AndreasHG

Oh dear: do you have any idea of what it takes to get the German passport to asylum seekers settled in Germany? Britons insularity is surprising. It seems that you spend the whole time closely watching your own d**k, and lose sight of the rest of the world, except the USA of course, I guess because they are just too big to ignore. Asylum seekers can become naturalized German citizens after five years of legal residence in Germany: Applicants must demonstrate that they are well integrated into German society. This can be shown by having outstanding educational or professional degrees, being involved in volunteering, or speaking German at a level above B1. Otherwise, nein, nada, niet, no UE German Passport for the asylum seekers. Now, let me ask you a second question? Why would an asylum seeker leave a country like Germany, offering a GDP per capita of €51,304, once they are integrated and speak the local language, to move to start all over again in a country having a GDP per capita of €48,441? The only rational reason is that, in the UK, the Sharia law is one of the law of the land. It is regularly enforced by Sharia Courts, whose verdicts are binding for Muslims living in the UK. And this is yet another peculiar consequence of the British insularity.

Thak you for being honest. I immediately understood you had a vested interest in promoting TCL, but I had no evidence to support my assumption. I have no vested interest. I am not in the AC business, and I am not a shareholder of any of the companies I mentioned above. My recommendation to the readers herewith is, if they really care about quality, to stay clear of Chinese designed and made units, including TCL. To you my recommendation is to introduce a two-or-three-tiers offering, something the like of good, better, and best. The Thai market is maturing. Customers are getting more experienced, and they start appreciating differences that first time users do not appreciate. If you don't see the need to expand your company offering to include also upmarket solutions now, you may soon. Actually, for your company, it may become a matter of survival, when the market finally really becomes mature. I have seen this trend in Japan first, in Europe thereafter, and in Latin America and Southeast Asia since a while.

I doubt the EU will ever collapse. What has happened and is still happening in the UK, starting from immigration, is so appalling that it has dissuaded the rest of Europe from following suit. Continental Europeans must be grateful to the United Kingdom for having voluntarily acted as a guinea pig. With regards to Europe, the last three years have been exceptionally difficult because the continent is consumed by a criminal and costly war, started by Putin, and that Putin cannot be allowed to win. For next year the IMF foresees an improvement for the EU as a whole, especially for Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Poland, Greece, Romania, Sweden, Finland, Checz Republic, Hungary, which are expected to post a GDP growth in line or higher than the USA (see link below). And this is the thing that EU haters tend to forget. The EU is a bloc with some common regulations, but also a large degree of discretion granted to national governments with regard to the vast majority of rules that regulate the economic activity in the individual states and more. The result is that there are EU countries that outperform compared to international standards, and countries that end up crushed by the competition. Textbook examples are Ireland and the United Kingdom: they joined the EU almost at the same time (1972 and 1973). The Irish per capita GDP in 1972 was US$2,080, while the UK per capita GDP was 50% higher, or US$3.030 in the same year. In 2016, year of the Brexit referendum, the Irish per capita GDP was US$62,784, or 50% higher than the UK one, equal to US$40,985. The UK has not been able to benefit from the EU membership as Ireland and many other countries did. And when considering this specific and humiliating aspect (the UK was once the colonial power asserting its domain over poor Ireland), Brexit was probably the only sensible choice left to the UK Below the links to the data in my post: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDP_RPCH@WEO/EU/EURO/EUQ/NMQ https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/IRL/ireland/gdp-per-capita https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/gdp-per-capita

It would have been notable if the brand-new TLC inverter units had not performed better than the 12-year-old fixed speed MELCO units. Try comparing any 12 years old Toyota diesel pick-up truck with any brand-new electric car and see if you get a different result.

Your comment is nonsense. Are you really so naive as to believe that all inverter air-conditioners are the same, just because the manufacturers print an "Inverter" label on their boxes? You always get what you pay for. And TLC units are among the cheapest units you can buy, also when comparing its prices only with Chinese competitors. That's it.

I agree with the second comment. It’s impossible to restore Russia to its former glory for the simple reason it has never been neither glorious nor great. The most Russia has ever been is huge. An immense landmass sparsely populated by people mostly living in misery.

Not in Scotland!

