[CdM] Close, old chap. Like Phil, I enjoy the displays when I bother to watch them.
I've been pondering on my original comment and am thinking that maybe I've got things wrong. Before I comment further though a little research is required.

From: smh

"Peter Hawkins and Linton Besser
December 31, 2007

The city's $4 million New Year's Eve party on the harbour will not be hampered by bad weather this year, with mostly clear conditions forecast for the celebrations."

The same source (possibly CdM's) quotes AUD 600,000 as the cost of the fireworks. I do wonder though if that costing includes the expense involved in siting the beasts, programming and installing the computerised control system and the eventual dismantling of same.

If the quoted figure is correct (i.e. ignoring my comments) it means that the State (or city) expended 3.4 Million AUD in supporting the function. Media comments claim anywhere between 1 and 1.5 million people turned up in the city to watch the spectacle. In effect that's 1 in 3 of the whole population of Sydney. Yeah, right.

I popped onto the official NYE celebration site ( sydney ) to check out who was who. Slide down to the bottom of the page. I wonder if any of those organisations are recompensed or are simply expected to turn up and factor the event into their annual budget?

Right, I'm putting all this rubbish behind me and flying from Cootamundra to Bendigo. Tally-ho!

Well, even if you went with AUD4 million as the cost and 400,000 spectators, you would have a cost of AUD10 per person, which is less than the cost of a movie ticket. We have a lot of evidence that people were willing to spend a great deal of time getting somewhere to see the display, waiting for it to begin, and traveling home afterwards. Was it worth an additional AUD10 on top to those people? I'd still put my money on yes.

Hello and happy new year to all. Wandering around John Lewis's end-of-year "Clearance" (they're far to posh to have a sale) we notice they're offering a temporaray "special purchase" 300 quid reduction on a sofa we've been lusting after. The bastards.

One difficulty, apart from the possibility of an unexpected major purchase, is that we're also thinking of getting a cat and it's not clear the two will be entirely compatible.

[rab] Better that the cat does damage to the £300-cheaper sofa than the full-price version, shurely? Get both. You know you want to.

[rab] Are you already catty? If this is your first mog, the following anti-scratching tips may be useful: Cats are very discerning scratchers. They will start by destroying the most valuable soft furnishing in a room, then working their way through the remainder in descending order of value. You may be able to decoy them by the following options:
one: a toy 'cat pyramid' - very popular with kittens, this is a cardboard pyramid covered in carpet, usually with a hole in the side so the cats can climb into it, and often with a ball on a string or something tied to the apex. This may (not guaranteed, natch) give a young cat hours of pleasure and become their preferred scratching station.
two: a plain old scratching post. These can be quite luxurious, and may also act as a suitable distration.
three: a really nice (small) real wool rug. If this feels nicer on the little cat's paws than the sofa, then there's a good chance they'll scratch that instead. Needs to be the softest, most luxurious rug you can find, of course. These are cats we're talking about here, after all.
four: Declawing. Cruel. Please don't.
five: Claw clipping. Generally just results in the cat making larger holes when it scratches rather than pinpricks, so probably pointless. six: Luck. Some fabrics tolerate scratching without any great visible effects. Once you have got them scratching somewhere acceptable, the battle is largely won, because that spot will become scent-marked and they'll tend to use it in preference to anywhere else. Mostly – so you'll still need to keep half an eye on them. But if they become accustomed to scratching somewhere you don't want, or if they don't have an official scratching location, you have to watch them constantly and it's a war of attrition that you will slowly lose.

[Simulposted with Simons] Such is the contrary nature of felines that we know it will ignore all the IKEA furniture (of which there's lots) and scratch only the legs of the nice chair and (potentially) sofa. On the other hand, if it keeps the mice at bay I'm happy.

We think we'll have to let him/her into the living room only when we're there, have nice moggy scratching posts in the back bedroom (both of our bedrooms are at the back, but the name has stuck...) and let himher out into the garden during the day where there are real trees and bushes and things. And water-pistol aversion therapy has been quite successful I'm told.

We're not yet sure what kind of cat we'll be getting. We're currently researching the options. My preference would be for a toilet-trained kitten going spare from a loving home that we can teach social graces, rather than some rescued hell-cat with a dozen ASBOs to its name. The latter do have a talent for looking particularly cute in the adverts though...

