They have some powers, they got upset at Facebook and decided to flex a bit by sending one of the boys around, to invite one of his mates for a chat.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/24/mps-seize-cache-facebook-internal-papers

The person sent was the serjeant at arms. They carry a sword. Doubt they took it out but they also carry one of the House of Commons maces, which is gold covered and jewel encrusted, about 1.5m (4.9ft) long and weighs roughly 10kg (22 lbs).

Imagine some large, pissed off looking dude, dressed like he’s from the year 1415, kicking your hotel door in because you didn’t RSPV properly. Then being told hand over documents or we may stick you in jail (and you know the pretended it would be the Tower of London).

The 1,000 yard stare he must get when asked if he enjoyed London and how lovely that history must be.

1950s, the time of plenty… if you ignore the rationing you mean? Life expectancy of 69 (12 years less). Infant mortality was almost 10 times higher, 30 infants died per 1,000 births vs 3.25 per 1,000.

Healthcare has grown from 3.5% gdp to 9%, more stuff gets treated.

There are double owner occupier housing now. 1953 was about 30%. 1956 is when protected rents ended and rents started to increase massively.

Defined pensions were taxed to death by Brown. They do still exist though (I have one, along with a SIPP). More people contribute to pensions than ever before and the age people stop work is starting to decline.

Did you have healthcare before Russia invaded Ukraine and started murdering babies? Was it even on the cards?

It's not an economic factor either. US health costs are much higher than other developed nations. It spends 17% of GDP, almost double of Germany (next highest).

Spending is without the positive outcomes. Infant mortality of 5.4 deaths per 1,000 live births (17,000 extra dead babies a year Vs an average.rate), for context you are worse than Russia with 4.9 but better tha Chile 5.9). 23.8 maternal deaths per 100,000 births being 3 times higher than most wealthy nations.

The economic considerations are that you have a lot of heath businesses. If you socialised medicine and reduced spend, you may improve health outcomes but how would they pay for the very nice buildings they have loans for?

Finally, US doesn't want universal healthcare as a society. Whilst they may be financially wrecked by costs and live shorter more painful lives, that is far preferential than seeing the low income family get the same free cancer treatment for their child.

Brian Cox was also in d:Ream.

American but E from the eels, his dad came up with the Many Worlds Interpretation

What would they do for the hours after school finished normally or if work on weekends?

Sounds like a work / life balance problem. Companies will have to be made to change their working practices, allow more remote, flexible working hours and reduced time.

UK is, very, slowly starting to move to a 4 day week for work (reduced hours, not cramming in 4 days x 10 hours). The productivity increases along with recruitment make it worthwhile. My company isn't there but 35 hours + 50 days holiday so not far.

That would solve the 4 day school day. Also allow for parents to educate their kids for 1/2 a day if needed.

Yes but not for long.

As (generally climate denying) people love to point out, wind and solar is erratic power generation. For this reason you need triple capacity Vs requirements.

This means that for a huge amount of time you'll have excess energy, once we start to be predominantly renewables, battery storage is expensive. One of the solutions is to create hydrogen, also pumped hydrogen, etc.

Banking sector regulations require financial reserves that can be used to cover emergencies.

The EU revised the rules recently that meant banks could count the cost of its software as part of its cash reserves, increasing them by € billions each year.

You try and sell your copy of windows 10 and Norton anti virus to make ends meet.

Also when you are paying for those that is after tax as well. So I save about £2k a year just on travel costs, that’s the same as a £3k pay increase.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits different treatment of insured persons on the basis of their sex in connection with pension funds. This was a supreme court ruling, so kind of linked but not quite.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/253100

Interestingly, in UK and EU it became illegal to discriminate by sex for car insurance from about 2012, without very careful use of data - which doesn't happen. It is allowed to be linked on things like jobs though.