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 20:55:29 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:

On 15/01/2019 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:30:42 -0000, David B. "David
wrote:
[....]
Randy Knobloch was listed on LinkedIn as a Security
Consultant

In fact, we messaged one another!

You mean LinkedIn is a real place?* I just get spam from them
from
people I've never heard of wanting to engage in some kind of
conversation about a business I'm not in.

It is! :-)

Here's the site of my protégé, a fellow of whom I'm enormously
proud.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathan...orth-97498226/

You'll even find a 'Recommendation' from me there! ;-)

I don't know how I ever got a linkedin account, but I
constantly get
messages from people wanting to "connect" with me whatever that
means.
So what's the purpose of this site?

A bit like Facebook for business. And a glorified business card.

Is it like a lonely hearts thing for businessmen?

Yeah, kinda

So no real purpose then.* I'm quite sure a business finds
customers
without that ****.

One principal purpose is for recruitment.

Recruitment is traditionally done through newspapers, or their
online
equivalent.* I've always looked for jobs in for example s1jobs.com

It's for the opposite purpose. Employers looking for staff!

Surely they should advertise through the usual channels?

I'm sure they do that too! LinkedIn enables potential employers to
directly contact people who they consider might fit their needs.
I've no
doubt that recruitment agencies trawl the membership too.

I've never seen the need myself.* Plenty job adverts through traditional
channels.

This might come as a surprise to you, but advertisements in the press or
magazines is really the end of the line. Most people are recruited for a
job well before it comes to advertising a position.

Doesn't work that way in the UK.* I've never been given a job offer by
floating my CV about, but I've got several jobs by responding to adverts.

Are you employable? Professionally qualified? If so, in what field?

Computer technician, although I've got a degree in Physics.

Wow! My late son got a good Physics degree from Manchester University
then worked for ICL as a computer whizz until his tragic death.

Yip, Physics degrees are useless, no jobs available.* I got my
computer
jobs solely based on my hobby of computers.* My first job, I
applied for
an Electronics Technician.* Somebody else got it, then 2 weeks
later the
boss phoned me and said he'd seen I played with computers a lot as a
hobby (on my CV) and would I like a new post they'd just created.
That
lasted 6 years till I got fired for ****ing off the upper management.

That made me smile! :-)

Which part?

"I got fired for ****ing off the upper management."

How was I to know that making public they'd lost £4 million was
naughty?* I should have taken the ****s to court.* What's amusing is in
a later job, I was doing electrical work in his house!* I was so tempted
to make that chandelier fall on his head.* The silly bugger never even
recognised me, or pretended not to.

You tell a fine tale! :-D

Btw, I don't doubt that it's true!

So what did you then do to earn your living?

I got a very similar job elsewhere, which lasted for 2 weeks until I was
fired for continually sleeping in.* Then another one, which somehow paid
me less than I thought, so I resigned, then got another which lasted for
5 years until I became ill.* Since then I've been self employed.

Interesting things to put on your CV!* Are you completely recovered now
from your illness? I do hope so.

No, I doubt it will ever go away.* I've had it for 3 sessions.* 6
months, then 2 years, then 9 years to date.* No doctor has a clue what's
wrong.* Medical "science" indeed.

Please tell me by email what's wrong. Others here might laugh. :-(

--
David B.

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 10:10:27 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 23:08:29 -0000, Chris wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 19:36:25 -0000, Chris wrote:

On 18/01/2019 01:45, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:28:12 -0000, Paul wrote:

On Jan1, people swim in the ocean here. For maybe ten seconds.
That's the Polar Bear Club swim. (There are several cities
that conduct these events.) It's a kind of idiocy test.
And no, they don't throw you in. You have to enter on your
own. And volunteering to enter, is the "personality test".
Getting out is easy. These are generally done in shallow
water, so someone in a dry suit can pull you out if needed.
The fire departments here, are equipped to extricate fools
from cold water :-) (Zodiac, boat trailer, dry suits, there's
such a setup only a ten minute drive from me, ready to go.
Call 911 if you need help.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear_plunge

Are you serious? 10 seconds? Water is never cold enough to get out
that quickly. I can swim in zero degrees C water for a couple of
hours. Humans are warm blooded. Shivering doesn't mean you're going to
die, it means you've lost 1 or 2C (out of 17C required to die) and your
body is shivering to prevent further heat loss, not to mention brown fat
cells generating heat, and of course limiting heat loss by adjusting
blood flow to the skin.

You're either exaggerating,

Nope, I'll make some videos next time we get wintry weather here in
Scotland. I've just bought an HD video camera.

swim with a dry suit

Dry suits are for girls.

or actually a whale (or
have the blubber of one).

Fat people get colder, they don't have the metabolic rate to generate so much heat.

It's strange that mammals have evolved blubber to survive cold water
climates, then. Better to insulate than lose the heat. They'd have to eat
constantly to survive.

People with fat have not evolved it for that reason.

Fat people are nothing to do with evolution.

Exactly. Which is why I was saying that fat people are not less susceptible to the cold.

Which if prolly what you're doing for two hours: swimming vigorously to
keep your temps up, but at a big calorific cost.

Swimming doesn't make me any warmer.