The installation cost is not significantly affected by the size of the unit. It varies based on the complexity of the installation (pipe length, finish, etc.). Regarding the cooling capacity, shops usually do not take any risks and recommend the capacity required in the worst possible scenario (large windows, south facing, exposed to direct sunlight, poor insulation, daytime operation, etc.). f your room does not have such extreme conditions, it is better to choose a unit with a lower capacity. Oversizing the unit attenuates or negates the benefits of the inverter. Each inverter operates within a certain range around its rated capacity (e.g. 30% to 110%). If the nominal capacity of the unit is too high and the typical heat load is close to the minimum capacity of the inverter, the unit does not modulate but operates as an On/Off unit, turning the compressor on and off instead of slowing it down. Don't buy Chinese stuff. Choose renowned brands (Mitsubishi Electric, Daikin, Carrier, Toshiba and Panasonic). The best inverter units (those which can provide the highest comfort and energy efficiency) are those with the widest modulation range. Some of these brands' top of the line units are equipped with twin rotary compressors, capable of rotating at a very wide range of RPM, without emitting excessive vibrations. The advantages offered by a good inverter (wide RPM range) are numerous: the continuous and regular operation of the compressor improves the thermal comfort, the energy efficiency, reduces the mechanical and thermal stress on the AC components boosting its reliability, and reduces the noise. Cheap inverters units (in name only) have narrow modulation ranges (e.g. 70%-100% of the nominal capacity). They are marketed as inverters, but they actually behave most of the time as cheap fix-speed units, continuously switching their compressor On and Off to regulate the temperature.

Donald Trump has neither forgotten nor forgiven the United Kingdom for the 11 windmills installed right in front his golf resort in Aberdeenshire. in 2015, the UK's Supreme Court judges delivered a unanimous ruling, dismissing Donald Trump's objection to the then proposed offshore wind farm. In 2019, the judges ruled that the Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd had to pay the legal bills incurred by the Scottish government.

In an interview broadcast earlier on Sunday, Farage told the BBC that the fact that Musk "supports me politically and supports Reform doesn't mean I have to agree with every single statement he makes". Elon Musk's response didn't take long to wait: In a post on his social media site X, Musk wrote "The Reform Party needs a new leader. Farage doesn't have what it takes" - but did not explain his reasoning.

It's fascinating how people can reduce a complex issue to a simplistic slogan. It's true: we need more skilled immigrants. But then we also need unskilled immigrants to cater their needs. Hosting more skilled immigrants calls for more unskilled ones, required to cook their burgers, serve them in restaurants and bars, cook their favorite ethnic food, pick the fruits and vegetables they eat, dry clean their clothes, and also more criminals to sell them the cocaine they consume, provide the sex-services they occasionally need, etc. The alternative is for American-born to perform the unskilled jobs needed to support the high standard of living of skilled immigrants. At present however the opposite is usually true: Americans more often than not perform skilled, high-paying jobs, while unskilled, low-paying jobs are left to unskilled immigrants.

Misha, you have been already banned from a number of posts as a Troll: do you really want to start all over again?

Either they do it for money, or they are brainwashed idiots. No... ...wait, yeah, none can be such an idiot.

Nice try troll. This is exactly what the US offered Zelensky assuming that the Ukrainian Army was incapable of resisting. Boy if they where wrong! Google has no mercy for liar like you. Слава україні

Suella Braverman teaches geography lessons for the world to benefit 😀.

I understand you have opinions, and that's okay. These are the facts: Russia was supposed to liquidate Ukraine in a "Special Military Operation" lasting few days. They are still stuck ina a war after 3 years, with no way to win it. In 2022 the Global Firepower Index ranked the Russian military capabilities second behind the United States, the Ukrainian 22nd, behind the like of Australia (17) and Taiwan (21). Western weapons supplied in the aftermath of the attack were essential in allowing Ukraine to hold out for so long. But it is the embarrassing performance of the amateurish and poorly led and organized Russian army in the very first weeks of the conflict that left an indelible memory. https://www.globalfirepower.com/global-ranks-previous.php The Russian made air defense system (S-300) deployed in Iran was easily and effortlessly neutralized by the Israeli Air Force F-35s, before it could even fire a single missile, leaving Israel free to hit any target on Iranian soil at will. The S-300 performed so poorly that has become a joke in western military circles. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-strike-on-iran-took-out-radar-sets-to-guide-ballistic-missiles-report/ While Russia is busy fighting in Ukraine, it's military capabilities proved so thin that Siria Bashar al-Assad has been left out in the cold, with no military assistance, despite his family has been a reliable allied of the Soviet Union first, and then of Russia, for over 50 years, and despite all of the Russian money and resources spent, in these fifty years, to support the Syrian Al-Assad family. Now, put yourself in the shoes of a dictator who relies on Russia to prop up his unpopular regime against internal and external foes. What kind of conclusion would you draw? It's a conclusion on which your life and the life of your family depend. My conclusion based on facts is that Russia military might proved to be just another Potemkin Village.

You divert attention from the focal point: Russia is considering the introduction of food stamps after waging a criminal war against Ukraine, and despite all the bluster about the extremely positive performance of the Russian economy. It is clear that Putin is lying. Get over it. Only the most diehard Russian trolls still deny it. Are you one of them?