In other news, it's just started snowing in a Hollywood at Christmas kind of way.

[Simons] Thanks for the advice btw.

Ooh, don't count on the animal making a special trip to another room just 'cos it wants to sharpen its claws; remember, they're lazy as well as contrary. A sacrificial rug or toy cat pyramid in the living room is probably still a good idea.

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will become the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other contender. As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and, as a result, has accepted a 5-year phase-in plan that will become known as "Euro-English". The 5-year plan will be implemented as follows:

- In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. Also, the hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konsiderable konfusion, and keyboards kan be manufactured with one less letter.
- In the second year, growing publik enthusiasm will be anticipated, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.
- In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil sertainly agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and should be done away with.
- By the 4th yer, people wil be mor reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".
- During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" resulting in a more sensibl riting styl.

By ze end of ze fifz yer, zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis; evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand evrivun els and ze drem of a united Urop vil finali kum tru bekos ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas!

Hello all, back from Paris with only a small hangover. Happy New Year 2008 to all and sundry - hope it's full of laughter, sunshine and cake.

[rab] I suspect that it's the luck of the draw. I have two moggies and have attempted to get them to use two varieties of scratching devices. Neither of the cats took to either of them. One contraption was a pole (wrapped with rope) the other a flat, foldable, unit covered in a lighter grade of rope. Good luck.

I have to confess - before I did the sprogging thing, I was a cat obsessive so can fully understand the 'desire to acquire' cat-like ness. All I can advise is .... whatever you wish them to do - they will graciously and very politely do the opposite ... and whatever direction you may want to send them [ with the best possible intentions] they will go the other way with a beguiling manner encompassing charm, purposefulness and intention, which sumply leaves you in a place whre you simply wouldn't even deign to complain. Adorable little hussies, each an every one of 'em.

'sumply' is a fine word - but as you can proberBly guess, was a bit of a misstype.

sumply - in the manner of a sump; L. sumpus, some cat.

Cats are shifty, evil, nasty pieces of work. No-one has ever had one as a pet. Millions of cats have had humans as servants, though.

Well, I've never had much time for dogs - so there you go.

I was wondering if one of the US Presidential Election experts (Projoy, CdM?) could explain if there's any reason why the Republicans and Democrats have their first nomination quasi-election thingy on the same day. Presumably there's nothing in the rules that says that candidates have to be nominated in anything like a similar way, let alone at the same time. Is it simply to try and prevent one party getting more press attention than another?

[rab] You just made me google the answer to that, cos I didn't know, but according to this page, anyway, "there was a mutual decision in 1976 between the parties to hold the event [the Iowa caucuses] on the same day because they understood the need to make it a heightened media bonanza of sorts."

There has been some change this year because the Republicans moved their caucuses in Iowa forward to 3 Jan. It was only after that decision was made that the Democrats decided (presumably for reasons of not handing momentum to the GOP race coverage) to move theirs forward also. The two parties do indeed use separate caucusing methods in Iowa (I think the Republicans do secret ballots, whereas Democrats tend to use the non-secret "go stand in the corner of the room relating to your candidate" solution. There has been quite a bit of shuffling this year of the primary calendar, mostly with different states jostling to put themselves earlier on in the process. I expect this drives up the cost for the candidates.

+)

Mmm... absence.

My brain was definitely on half-cock yesterday. Today, it seems to be on full-power again, with no discernable reason why.
As an aside, it's mild and windy here today in Grantham. And instead of being the last person on my cul-de-sac road occupied by mostly pensioners to put my bins out onto the roadside this morning, I was the first. Hurrah!

[penelope] The last time I managed that it turned out that I was putting them out on the wrong day. Something about holidays and skip-days, I don't know. Everyone hated me because the bins got knocked over, either by their kids or by the backwash from a passing vehicle. Great neighbourhood. Not.

Communal refuse collection for the building. It's magical.

[nights] Yes, we have that too, due to the sheer density of people living in the area (4 storey flats). The downside is that it means there are big wheely-skips on the streets, which don't do a huge amount to improve the look of the place. Preferable to bin bags being ripped apart by birds, though, which would be the alternative.

I was going to say, (before I whacked the wrong key) I'm really busy today...

