Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

"Frank Slootweg" wrote in message
.home.nl...
Mark Brader wrote:
This is now off-topic for both newsgroups,

Well, you might not *like* the topic, but I don't think it's
*off*-topic.

I'm quite sure that they have "German toilets" in (some
parts/locations/whatever of) Oz, and I'm quite sure I've seen a few
"German toilets" during our recent trip in the US (California). Whether
one *calls* them "German toilets" is another matter, but they are of
*essentially the same design*.

I promise, next time I will pay special attention, make notes and
report back! :-)

but in the hope of ending the subthread quickly...

Mike O'Sullivan:
"Not so the German toilet. The excrement lands on a bone-dry
horizontal
shelf, mere inches beneath one's posterior. Repeated flushings are
required to slide the ordure off the shelf ..."

Frank Slootweg:
I still don't understand it! The "shelf" is a little hollow, not flat.
Do the Germans use special water which magically flows *up*hill?

When you flush, the flush water is dumped onto the "shelf", moving
fast enough to overcome the slight slope of the hollow and wash it
(hopefully) clean.

Yes, of course. But *after* that, the last bit of water is supposed to
*stay* in the hollow area. At least that's what our (Dutch) toilets do,
and - while we travel a lot in Germany (and Austria) - I've never
encountered the mentioned shelf-is-totally-dry problem with German
toilets.

So all in all, I think the whining is about *broken "German toilets"
or/and from people with a dietary (sp?) problem.

Like so many Euros, Frank is anal retentive and seldom HAS to put anything
into a toilet of a solid nature.



[...]

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

Sharx35 wrote:
[...]

Like so many Euros, Frank is anal retentive and seldom HAS to put anything
into a toilet of a solid nature.

Well, I'd rather retain it, than have if come out of my mouth, as is
the case with you. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

BTW, I like the "Euros" naming, they're of higher value. Thanks for
that!

BTW 2, besides Reading 101 and Comprehension 101, you apparently also
need to enroll in Writing 101, or perhaps comprehension is just the only
problem.

--
"Is it some requirement for jerks to have sequence numbers?"

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:03:07 +0100, Frank Slootweg
wrote:



No, its not often, it's rare and restricted to taxes like the hotel
tax, the object being to stick tourists like you who can't vote in the
state so they can get away with it.

Give me a break! You guys don't stay in hotels, even not on business?
Dream on!

Not often and when I do, I am the tourist paying the tax to support
the locals who don't have to.


And you don't eat out, at 12.3%?

No, I avoid California like any sane person. It's have that where I
live.


Face it, it's like I said: The exclusion of the tax in the displayed/
advertized prices does *not* serve any purpose for the *customer*,
because - despite your statement that it does - it apparently does *not*
help you realize how high it is!

Of course, it does, which is why our tax is 6% and not 12% like in
California or 23% like in Sweden.


BTW, in case it was not clear: Our receipts, bills, etc., do *mention*
the amount and percentage of tax, it is just *included* in the
displayed/advertized/receipt prices. I.e. on the display etc. you see
how much you have to pay, and - if yo're to stupid to calculate it
yourself - you will see the amount of tax on the receipt.

That was the point you know. It's right there in front of us so we
can make sure it doesn't get too high. Works too doesn't it, because
ours is a lot lower than yours.


FYI, here the non-hotel taxes which i still have (I have no other
restaurant receipts, because most places keep those themselves):

Toy: 8.5%.
Restaurant: 12.3%
Groceries: 8.25%
Drinks: 7.25%
Mobile phone: 8.75%
MacDonald: 7.7-8.7%
Pharmacy: 6.75%

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 22:24:24 +0100, Frank Slootweg
wrote:

Sharx35 wrote:
[...]

Like so many Euros, Frank is anal retentive and seldom HAS to put anything
into a toilet of a solid nature.

Well, I'd rather retain it, than have if come out of my mouth, as is
the case with you. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

BTW, I like the "Euros" naming, they're of higher value. Thanks for
that!

BTW 2, besides Reading 101 and Comprehension 101, you apparently also
need to enroll in Writing 101, or perhaps comprehension is just the only
problem.

Careful Frank, He'll suggest you enrol on Spelling 101

Enroll = enrol

But then again perhaps that is the way it's spelt where you are.