Doing the right thing is more important than timely delivering on an electoral promise. I am often critical of President Trump. I despise narcissits, men who disrespect women and lose cannons. And Trump is a mix of all of that. But I hope that the Trump administration will do the right thing, not only with regards to Ukraine, but also with regards to other matters. A strong USA is in the best interest of the free world.

Foreign Affairs published an interesting article (link below) supporting the idea of South Korea going nuclear. The arguments put forward by the authors are convincing, they draw from the lessons of Ukraine and also apply to other geographies, starting from Japan and the European Union. In a world where the USA seems to be closing in on itself and is less willing to take on the role (and the associated cost) of world's policeman, US-allied countries must deal with the fact that the greatest threat to their security comes from nuclear powers. And even ignoring America's growing isolationism, modern technology allows countries like North Korea to directly threaten US territory. Guam, Hawaii, but also Los Angeles, San Francisco and Dallas. The lesson learned from the war in Ukraine is that, in the event of a conventional war, the attacked country would hesitate to strike deeply into the attacking country, for fear of nuclear retaliation. The result is that Russia can afford to strike any target on Ukrainian territory while Ukraine is denied the right to do the same on Russian territory. The risk of a Russian nuclear reaction is made credible by the fact that the only country capable of responding would be the USA, which would thus find itself in the position of having to risk sacrificing New York to avenge the destruction of Kiev. A clearly unsustainable choice. And we can also see how it was the unilateral nuclear disarmament of Ukraine, which occurred in 1993 with the Budapest Memorandum, at the insistence of the United States, that created the conditions that made the Russian aggression possible. Of the three countries that signed the Budapest Memorandum accepting their nuclear disarmament, Belarus is in fact a Russian province, while Ukraine is engaged in a war to avoid the same fate. Only Kazakhstan still has a semblance of independence from Russia and it is currently trying to strengthen its relations with the US and China, realizing that it might be next on Putin's list. According to the authors of the article, today "the biggest obstacle to South Korean nuclearization is not a domestic constituency but a foreign one: the United States. There is a deep, decades-old bipartisan opposition in Washington to nuclear proliferation, even among U.S. allies." "American opponents of South Korean nuclearization exaggerate the policy’s downsides, underappreciate its benefits, and ignore the United States’ own liberal values that call for Washington to tolerate a democratic partner’s national security choices, even when it dislikes them. " To avoid having to ask the question of whether it is worth sacrificing Los Angeles to avenge the destruction of Seoul, "Washington will need to loosen its rigid opposition to allied nuclearization. This may become easier under Trump, who showed in his first term that he is inclined to throw out the script when it comes to U.S. alliances." More to the article link below. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/north-korea/why-south-korea-should-go-nuclear-kelly-kim?utm_medium=newsletters&ut m_source=twofa&utm_campaign=Perché%20Sud%20Corea%20Dovrebbe%20Go%20Nuclear&utm_content=20250103&utm_term=EWZZZ003ZX

I believe that Russia has already lost. It would never admit it but: Russia has no chance of subjugating the whole of Ukraine. It may maintain its territorial gains, but free Ukraine will be aligned with the West, the EU, the US and will be staunchly anti-Russian. A much bigger thorn in Russia's western side than if Russia had not waged a war against it. Russia wanted to stop NATO expansion. But following the war against Ukraine, NATO has become bigger and more powerful, because it will invest more in defense. Through a show of force, Putin wanted to demonstrate to the world that Russia is today a great power. The performance of the Russian army and armaments has been so disappointing that it has convinced the world of the exact opposite. Russia is a dwarf desperately trying to appear bigger and more dangerous than it actually is. When the war ends (hopefully soon), Russia will be faced with the problem that a significant portion of its GDP is tied to the war, and produces nothing of value to use in peacetime. The Russian defense industry employs approximately 3.5 million people in 2024 and accounts for 20% of all manufacturing jobs in Russia. Hundreds of thousands of men currently employed by the army and paid high wages will be laid off without any opportunity to find similarly paid jobs in civil society. This is nothing new. This happened every time Russia waged war. World War II is the only exception, because Russia was not sanctioned but rather supported in its post-war recovery. This happened at the end of the First World War, when tsarism was overthrown, and at the end of the war in Afghanistan, when the Soviet Union collapsed. And this time it will be the turn of Putin's regime. Soon it will be time to politely knock on the door and see the whole Putin's house of cards collapse. The Russian double-headed eagle will soon become a meal served in KFCs around the world.

Russia won thanks to the backing of the US. Have you ever heard of the Lend Lease Act? The U.S. sent over $11 billion in supplies (in 1940-45 US$) to the Soviet Union, including 400,000 vehicles, 14,000 aircraft, 13,000 tanks, 8,000 tractors, 4.5 million tons of food, and 2.7 million tons of petroleum products. Russia reciprocated by contributing with the one resource the country has always been rich: cannon fodder. Notice that when fighting alone, Russia has achieved less remarkable results. Russia was the first "European" power to ever been severely beaten by an Asian country (Russo-Japanese War, 1904-1905). Russia was unable to win over little Finland in the Winter War (1939-1940), despite being, at least on-paper, overwhelming more powerful. The same story that is currently unfolding under our own eyes in Ukraine. I stand behind my statement: just politely knock on the door and let the Russians finish the job for you.