(rab) You can't leave binbags out round here because the foxes just rip them apart leaving the rubbish scattered everywhere. I had thought of splashing a little white spirit around the inside hoping the smell would put them off but the foxes will probably evolve rapidly into actually needing the stuff to stay alive (cf. Warfarin, now a dietary essential for rats).

Yes, but my bit of town looks like shit 93% of the time anyway, so it's not so much of a concern.

On the way back from rehearsals this evening - well actually the pub after rehearsals - I was charmed by the man who got on the bus and was absolutely mystified that he had to buy a ticket. The driver and our interlocuter went back and forth on this one for about three stops, before the gentleman found the 1,30€ needed. And then got off. Marvellous.

[Rosie] So long as you don't use dogs, it's still perfectly legal to hunt and kill foxes.

(Phil) So it ought to be. I am the least likely huntsman, thinking it distasteful to set one animal against another but I was very much against the ban purely on libertarian grounds and after all it's only bloody foxes, which are pests. I find it staggering that some people in the suburbs actually leave food out for them, which is a bit like leaving food out for the dear little flies and wasps. I do feed the dickybirds but they are a Good Thing.

[Rosie] The quantity of species that became extinct long before intelligent bipeds trod this earth is simply staggering. I think our impact is over-rated and, unless we don't believe in evolution, we should stop saving species that obviously don't have the necessary means to survive on their own. Also, I wholeheartedly agree with you on the matter of the naïve townsfolk who put food out for the most wiley of scavengers, so that the cute little feckers don't have to go and find food for themselves. I wouldn't mind getting rid of a few robins at the moment - either that or persuade them somehow to shut the hell up at night.

(Phil) Robin problems? Bar them. Employ crows.

They switched to singing at night because modern noise pollution is so bad during the day that they can't hear themselves chirrup. If you want to Do Something about that, you'll probably have to join the Black Ops Arm of the Noise Abatement Society.

I was aware that rats were growing immune to many poisons, but this is the first I've heard about them needing a blood thinner to survive. Which begs the question: If warfarin is now an essential dietary additive for healthy rats, why don't we simply stop giving it to them?

(S M) I think the story is true though there's a possibility it may be a scientific urban myth. Without Warfarin the rats presumably will rapidly evolve back to what they were before the introduction of this substance although a number will perish in the process. Something more subtle is needed.

Dad always swore by a cricket bat during the bad old days.

I see idiots have dropped by (see elsewhere)...

Not my day. A casual chat over coffee led me to realise that flights I was booked to take next week have been withdrawn. The service email got swamped by spam, and though they tried to call me, it turns out they did so on my old office number during the Christmas vacation. Ho hum. The original booking was perfect: nice leisurely departure, direct flight out to a meeting; meeting finishes, evening flight back, airport easily makable after the end of the meeting. Then I could go to a course I was enrolled on the next day. Now, the outward is early morning, involves a change at Birmingham. Then I had a choice of either leaving the meeting before the session in which I was scheduled to speak, or missing the course. I went for the latter in the end.

And now these guys show up.

I think I missed it.

Well where's the fun in that? You are supposed to get the only available flight that puts you in the night before your event, a train ride away from wherever your meeting is to take place. Said train should break down, stranding you overnight somewhere with no accomodation so that you have to sleep on the (open-air) platform where you get molested by stray dogs and policemen. When you get to the meeting you should discover that your powerpoint slides have somehow been erased from your laptop, at which point your wireless connection should pack up. The return journey should see you travel by coach and hovercraft and deliver you into the arms of a UK customs official who is going through a bad patch in his or her personal life. You should return home after 15 hours of point-to-point commuting to discover your pipes burst approximately one hour after you departed.

On the other hand, you are changing at Birmingham.

Actually, crisis averted. Having rescheduled my course, I realised that a different airline could offer me direct flights at better times, and for a few quid less than my original ticket. So, back on the phone to get the original ticket refunded (which I must make sure actually happens), and less cost to the taxpayer.

[rab] All's well that ends well, then.

Not a criticism of anyone here, or anyone at all really, but I do wonder how many air/car/train/hovercraft(?)/coach miles of unnecessary travel to and from meetings are covered per annum. Also, how much money is spent on travel and accommodation that could be done much more cheaply with minimal discomfort to the person (who is, after all, getting paid to travel in many cases).

