Links: | Thanks Ant and Acleacius. |
Play: | Rocketpult. |
Stories: |
Big Ben to fall silent in London at Houses of Parliament for repairs
to Great Clock and huge bell. David Bowie's FBI agent made an unexpected return to Twin Peaks. Thanks Devicer. |
Science: | Fleas test positive for the plague in parts of Arizona. |
Media: |
Crushing Power
Bank with Hydraulic Press - HUGE EXPLOSION. Thanks
Digg. Cyclist Enacts Swift Justice On Would-Be Bike Thief. Motorcycle Drives Off Cliff. |
The Funnies: | Dilbert. |
RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 22:17:
But I'm all for tearing down the United States Capitol, that land could be put to better use as a skate park or an extension of the Smithsonian Institution.
Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 21:03:This^Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 20:23:
And you don't understand there is no sentimental value attached to the Parliament buildings. I would bet you any amount of money that if you ran polls all over London and/or England tomorrow it would likely be close to 100% that people would say scrap it and build something better and much more cost effective.
I've not talked about Parliament. I'm specifically talking about the northern clock tower called Big Ben. When in my entire conversation did I ever mention Parliament?
However, since you seem to be so keen on bringing up "Parliament." I should remind you that parliament isn't the name of the building. Parliament is the name of the supreme legislative body in the United Kingdom. Body members meet in the House of Lords and the House of Commons in separate large chambers within the Palace of Westminster (the actual name of the building). The entire palace is declared Grade I ("buildings of exceptional interest") by England and Wales since 1970 and part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1987. UNESCO sites tend to remain protected structures for conservation and posterity. So clearly the building absolutely has sentimental value within London, Britain, the UK, and the world.
Quboid wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 18:16:Was listening to a program on NPR about this and it was pretty amusing. Someone from the UK rattled off a list of some of the things which needed to be negotiated with the EU and how long each of those things themselves would in normal circumstances take to be fully negotiated. None of the time-lines were less than the time until Brexit is supposed to happen. And now ALL of them need to be completed. It can't be done in any kind of normal way. Which probably means there will be quick and dirty compromises which will likely be painful -- probably more so for the UK than the EU.
Brexit dominates everything and it's hard to look at any big expenditure as wise with so much uncertainty about what our economy will look like a few years. It's some measure of economic stimulus, but there are higher priorities. We haven't even started buying the land for the border controls we'll need in 19 months. It feels like we're treading water until someone senior in the government acknowledges the elephant in the room: this is a terrible idea. The undefined being negotiated by the unprepared in order to get the unspecified for the uninformed.
Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 20:23:
And you don't understand there is no fucking sentimental value attached to the Parliament buildings. I would bet you any amount of money that if you ran polls all over London and/or England tomorrow it would likely be close to 100% that people would say scrap it and build something better and much more cost effective.
jdreyer wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 17:35:Creston wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 17:31:£7B buys a lot of rounds at the pub. Given the choice which would they choose?Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:25:Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:36:
That's the problem with those old buildings. It costs far more to repair and maintain them then it would be to scrap them and build something new and efficient. It's just a huge waste of money for a public service building.
Have you never heard of sentimental value? It's not an "old building." For Londoners and England in general, Big Ben (the building and the clock) remains a part of the culture and heritage for over 150 years. I guarantee you if you asked any Londoner what you just said, they would be appalled at such a thought.
I lived in London for six months, and very few Londoners had much good to say about the Houses of Parliament and the shitheels that infest them. Big Ben, yes, but I think that if given the choice, the good people of London / the UK would choose NOT to pay SEVEN BILLION POUNDS for the upkeep of a building.
Primalchrome wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 17:50:Don't you know it. Pence smiles every time don gobs downs an artery clogging cheeseburger or piece of fried chicken. You can hear him snickering in the background as he says "have a piece a cake Mr President"RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 15:56:You don't think Pence just views himself as sitting in the bullpen waiting for the 70+ year old guy to throw his arm out of socket?
You know Pence is tired of running around doing damage control as his boss becomes more tractable. Now all they have to do is take away the morons twitter account.
RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 15:56:You don't think Pence just views himself as sitting in the bullpen waiting for the 70+ year old guy to throw his arm out of socket?
You know Pence is tired of running around doing damage control as his boss becomes more tractable. Now all they have to do is take away the morons twitter account.