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

pltrgyst wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:12:20 +0900, wrote:

Careful Frank, He'll suggest you enrol on Spelling 101

Enroll = enrol

But then again perhaps that is the way it's spelt where you are.

"Spelt"? Isn't that a small fish? Fish can enroll in spelling courses
where you live?

Yes, "spelt". But because you keep snipping [1] the 'Newsgroups:' line
for no apparent/good reason, it might not apply in your neck of the
woods.

Perhaps it's only the monkfish.

-- Larry

[1] Or is Forte Agent *that* broken?

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:45:09 +0100, Frank Slootweg
wrote:

pltrgyst wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:12:20 +0900, wrote:

Careful Frank, He'll suggest you enrol on Spelling 101

Enroll = enrol

But then again perhaps that is the way it's spelt where you are.

"Spelt"? Isn't that a small fish? Fish can enroll in spelling courses
where you live?

No ! the small fish is "Smelt"

Spelt, in it's other guise than above, is actually an ancient variety
of wheat.


Yes, "spelt". But because you keep snipping [1] the 'Newsgroups:' line
for no apparent/good reason, it might not apply in your neck of the
woods.

Perhaps it's only the monkfish.

-- Larry

[1] Or is Forte Agent *that* broken?

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

[rec.travel.australia+nz re-added. See below as to why. Please don't
break it again, at least not for this sub-thread. Thanks.]

pltrgyst wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 14:45:09 +0100, Frank Slootweg
wrote:

pltrgyst wrote:
... But because you keep snipping [1] the 'Newsgroups:' line
for no apparent/good reason, it might not apply in your neck of the
woods.
....

[1] Or is Forte Agent *that* broken?

No, I just don't care to cross-post. I only inhabit rec.travel.usa-canada.

No offense, but we (TINW) don't care that you don't care, and we don't
care which group(s) you inhabit. Someone posted in some groups and you
responded.

You responded to . I doubt that you know for sure
that he subscribes to rec.travel.usa-canada. I know that he subscribes
to rec.travel.australia+nz. So it's quite possible that he would not see
your response (in this case "would not have seen", because of my
crossposted response).

I find such practices strange and rather impolite, not to mention
unneccessary.

As I'm sure you're aware, posting to multiple groups is often
inappropriate, and almost always leads to off-topic subthreads or
derivatives lingering forever in both groups.

That's a non-argument, because we were discussing English language
aspects, which are *especially* applicable to both groups, and you
*specifically* said "where you live", i.e. where tony lives.

As to posting to multiple groups often being inappropriate, that may
be true, but is hardly relevant. The only *relevant* issue is, whether
or not it is inappropriate in *the case at hand*. I don't think it is,
and not because it is 'my' thread (see above).

IME/IMO, stripping groups most of the time creates more problems than
it 'solves', and stripping without saying so is nearly always
inappropriate.

FWIW, *my* rule is that I don't strip groups, unless they are *totally
and utterly* inappropriate, *and*, if and when I do, I leave all groups
in the Newsgroups: line intact and strip only in the Followup-To: line,
*and* *say so* in my text. In that way, nobody is taken by surprise.
(That is how Newsgroups:/Followup-To: should be used.)

N.B. I realize full well and acknowledge that you can do as you damn
well please, but that does not mean that we have to take it lying down,
does it!? :-)

Report from the US, a nice but somewhat backward country.
 

On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:17:07 +0100, Frank Slootweg
wrote:

[rec.travel.australia+nz re-added. See below as to why. Please don't
break it again, at least not for this sub-thread. Thanks.]

OK. I'll leave the headers intact just this once.

....
No, I just don't care to cross-post. I only inhabit rec.travel.usa-canada.

No offense, but we (TINW) don't care that you don't care, and we don't
care which group(s) you inhabit. Someone posted in some groups and you
responded.

No offense, but I don't care that you don't care that I don't care. There's
nothing that says I have to play by your imaginary rules and cross-post. I
intended my reply for consideration by only those in the usa-canada group. I
have no interest in discourse with those discussing travel in the southern
hemisphere.

.... N.B. I realize full well and acknowledge that you can do as you damn
well please, but that does not mean that we have to take it lying down,
does it!? :-)

On USEnet? Of course not! Have at it! But first, Frank, as I sit here sipping
MacChouffe and nibbling a sensational Boerenkaas, it was nice meeting you. But
all good things must come to an end, so -- {threadkill} and {plonk}.

-- Larry