|
|
| Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) (1444003) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jun 24 11:14:12 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Charles G on Sat Jun 24 10:37:48 2017. The answer is that we are the only nation on earth that is concerned at the risk of accidental electrocution while we are at our ablutions. We limit bathroom power to a puny 12 volts.Not true of course. The US requires ground fault interrupters, so if you drop your plugged-in hair into the filled tub while you are in it, you don't get electrocuted. Bathroom electrocutions are a real issue; but there are effective approaches other than the UK approach. My IRS pension example applies to private pensions, which are well funded on the whole. Retirees who ask for an annuity will get it; it's just that those who ask for a lump sum are short changed by 10%, not because the pension fund can't afford to pay them more, but because the regs still say this is OK and now the regs can't easily be changed. It's public pensions that are most at risk, and not surprisingly this is because they are not really regulated. A state can do whatever it wants in terms of funding. Multiemployer (Taft Hartley - joint union/management) pension funds are a mixed bag - many are OK but a few are so spectacularly underfunded that they are expected to bankrupt the PBGC multiemployer pension fund insurance program in 2025. |
|
|
|