Creston wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 17:31:£7B buys a lot of rounds at the pub. Given the choice which would they choose?Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:25:Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:36:
That's the problem with those old buildings. It costs far more to repair and maintain them then it would be to scrap them and build something new and efficient. It's just a huge waste of money for a public service building.
Have you never heard of sentimental value? It's not an "old building." For Londoners and England in general, Big Ben (the building and the clock) remains a part of the culture and heritage for over 150 years. I guarantee you if you asked any Londoner what you just said, they would be appalled at such a thought.
I lived in London for six months, and very few Londoners had much good to say about the Houses of Parliament and the shitheels that infest them. Big Ben, yes, but I think that if given the choice, the good people of London / the UK would choose NOT to pay SEVEN BILLION POUNDS for the upkeep of a building.
Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 16:26:Oh, you! Stop being so logical.Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 15:55:
There is no shortage of old and ancient buildings throughout Europe. While Londoners may be sentimental about Big Ben I seriously doubt any of them would object to seeing Parliament demolished and replaced with something far better. If it saves taxpayers money in the long run they'll always be for it. And let's not forget those buildings are paid for by the majority of people in a nation that never see them or use them, so why waste their money needlessly when they need it a great deal more in their own communities. What private companies do with their own money is their business, what governments do with our money is our business.
You're still not understanding the point of sentimental value. The very definition is "the value of something to someone because of personal or emotional associations rather than material worth." In other words, ancient buildings and landmarks may be financially inefficient to maintain by today's standards, but in the minds of many, they hold iconic and cultural values that are worth preserving regardless of high costs.
Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:25:Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:36:
That's the problem with those old buildings. It costs far more to repair and maintain them then it would be to scrap them and build something new and efficient. It's just a huge waste of money for a public service building.
Have you never heard of sentimental value? It's not an "old building." For Londoners and England in general, Big Ben (the building and the clock) remains a part of the culture and heritage for over 150 years. I guarantee you if you asked any Londoner what you just said, they would be appalled at such a thought.
Mr. Tact wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 11:18:For $11B they could populate those two carriers they built with aircraft.
Wow. Big Ben's regular hour ringing out for four years. Deeper in the article it claims the Parliament building needs 7 billion pounds ($11 billlon) of repairs. Really? I would have thought you could build that building several times over for $11 billion....
RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:15:Not sure Trump even understands what went on down there. He just read what his chief strategist wrote. Just so happens that his chief strategist is white nationalist Stephen Miller.
donald was forced to make a comment that made sense. must have been extremely painful. It only took the idiot 48 hours.
Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 15:55:
There is no shortage of old and ancient buildings throughout Europe. While Londoners may be sentimental about Big Ben I seriously doubt any of them would object to seeing Parliament demolished and replaced with something far better. If it saves taxpayers money in the long run they'll always be for it. And let's not forget those buildings are paid for by the majority of people in a nation that never see them or use them, so why waste their money needlessly when they need it a great deal more in their own communities. What private companies do with their own money is their business, what governments do with our money is our business.
Mr. Tact wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:47:You know Pence is tired of running around doing damage control as his boss becomes more tractable. Now all they have to do is take away the morons twitter account.RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:15:He may have read the statement, but I guarantee he didn't write it and most likely doesn't understand why he "had to" read it.
donald was forced to make a comment that made sense. must have been extremely painful. It only took the idiot 48 hours.
PHJF wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:45:Let me guess... because too many ugly Americans come to see it?
By contrast, most Parisians would pay good money to see la tour Eiffel torn down.
RedEye9 wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:15:He may have read the statement, but I guarantee he didn't write it and most likely doesn't understand why he "had to" read it.
donald was forced to make a comment that made sense. must have been extremely painful. It only took the idiot 48 hours.
Kxmode wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 14:25:Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:36:
That's the problem with those old buildings. It costs far more to repair and maintain them then it would be to scrap them and build something new and efficient. It's just a huge waste of money for a public service building.
Have you never heard of sentimental value? It's not an "old building." For Londoners and England in general, Big Ben (the building and the clock) remains a part of the culture and heritage for over 150 years. I guarantee you if you asked any Londoner what you just said, they would be appalled at such a thought.
Cutter wrote on Aug 14, 2017, 13:36:
That's the problem with those old buildings. It costs far more to repair and maintain them then it would be to scrap them and build something new and efficient. It's just a huge waste of money for a public service building.