I'm not sure it is objectively marginal. At Circuit of the Americas where they have both raced recently the difference in lap time is about 10 seconds. That doesn't sound like a lot but is close to 10% of the lap. The F1 race is 56 laps so by the end an Indycar is going to be 5 or 6 laps down. Throw in the fact an Indycar can't do 56 laps without refueling and it might be closer to 7 laps. In motorsport that is extreme
In the context of the issue that doesn't really make sense. The issue is that the home office think you left and didn't come back. How would an exit check tell the home office you have come back into the country?
In a country that has exit checks, in order to go airside, a border agent will stamp you out and record your exit. If you were to get stamped out and then decide that you don't want to catch your flight after all, you'd have to get stamped back in again (often not a real stamp these days).
In the UK there's no exit checks. The only information they have is that you booked a flight. This is "Advance Passenger Information" which all airlines are legally required to submit. They don't know if you've actually boarded the flight, they just assume that if you booked a flight that it means you left the country.
The exit check doesn't tell them that you've come back, they know that already unless you cross the land border. But it does tell them that you truly left and stop the guesswork.
Isn't that a big part of the issues the US has with passing a budget? Some of their tax breaks etc. have expiry dates so keep needing to be renewed. I think part of the current shutdown is related to the debate about renewing the obamacare tax breaks which have/are due to expire
So they do the thing where they set breaks to sunset in order to make the bill revenue neutral according to the CBO.
Then, later on, when the tax breaks are ready to sunset, they convince the CBO that the tax breaks constitute the new baseline. So now when they pass the next budget they are not considered "new" and they do NOT need to be balanced with cuts or increases any more.
It's a total end run around the intention of the process.
very true, although in relation to OPs point I was talking less about the why of expiring laws/taxes and just pointing out that creating laws that expire can have its own less than desirable knock on effects
To over simplify the process: Budgets in the US are supposed to be revenue neutral. The use of sunset provisions, like the SALT cap, allow Congress to play with the math in order to make it follow its own rules. These provisions are really a gimmick because not extending them before expiration becomes a political problem. I.e. letting the SALT cap expire would “give the rich a tax break”. Note: I’m not arguing the validity of the SALT cap).
> Budgets in the US are supposed to be revenue neutral.
To clarify - budgets passed via the reconciliation are supposed to be revenue neutral. The reconciliation process takes away the Senate's filibuster. When the filibuster is in play, it effectively requires a 60-40 supermajority to pass anything.
(No this is not how the founders imagined the process going when they wrote the rules.)
It covers the impact of fuel quite thoroughly but it brushes over the time element which I think is actually a bigger factor in why they don't really do it. Passing on the fuel cost to the customer they could probably get away with but given how tightly packed the flight schedules are (particularly short haul) the cumulative extra time across even a day could be enough that they have to drop a flight from the schedule.
When you consider that RyanAir don't have seat back pockets specifically because of the extra cleaning time to clear them between flights, you can see why the extra 2 minutes flight time might matter.
Because Iceland is a member of the Schengen zone. It's possible to travel between countries in the Schengen area without going through border control (although I don't know about the specifics of travelling to/from Iceland).
That was part of my earlier point, they are already issuing a visa, and a visa to Iceland is a Schengen Visa. This seems to imply that they only want nationals from certain countries.
Contrast this with Spain's digital nomad program, where they don't require someone to have a powerful passport, all they seem to care about is having a job outside spain.
I traveled from US to Iceland to France without knowing this and honestly thought I somehow bypassed customs when I got to France. So, this is correct you can go from Iceland to other Schengen zone countries without any checks (I didn't show my passport or do customs at all)
From my understanding of the article, the BoE aren't concerned about their own infrastructure.
They're concerned about all the major retail banks using the same cloud provider and then that provider having a major outage.
Individual banks having an outage is an issue but one that can be handled. Three or four of the main banks all going down at once could be catastrophic.
Firstly, never and never in your lifetime are two very different timespans.
Second, just because those houses from 2008 recession are now worth more than in 2008 doesn't mean they have been steadily increasing in value since 2008. There have definitely been downturns in the property market. One in particular that springs to mind is the impact of Brexit on house prices in London. Sure, eventually the price might recover to the point that homes are worth more than pre Brexit. But if you are trying to sell in the meantime that drop can have a significant impact on your ability to move.
Ok never ever have housing really prices gone down. Look at any chart of average home prices in the US if you bought a house at any time and waited 10 years you definitely made money. Even in neighborhoods where >50% people were in foreclosure their homes are worth more then ever.
If you can find anywhere housing prices are less then in 2008 please say so.
The Brexit thing is just guesswork on your part those properties will be sell at the same prices they were listed at probably nobody actually purchased them in the first place just for speculation.
Look anywhere in rural areas of high tax states in Great Lakes/Midwest/Northeast, such as southern Illinois or upstate NY. Even homes in CT/NJ away from the urban centers are down in real value, maybe flat or slightly higher in nominal value.
Certain regions of the country are hot, certain regions are nowhere near. Even the differences in the regions of the US where house prices are rising exhibit a wide range from many areas only experiencing slight changes to others in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It depends if your region has the amenities people with money are looking for or if it has access to large numbers of high paying jobs.
No region doesn't matter look at the actual statistics on this. I looked at neighborhoods the had above 50% foreclosure rates and those houses STILL increased in value in the long term.
You can argue the real/nominal value, but housing cost are a cause of inflation in this regard not an effect, all prices are relative to the price of shelter for individuals.
If I wanted to create a market in trains I wouldn't hold a bid to run a specific line or route. I would hold a bid to operate specific times on a given line. e.g. Operator A would run the 7:00,8:00 and 10:00 and Operator B would run the 7:30, 8:30 and 10:30.
There are still limits on how much competitiveness that brings to the market (Operators have very little control over delays) but it would encourage the operators to compare in terms of on train service (and potentially ticket prices as well).
This is something that actually really frustrated me about the Brexit referendum. I remember reading an opinion piece in the NZ herald from a women who explained why she was voting in favour of Brexit. What it basically boiled down to was that she was jealous that EU citizens had freedom of movement with the UK and she didn't.
But conversely during the time that she was allowed to be in the UK, she had the right to vote while EU citizens didn't.
Like you I don't think commonwealth citizens who voted for Brexit were being racist, I do think it was sometimes vindictive though which doesn't really make it much better.
One thing I would say on claiming health reasons is, from the employers perspective it might be taken more as "I'm not ready to return to the office" instead of "I don't want to come back ever".
They are still going to expect you back at some point so this may result in just kicking the can down the road.
