On Jun 11, 2:01*pm, Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:
On Jun 11, 1:52 am, Richard wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:31:04 -0500, Recliner

wrote:
From:http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02yyh1c

Quote:
Filmed over a year, this six-part series from the makers of The Tube is the
story of the individuals who keep the system working - from nightbus
drivers to roadmenders to the controllers running it all. But it's also the
story of our capital now, as the city expands faster than ever.

Part 1 of 6 on BBC2, Tuesday 18/6/13 at 2100.

The hype consistently misuses the word "City", when the writer means
County or Region. *The City of London has a population of 7.3
THOUSAND. *It had considerably less before the Barbican was
constructed.

I see no incorrect references to the "the City". The lower case "city"
means the whole of London to any sensible person, which may not include Mr
Auer Hudson. I don't think the programme or the audience is interested in a
pedantic rehearsal of the various historical county structures that make up
modern London, just how the clogged traffic is kept flowing. It's a story
about London's traffic, not its historic local government structures.

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. Mention this to your therapist. He may be able to help.

London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.

Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:52:46 -0700 (PDT), e27002
wrote:

On Jun 11, 2:01*pm, Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:
On Jun 11, 1:52 am, Richard wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:31:04 -0500, Recliner


The hype consistently misuses the word "City", when the writer means
County or Region. *The City of London has a population of 7.3
THOUSAND. *It had considerably less before the Barbican was
constructed.

I see no incorrect references to the "the City". The lower case "city"
means the whole of London to any sensible person, which may not include Mr
Auer Hudson. I don't think the programme or the audience is interested in a
pedantic rehearsal of the various historical county structures that make up
modern London, just how the clogged traffic is kept flowing. It's a story
about London's traffic, not its historic local government structures.

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. Mention this to your therapist. He may be able to help.

London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.

Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

I'm not sure what the vernacular of London is these days? Perhaps it's
Polish or Russian, or maybe it's Urdu. It's certainly changed in the
40+ years I've lived and worked in this city. And, no, I don't live in
the City.

On 15 June, 03:36, Recliner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:52:46 -0700 (PDT), e27002









wrote:
On Jun 11, 2:01*pm, Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:
On Jun 11, 1:52 am, Richard wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:31:04 -0500, Recliner

The hype consistently misuses the word "City", when the writer means
County or Region. *The City of London has a population of 7.3
THOUSAND. *It had considerably less before the Barbican was
constructed.

I see no incorrect references to the "the City". The lower case "city"
means the whole of London to any sensible person, which may not include Mr
Auer Hudson. I don't think the programme or the audience is interested in a
pedantic rehearsal of the various historical county structures that make up
modern London, just how the clogged traffic is kept flowing. It's a story
about London's traffic, not its historic local government structures.

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. *Mention this to your therapist. *He may be able to help.

London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. *The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. *This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! *So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. *Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.

Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? *No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? *In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

I'm not sure what the vernacular of London is these days? Perhaps it's
Polish or Russian, or maybe it's Urdu. It's certainly changed in the
40+ years I've lived and worked in this city. And, no, I don't live in
the City.

NB Your vivid imagination does NOT compensate for your ignorance.

On 15/06/2013 11:36, Recliner wrote:

wrote:
Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:

[ ... ]

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. Mention this to your therapist. He may be able to help.
London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.
Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

If you're interested in the answers, they a

(a) Long Beach is in LA county but isn't part of the city of Los Angeles
(it's a city in its own right);

(b) Disneyland is in Anaheim, about thirty miles from the nearest part
of the city of LA; Anaheim is in Orange County;

(c) LAX is indeed within the city of Los Angeles, though this appears to
have been achieved by contrivance; the shape of the municipality is odd,
to say the least:

http://tinyurl.com/mwmua75

Just look at that narrow finger of territory heading south (parallel
with I-110) to take in San Pedro, but not Long Beach, which is adjacent
to it.

(d) Hollywood and Belair lie within the city of LA, but adjacent areas
are outside the city (eg, Burbank, Beverly Hills and - oddly - North
Hollywood).