[Phil] As a fully paid-up member of the business tralling set I have had those thoughts occasionally, but, if you do it all the time then the level of comfort becomes a significant issue. You'd sleep in a capsule hotel for one night, but not 4 nights a week for 6 months.
Also, speaking for myself and most of my colleagues, my traveling is almost exclusively outside normal office hours, so I dispute that I'm being paid to travel. I think there are a lot of myths around this area.

That's 'travelling set' of course.

On the travel theme, how do people commute to and from work/university/knitting lessons?

I personally dislike travelling, particularly on my own. Most of the meetings I go to involve a bunch of people getting together from all over to present talks to an audience. Although this can be done by videoconferencing, much of the most useful time is that spent discussing with individuals in ad-hoc discussions etc. I think that could well get lost without the physical presence. I get paid the same whether I stay put or go somewhere. Also, this all being paid by your (and my) taxes, means that we always have to go the cheapest, most unglamorous way possible.

(INJ) You are being paid to travel, it presumably being a part of your job specification, unless you're self-employed. (nights) Car, once I'd got one (1965). Distances 2, 27, 10 and 6 miles.

[nights] Lots of jobs, several parts of the country involving several house moves. It goes thus: 1. Walked, then car 1.5 miles. 2. Ditto. 3. Car, 10 miles. 4. Car 1.5 miles. 5. Car, 17 miles. 6. Walked 600 yards. 7. Car, 20 miles. 8. Car 11 miles, then 2 miles (I moved). 9. Car 2 miles.

Oh, [nights] Walk, 2 miles.

[nights] For many years around 50 miles - 80 Km - each way but these days a leisurely stroll of around 10 metres from the kitchen to workshop.

(rab) What, even when it's chucking it down? (everybody) My niece and her hubby commute respectively to Cardiff and Swindon, from Chepstow. This is among the reasons that CO₂ emissions are high, and will carry on getting higher. Should I tell her? She claims to be Green-ish, after all. At least they don't fly.

Currently - a quarter of a mile into the city centre. Takes about 6 minutes. *smug green face*

When I was doing a proper job, then that would be a train every day. Now I'm freelance, it's that occasionally plus a lot of lying in bed, thinking.

[Rosie] Well, I don't own a car. There is a bus, so when it's totally dreadful I might get a bus. But for the rest of the time, I have an umbrella.

[Rosie] My job specification says I have to do 5 days of 7.5 hours each (as if!). My base location/normal place of work in tax terms is about 45 minutes away. I am currently working some 3.5 hours away from home, am still expected to do the same number of hours once at the client site and get no extra money. Where's the payment for travel in that?

[INJ] Blimey. No wonder you go walkies whenever you have some time off.

I am currently juggling TV companies' and radio stations' requests for t'interviews. And then I'm off on hols to Holland tomorrow :oD

My commute is even shorter than Dujon's: 6m from kitchen to office. Music lessons are reached by tram. Tram or train to the city, or bicycle are the other ways I usually get around.

[INJ] Do you get paid travel expenses? If not, I'd be having a word with my employer, if I were you. Also, are you really out of the house for 15 hours a day (presuming you take 30 minutes for lunch), 5 days a week? Also (Take 2), do you need to be at the client site for all of those hours/days?

My commute these days is a flight of stairs. In my last few jobs it's been: a flight of stairs; a flight of stairs; 27 miles each way by car; 30 miles each way (1 mile by car, the rest by train); 8 miles each way by bicycle; 20 mins walk; 17 mins walk; 25 mins walk etc.

For several years at one time in my life I had a 60-mile each way commute. Now it is 18 stairs.

(That's 18 stairs each way, mind you.)

[INJ] Please ignore the apparently aggressive style of my previous post to you (which was unintentional). In fact, just ignore the whole thing, as it seems rather silly now. I was NES (Not Entirely Sober) at the time of writing.

[flerdle] Six miles from kitchen to office? How big is your house?

[Tuj] If I were to tell you, I'd have to kill you.

I should contribute. Bus for ten minutes then tram for twenty, then feet for five. This is why strikes throw me so - I live out in the suburbs, and while it has its advantages - calm, nicer people, very few sirens - if I want a late night, or to go and see Mlle Nights on a whim, it's a touch difficult. I keep on having dark thoughts about buying a car...

[nights] I can understand going to work on a bus, going to work on a tram, but going to see Mlle Nights on a whim is new to me. ;-)

[Phil] I prefer to go to work on an egg.