Of course it does. Any exercise warms you up.

Staying still can generate the same amount of heat from brown fat cells and shivering.

Nope. Do you sweat standing still?

No, because I don't have to. Exercise warms me up, but not exercising can still warm me up if it's required - brown fat cells and shivering both generate heat. You can also lower blood flow to the skin, which keeps the heat in. If I swim in a cold lake, I'm no warmer afterwards than if I stand still for the same amount of time.

The limitation remains the same, my body's stamina - the ability to
generate energy over a long period of time.

That's not stamina.

Yes it is. Stamina is the ability to not run out of energy.

Hyper

Hypo, dimwit.

Typo, obvs.

The take more care you silly Aussie.

Oh, the irony...

And I'm not an Aussie.

You sounded rather like Rod Speeed.

thermia kicks in when the core temp drops below 35ºC.

Wrong wrong wrong. You die at 20C.

Hypothermia is not the point at which die. That's death. Medically it is
defined as below 35°C.

That's ridiculous, since death is 20C. Why worry when you've lost only 2
of 17C required to lose life? Losing 2C just makes you shiver really
hard, which creates a large amount of heat, stopping you getting any colder.

A sign of severe hypothermia is when you *stop* shivering. The body can't
shiver indefinitely and can only compensate for small temperature
differences.

Like I said, stamina. Healthy people can shiver for as long as they have a food supply.

The body is very sensitive to temperature changes.

The body reacts to them but doesn't come to any harm. Do you worry when you sweat?

Sweating and shivering are the body attempting to keep within a degree of
37.4. It does it because it stops functioning properly when it is outside
that range.

So like I said, you should be worrying equally about sweating and shivering, yet people quite happily run for hours while pouring with sweat, yet if they shiver they panic.

Most people will go running for hours and sweat continuously without any
worry. Sweating is the same as shivering but for the opposite reason..

And their core body temperature doesn't really fluctuate. That's why they
sweat. They also drink copiously otherwise they'd stop sweating and get
heat stroke.

And with shivering your core doesn't change much either. The first degree or two makes you shiver, preventing further drops in temperature. Just like the first degree or two the other way makes you sweat, cooling you down and preventing further increases in temperature.

Just like 40°C is a 👎bad fever.

WTF is that thumbs down sign before the word "bad"? How did you do that?

No idea. Accidental.

No way you could accidentally create an appropriate symbol.

Below 30ºC
you're unlikely to be conscious. At 20ºC you're long dead (except in
exceptional circumstances!).

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/hypothermia/

You're quoting th NHS? ROTFPMSL!

It doesn't matter what I quote, the definition is the same.

It's not a definition, it's a belief, by an organisation that couldn't
organise a ****up in a brewery.

The NHS didn't invent hypothermia. It's an actual thing. Every Google hit
says the same thing. Here's some actual science...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...23085007000916

It's bull****, try it yourself. Go in ice water and stay in for more than 15 minutes. I guarantee you won't die, despite what the bull**** on the internet says. If you're worried, have a friend ready to pull you out if you lose consciousness. I don't even shiver until 30 minutes, and I don't shiver hard until an hour.

They take our taxes and can't even cure the common cold.

Wow. That's a special kind of criticism.

What on earth do you mean by that? I'll be more clear - why should I respect medical "science" when in the 21st century we're still suffering from colds, flu, cancer, and fifty billion other ailments?

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:18:20 -0000, Wolf K wrote:

On 2019-01-23 05:10, Chris wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:

[...]
[The NHS definition of hypothermia is] not a definition, it's a belief, by an organisation that couldn't
organise a ****up in a brewery.

The NHS didn't invent hypothermia. It's an actual thing. Every Google hit
says the same thing. Here's some actual science...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...23085007000916

They take our taxes and can't even cure the common cold.

Wow. That's a special kind of criticism.

"Commander" Kinsey is a special kind of twit. He tries new nyms when he
realises most people have kill-filed him,

You don't get it do you? The killfiling brigade are a bunch of childish morons. I don't care if someone doesn't like my opinions and killfiles me, but to jump up and down and publicise that they don't like me is beyond a joke. And what's worse is responding to my post, then killfiling me AFTERWARDS, so they get the last word in - the ultimate childishness.

and for a couple or three
posts he sounds quite sane. Then something triggers his characteristic
weirdness, which eventually becomes incomprehensible. About the only
thing you can be sure of is that he hates just about everything that
makes his life in the UK possible and worth living. Except ****ups in
pubs, a method of achieving a pseudo-zen-like absence of thought
peculiar to yobs.

Just because I show common sense and realise that 90% of the population are idiots....

Take the IQ test. 50% of people have a 2 digit IQ by definition. Have you ever tried having a conversation with one?

It's high time we let idiots die off instead of protecting them with benefits, NHS, etc, etc. If you can't survive by yourself, we don't want you on Earth.

In article , Commander Kinsey
wrote:

Take the IQ test. 50% of people have a 2 digit IQ by definition.

false.

Have you
ever tried having a conversation with one?

does responding to your posts count?

It's high time we let idiots die off instead of protecting them with
benefits, NHS, etc, etc. If you can't survive by yourself, we don't want you on Earth.

when will you be departing?