JNugent wrote:
On 15/06/2013 11:36, Recliner wrote:

wrote:
Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:

[ ... ]

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. Mention this to your therapist. He may be able to help.
London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.
Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

If you're interested in the answers, they a

(a) Long Beach is in LA county but isn't part of the city of Los Angeles
(it's a city in its own right);

(b) Disneyland is in Anaheim, about thirty miles from the nearest part of
the city of LA; Anaheim is in Orange County;

(c) LAX is indeed within the city of Los Angeles, though this appears to
have been achieved by contrivance; the shape of the municipality is odd, to say the least:

http://tinyurl.com/mwmua75

Just look at that narrow finger of territory heading south (parallel with
I-110) to take in San Pedro, but not Long Beach, which is adjacent to it.

(d) Hollywood and Belair lie within the city of LA, but adjacent areas
are outside the city (eg, Burbank, Beverly Hills and - oddly - North Hollywood).

As you say, the city of LA has a strange, gerrymandered shape. But do
locals routinely distinguish between which of these districts are within
the city of LA and which are simply close to it? While I know that
Disneyland is in Orange County, I also think of Disneyland=LA, Disney
World=Orlando.

On 2013\06\16 01:26, Recliner wrote:

As you say, the city of LA has a strange, gerrymandered shape.

Except it isn't gerrymandering, because the shape is not controlled by
government but by public choice. On Entourage, one of the characters
tried to sweet-talk the mayor of the neighbouring city (played by the
Homer Simpson actor) to enlarge the city to include his house.

In Britain by comparison, the borders of local government are all
controlled from above, and bits of Lancashire and Yorkshire have been
reassigned to universal local chagrin.

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2013\06\16 01:26, Recliner wrote:

As you say, the city of LA has a strange, gerrymandered shape.

Except it isn't gerrymandering, because the shape is not controlled by
government but by public choice. On Entourage, one of the characters
tried to sweet-talk the mayor of the neighbouring city (played by the
Homer Simpson actor) to enlarge the city to include his house.

In Britain by comparison, the borders of local government are all
controlled from above, and bits of Lancashire and Yorkshire have been
reassigned to universal local chagrin.

If it's controlled by politicians from the affected districts, then it's
gerrymandering. It's a major problem in the US House, where the politicians
on both sides have conspired together with political redistricting to make
most seats safe. That makes the real elections the primaries, not the
general election, and leads to the election of ever more extreme
politicians (who get and stay in by appealing to activists, not the
electorate as a whole).

On 2013\06\16 12:27, Basil Jet wrote:

In Britain by comparison, the borders of local government are all
controlled from above, and bits of Lancashire and Yorkshire have been
reassigned to universal local chagrin.

I meant "unanimous local chagrin". The adjectives "universal" and
"local" shouldn't really be put together ;-)

On 16/06/2013 01:26, Recliner wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 15/06/2013 11:36, Recliner wrote:

wrote:
Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:

[ ... ]

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. Mention this to your therapist. He may be able to help.
London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people.

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.
Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

If you're interested in the answers, they a

(a) Long Beach is in LA county but isn't part of the city of Los Angeles
(it's a city in its own right);

(b) Disneyland is in Anaheim, about thirty miles from the nearest part of
the city of LA; Anaheim is in Orange County;

(c) LAX is indeed within the city of Los Angeles, though this appears to
have been achieved by contrivance; the shape of the municipality is odd, to say the least:

http://tinyurl.com/mwmua75

Just look at that narrow finger of territory heading south (parallel with
I-110) to take in San Pedro, but not Long Beach, which is adjacent to it.

(d) Hollywood and Belair lie within the city of LA, but adjacent areas
are outside the city (eg, Burbank, Beverly Hills and - oddly - North Hollywood).

As you say, the city of LA has a strange, gerrymandered shape. But do
locals routinely distinguish between which of these districts are within
the city of LA and which are simply close to it? While I know that
Disneyland is in Orange County, I also think of Disneyland=LA, Disney
World=Orlando.

