Modern Life Is Rubbish

[trastrick]

2 hours ago, Tyke02 said:

Think of it not as a value on life, but the cost of preventing (well, delaying) a death.

 

Uncomfortable though it may be, in the absence of an unlimited budget countries providing healthcare (and all the other things that prolong life) need to have some  mechanism of deciding how much it is reasonable to spend out of taxation to do that.  There is of course the option used by some other nations of letting people decide for themselves how much to spend on healthcare, at least those people who have the money to choose.

I'll think of it as it is stated, thank you. 

 

Monetorising life is a handy way to determine who gets priority treatment, otherwise known as rationing.

 

But I don't think a system running out of money in a country with spiraling unsustainable National Debt, would ever, ever, think of such a thing!  Do you?

 

It's actually inevitable as the money runs out.

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by trastrick

[Chekhov]

On 07/06/2022 at 16:08, Carl said:

Because a very simple internet search throws up plenty of more authoritative results which flatly contradict what your electrician has apparently told you; two for starters:

 

https://www.nrla.org.uk/news/electrical-safety-does-changing-tenants-affect-EICR#:~:text=As change of tenancy is,not be appearing on reports.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/electrical-safety-standards-in-the-private-rented-sector-guidance-for-landlords-tenants-and-local-authorities/guide-for-landlords-electrical-safety-standards-in-the-private-rented-sector

My 'trician says :

 

From July 2020 a rental property requires an EICR EVERY 5 YEARS

From 1st April 2021 the new regulations stipulate this applies to all tenancies, new and existing so if I test a property in June but the tenant moves out in July, I would have to retest the same property before a new tenant can move in

[Bargepole23]

56 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

My 'trician says :

 

From July 2020 a rental property requires an EICR EVERY 5 YEARS

From 1st April 2021 the new regulations stipulate this applies to all tenancies, new and existing so if I test a property in June but the tenant moves out in July, I would have to retest the same property before a new tenant can move in

Then I would get an electrician who understands the requirements. I can see no mention in the regulations about tenants moving in and out. Just the five yearly interval.

[Carl]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

My 'trician says :

 

From July 2020 a rental property requires an EICR EVERY 5 YEARS

From 1st April 2021 the new regulations stipulate this applies to all tenancies, new and existing so if I test a property in June but the tenant moves out in July, I would have to retest the same property before a new tenant can move in

The 1st April deadline applied to existing tenancies - ie you had until that date to have the inspection performed where you had an existing tenant. it doesn't mean that you need to have a new inspection every time you get a new tenant after that date

 

The regulations are here:

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/312/contents/made

 

I suggest you read Part 2 (it's only a page so shouldn't take long).

[GabrielC]

Life is what you make it. I'm sure past  generations moaned about their lives.

[Chekhov]

52 minutes ago, Carl said:

The 1st April deadline applied to existing tenancies - ie you had until that date to have the inspection performed where you had an existing tenant. it doesn't mean that you need to have a new inspection every time you get a new tenant after that date

 

The regulations are here:

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/312/contents/made

 

I suggest you read Part 2 (it's only a page so shouldn't take long).

I think I'll just accept your position if either of my tenants ever move out !

[Chekhov]

14 hours ago, Tyke02 said:

Let me know if you can come up with any stats to support this assumption. I drew a blank, but from fire service reporting came up with the information that fire seems to be seven times as likely in rented versus owned property, and electrical faults are in the top two causes of fire in rental properties, so it might be higher than you think.

I spent a bit of time trying to find out how many people died in domestic electrocutions but the data was not clear but it appeared to be lower than 10 a year, and that included private properties etc.

I agree with you that fires caused by electrical faults are probably more significant but even trying to split out private v rented was getting too complicated, plus the stats did not discriminate between faults in the house wiring and faults in devices (esp extensions and splitters....).

I still think 10 deaths, or less, prevented by this legislation is probably not that far out.

The point is that if £250 million a year was spent on the NHS it would save a hell of a lot more than 10 lives.

Edited June 9, 2022 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

15 hours ago, RJRB said:

Cost benefit analysis has its place but is far from being a total solution.

Costs  in money terms may supposedly be calculated at a point in time but massive over runs or constant upward revision seem to be the norm on most major projects.

There  are numerous examples including most government projects .Do any come in on budget .

As for benefit,that can be even harder to define.Not everything can be assessed in monetary terms.

HS2 fails for me on both fronts

As for your oft quoted Mike Buckley comments this is hyperbole that you are determined to take literally.

Why would he not mean it literally ? Sibon takes similar views as regards parents being banned from photographing their kids at school events.

These people are very concerned about virtue signalling "look I care about people more than everyone else", and, on the other hand, do not think the "cost" is significant, Buckley vis pupils being forced to wear masks, and Sibon vis parents being banned from photographing their kids.

It is entirely plausible that Buckley (and Sibon) meant it literally.

 

15 hours ago, RJRB said:

Just like your claim to be a downtrodden white ,middle aged ,middle class  victim is designed to make a point by exaggeration.(At least I hope it was  or you are unhinged)

I'm not sure I said I was downtrodden", but it is undeniable that if (effectively) positive discrimination is applied to many groups then the others are suffering the opposite.

Edited June 9, 2022 by Chekhov

[Rockers rule]

34 minutes ago, GabrielC said:

Life is what you make it. I'm sure past  generations moaned about their lives.

Hey!

You can't just come on here  Gabriel and put things back on subject - its just not allowed, there's such things as etiquette you know 🤣.

 

I'm with you Gabriel .

Life is what you make it.

Not going to say we had bugger-all but we made our own entertainment and didn't need expensive gadgets.

Jee's (sorry Gabriel 🤣) if little Johnny ain't a smart phone at 5 year old he's classed as underprivileged.

 

Keep safe out there  .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rockers rule]

22 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

I spent a bit of time trying to find out how many people died in domestic electrocutions but the data was not clear but it appeared to be lower than 10 a year, and that included private properties etc.

I agree with you that fires caused by electrical faults are probably more significant but even trying to split out private v rented was getting too complicated, plus the stats did not discriminate between faults in the house wiring and faults in devices (esp extensions and splitters....).

I still think 10 deaths, or less, prevented by this legislation is probably not that far out.

The point is that if £250 million a year was spent on the NHS it would save a hell of a lot more than 10 lives.

 

15 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Why would he not mean it literally ? Sibon takes similar views as regards parents being banned from photographing their kids at school events.

These people are very concerned about virtue signalling "look I care about people more than everyone else", and, on the other hand, do not think the "cost" is significant, Buckley vis pupils being forced to wear masks, and Sibon vis parents being banned from photographing their kids.

It is entirely plausible that Buckley (and Sibon) meant it literally.

 

I'm not sure I said I was downtrodden", but it is undeniable that if (effectively) positive discrimination is applied to many groups then the others are suffering the opposite.

 

Come on Chekoff.

Modern life is NOT RUBBISH.

It's what you make of it - simple as.

Time to stop beating a dead horse & get back on subject.

(novel idea for SF, but you never know it might catch on )

(Shouldn't the intricacies of household wiring regulation be in the 'Property' section of this Forum ? ? ? ?)

Get back on subject.