😂 Actually, politely knocking on the front door should suffice👍

LOL, Hakuna Matata's post contains the highest number of idiocies I have ever recorded in a single post... Putin has killed all his political opponents, and a big share of those who disagreed with him. None of his opponents ever made to the ballots. They were stopped way before, by bullets, poison, hanging, flying off from high windows or flying off the sky with their airplane, crew and associates. Putin, like Adolf Hitler after a few years in power, reached the stage where he only represents himself. It's three years that the Russians try unsuccessfully to pulverize the Ukrainian army. Russia has almost four times the population of Ukraine, almost three times the GDP per capita of Ukraine, the support of China, India, Iran, North Korea, Siria (till it lasted), and all has achieved in three years is add a further 119,000 km2 (46,000 sq mi) of occupied Ukrainian territory, to the 42,000 km2 (16,000 sq mi) it already controlled prior the full scale invasion of March 2022. It took only six weeks (yes you read it right Hakuna Makata, 42 days in total) for Hitler's army to overrun the armies of Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and France, starting from May 1940. The difference between Germany and Russia is due to the endemic corruption of the Russian society and widespread posturing, the so-called Potemkin village effect. The Russian Army pretends to be powerfully invincible, and the rest of the Russians pretend to believe it, with only the idiot at the top (i.e. Putin) ending up believing that there might something true in the claim and deciding to put it to test. Stalin did the same mistake with Finland in November 1939. But the most idiotic part of the post is the expected downsizing of NATO... NATO just added two members, Finland and Sweden, 15,5 million inhabitants and a combined GDP five times bigger than Ukraine. If there is one thing happening to NATO it's that it has just got bigger, and its member countries are spending more in defense, pushed by Russia's aggressivity and by the newly re-elected POTUS, Donald Trump. Russia, with its GDP of 2 trillion USD and 143 million inhabitants, is dwarfed by the EU 19,4 trillion USD GDP and 449 million inhabitants, and disappears when compared to NATO combined GDP of 53.1 trillion USD and a population of 951.

The US did not invade Cuba. The US let the Cubans struggle under Russian rule, it allowed Russia to deploy conventional weapons on the island for defensive purposes, it allowed communism to rule the place unchecked, it kept sanctions in place and focused on something better, more rewarding and interesting than wasting time with the Castro brothers and their demented, hopeless circus. Problem solved. Can Putin do the same? He could but he miscalculated, and now his past criminal behavior doesn't allow him to acknowledge defeat, relax, retire or let his guard down. He must always seem to come out on top, to project strength to feel secure. In the very moment Putin acknowledges defeat in Ukraine, he would instantly turn into a dead man walking in the Kremlin. To be clear, Putin has already lost. He triggered a war to prevent Ukraine to become NATO member and, even before the war is lost, both Finland and Sweden already joined the alliance. Finland and Sweden added 1,350 km to the border shared by NATO with Russia, a combined population which is half of that of Ukraine, but with a combined GDP of $895 billion, five times bigger than Ukraine. In a democratic open society, genuinely worried about a hypothetical NATO aggressive stance, Putin would have been impeached and forced to retire. Neville Chamberlain is a good example of what happens in democracy when a leader is defeated in the international arena by a dangerous opponent. But Russia is not a democratic open society, and in Russia politics is just about posturing and eliminating one's opponents. In Russia all smart people perfectly know that NATO hypothetical aggressivity is a joke. NATO has no reason to invade Russia and take charge of 140 million Russian citizens, a big junk of whom are destitute, illiterate, alcoholics, troublemakers and/or pretty w**res. Only idiots in Russia (and elsewhere) can truly believe that NATO may have aggressive intentions. Therefore, Putin is left off the hook. He can keep on posturing, pretending to be a world master strategist, while the Russians pretend to believe that NATO is a dangerous enemy, their casualty count mounts, innocent Ukrainians are killed every day, the Russian economy is slowly but securely sliding into a crisis similar to the one that caused the demise of the Soviet Union, and the Russians, as usual, are the ones who will foot the dearest bill, Bottom line Russia is just an immense Potemkin village. Another demented, hopeless circus, like the one the Castro brothers set up in Cuba, only much bigger and wealthier.

In my opinion keeping common platforms is more cost efficient and simplifies logistics in the event of a conflict. Therefore, I would like to see a strong coordination and strong commonality in defense procurement between the USA and Europe. But both shall contribute with budget, engineering and manufacturing capabilities.