I don't say that the LA city boundaries have been gerrymandered for
partisan advantage, but just looking at the map of the city's outline
tells you that there has been contrived adjustment over the years.

But this is not unusual in the USA. Even the states have had their
shapes and edges defined by Congress. Just look at the way that Alabama
and Georgia each have a bit of coastline on the Gulf of Mexico. There
was a time when all of that was part of the Florida panhandle and when
Alabama (though obviously not Georgia) was landlocked.

On 16 June, 17:46, JNugent wrote:
On 16/06/2013 01:26, Recliner wrote:









JNugent wrote:
On 15/06/2013 11:36, Recliner wrote:

wrote:
Recliner wrote:
e27002 wrote:

[ ... ]

You have difficulty avoiding responding to my posts without a snide
remarks. *Mention this to your therapist. *He may be able to help.
London has been my past home for a sum total of eight years.
Variously, I lived in Surbiton, Motspur Park, Maida Vale, The West End
(Hanson Street), New Malden, and Shepherds Bush. *The term "the city"
always referred to, and only referred to, the square mile (actually
1.6 square miles) of the City of London. *This was true even when the
term was utilized within the City of Westminster! *So, by your
imputation none of my neighbors, or colleagues, were sensible people..

Neither Edgware, nor Morden are in "the city" any more than Lancaster
and Long Beach are in the City of Los Angeles. *Both Lancaster and
Long Beach are certainly in the County of Los Angeles.
Spend some time in London; you will become accustomed to the
vernacular.

Wow, you lived in six well-separated London areas in just eight years
-- presumably you were on the run from the cops, debt collectors or
cuckolded husbands? *No wonder you needed therapy when you finally
escaped to the US, although from your previous posts, I get the
impression that you've kept up your peripatetic existence in the
States as well. I'm afraid I've never met a therapist, so I'll have
trouble discussing your case with one -- is it compulsory to use them
in the US, along with gun ownership? *In this country, few people feel
the need for either. Perhaps that's why you left.

I've visited the US around 70 times since 1979 but, fortunately, very
few of my itineraries included LA. I have to confess that I regarded
Long Beach as part of LA when I dined under the Spruce Goose there. I
now realise my grave error in not mastering the political geography of
the city before visiting it. Even worse, I made the critical mistake
of thinking that Disneyland and LAX were in LA when I was there. Was I
also wrong in thinking that Hollywood was in LA?

If you're interested in the answers, they a

(a) Long Beach is in LA county but isn't part of the city of Los Angeles
(it's a city in its own right);

(b) Disneyland is in Anaheim, about thirty miles from the nearest part of
the city of LA; Anaheim is in Orange County;

(c) LAX is indeed within the city of Los Angeles, though this appears to
have been achieved by contrivance; the shape of the municipality is odd, to say the least:

http://tinyurl.com/mwmua75

Just look at that narrow finger of territory heading south (parallel with
I-110) to take in San Pedro, but not Long Beach, which is adjacent to it.

(d) Hollywood and Belair lie within the city of LA, but adjacent areas
are outside the city (eg, Burbank, Beverly Hills and - oddly - North Hollywood).

As you say, the city of LA has a strange, gerrymandered shape. But do
locals routinely distinguish between which of these districts are within
the city of LA and which are simply close to it? *While I know that
Disneyland is in Orange County, I also think of Disneyland=LA, Disney
World=Orlando.

I don't say that the LA city boundaries have been gerrymandered for
partisan advantage, but just looking at the map of the city's outline
tells you that there has been contrived adjustment over the years.

IIRC San Pedro avoided being swallowed up by Long Beach, only to be
absorbed by Los Angeles.

But this is not unusual in the USA. Even the states have had their
shapes and edges defined by Congress. Just look at the way that Alabama
and Georgia each have a bit of coastline on the Gulf of Mexico.

Only Alabama, not Georgia.

There
was a time when all of that was part of the Florida panhandle and when
Alabama (though obviously not Georgia) was landlocked.