Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 June 22

= June 22 =

Jackie Kelly MP Marijuana Smokers Rights Party
Could I have the history of the Marijuana Smokers Rights Party (or similar) created by Australian Federal MP Jackie Kelly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.175.114 (talk) 02:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * This, fwiw, is all I can find about this matter. I suggest there is no "history".  --   Jack of Oz   [your turn]  11:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Documentaries regarding Canadian history
Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Canada-America Free Trade Agreement which became the big issue in 1988 election? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: 1980 and 1995 Quebec referendum? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Meech Lake Accord and Charlottetown Accord? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Burnt Church Crisis of 1999? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Oka Crisis of 1990? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: 1981 Restigouche raids? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Ipperwash Crisis? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Gustafsen Lake Standoff? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Grand River land dispute? Are there any documentaries or films regarding the: Haida land dispute in the 1980s? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.154.119 (talk) 02:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * IPPERWASH: A CANADIAN TRAGEDY Rmhermen (talk) 04:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The answer is yes in almost all cases. For the Quebec referendums, a lot of the documentaries are in French. On the 1995 one, there is "Point de rupture"; "Référendum Prise 2/Take 2" ; "Référendum 1995: le Québec face à son destin" . On the 1980 Referendum, "Le confort et l'indifférence" by Denys Arcand . A famous one on the Oka Crisis is "Kanesatake 270 ans de résistance" by Alanis Obomsawin . The National Film Board and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation/Société Radio-Canada websites are good places to look for documentaries on the other issues you are interested in. --Xuxl (talk) 15:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

China gender gap vs. Government stance on pr0n, prostitution
Has anyone (sociologist?) ever written about the implications of China's rapidly worsening sex ratio and the government's aggressive anti-pornography, anti-prostitution stance? Call me crazy, but this seems rather counter productive. Yes, I realize porn and ladies of negotiable morals are still widely available in China, but the State position is one of official opposition (as opposed to, say, the Netherlands) and these things are largely kept underground. With 1/3 of Gen Y's Chinese men potentially being involuntarily single, wouldn't a vast and thriving sex industry obviate some of the feared negative social impacts? Surely I can't be the first person to consider these two policy points...? The Masked Booby (talk) 07:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sidenote, the sex ratio is only worsening if you happen to be male. Females might find that it is improving.  Googlemeister (talk) 13:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * They might. Or there again, they might object to the increased risk of bing kidnapped as brides. Last year the China Post wrote on the China gender gap fuelling human trafficking: report. "Police in China have freed more than 10,000 abducted women including 1,100 foreigners since April last year as the widening gender gap fuels bride trafficking and prostitution." The China Daily reported in 2010 (Brides and prejudice in China):
 * Experts warn that the gender gap not only threatens social stability but could also put more women in danger. "The sharp rise in the number of men of marriageable age who fail to find wives will become a big hazard," said Tian Xueyuan, deputy director of the China Population Association. "It will increase incidences of women being bought as wives, as well as abduction and trafficking, and prostitution and pornography."
 * The Utne Reader reported on this 15 years agoThe Lost Girls - China may come to regret its preference for boys:
 * For some time, experts have been predicting kidnapping of women for personal use and for marriage, slave, and prostitution markets. Richards reports that the abduction and trading of women actually is widespread, especially in rural areas. “The trade is worth over 700 million a year,” she says, “and the problem is likely to escalate as men find it increasingly hard to find a wife.” A report in Asiaweek (March 3, 1995) also notes that “in one region police captured more than 1,000 such traders and rescued 5,000 women in the last decade.”
 * Sources, gentlemen! BrainyBabe (talk) 18:10, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't speak as to whether anyone has written a study of it, but China is not the only country with politicians who find it politically favorable to take a stand against pornography, despite there being little (by my understanding; if someone has some contradictory evidence, do post it) evidence that it is harmful. Adam Berman (talk) (contribs) 10:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It is worth noting that China's antipornography policy is often used as a means to shut down government dissenting media, as well, and improve the Great Firewall, and things like that. So their ostensible goals may not be antipornography at all — it may just be whatever they think "plays" well with "the people" as an excuse for censorship. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:01, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why being more permissive with regards to pornography and prostitution would help involuntarily single Chinese men finding life partners. Possible ways to fix that might include polyandry, male-male relationships, immigration of women into China, emigration of men out of China, and so on. But if being single is a problem, I honestly don't see how prostitution and pornography are any kind of "solutions". Gabbe (talk) 20:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * More of a stop-gap measure or a band-aid fix. The underlying problem would still be there.  Googlemeister (talk) 13:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Philosopher's essay on diachronic conception of personal identity
Hail, refdeskers. I am trying to track down an essay I read online sometime in the past year. It concerned two different ways of conceiving the self – as one stable/evolving entity, and as different successive entities (I *think* this one was called "diachronic"). It was written for an intelligent layman's audience, but by a contemporary philosopher of some renown (think Galen Strawson/A.C. Grayling/David Chalmers stature), and in the context of the challenges of personal identity in an online environment. The publication was something like The Philosophers’ Magazine – some low-circulation intellectual periodical; it was linked from an intellectual-oriented net portal like Arts and Letters Daily, 3 Quarks Daily or The Daily Dish. Can you help me track down this essay? Skomorokh  09:44, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Chinese restaurant
Hi. Can I have two questions? 1. I can't find an article on "chinese restaurants" or "chinese takeaway" specifically those in the west. Seems an odd ommision (at this stage)? Is there a reason?

2. In the UK Chinese Takeaways generally (more than 50%) have large Jade plant in the window.. Is this a worldwide thing, and do they do this in china? Is there a reason for the choice.

3. The "jade plant" is from South Africa - why the chinese name? Is it because chinese restaurants use them a lot (china=jade) ;) . Seriously does anyone know the name origin.. Thanks.83.100.232.49 (talk) 10:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I can answer #1 and #3. There is no article specifically on "chinese restaurants" or "chinese takeaway" because nobody has written it. There is an article on American Chinese cuisine; perhaps, if you can find some sources, you could write an article on English Chinese Cuisine or British Chinese Cuisine or Chinese Cuisine in the United Kingdom, to clarify some of the finer points of adapted chinese cuisine in your locality (I realize "American Chinese Cuisine" is somewhat small consolation; it's like saying "well, there's no article on Foosball, but there's an article on American Foosball!"


 * as for your 3rd question, Jade plants almost certainly derive their name from the deep green colo(u)r they share with the gemstone jade.


 * As for your second question, certainly many (probably a majority) of the "Chinese" restaurants I've been to in the United States have some form of plant, generally either a Jade plant or some domesticated form of Bamboo, in the lobby. Adam Berman (talk) (contribs) 10:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As to the question about "jade plant" - I don't see anything uniquely Chinese about the name "jade". Jade is not unique to China. In fact, the equivalent Chinese name (翡翠木) refers to jadeite, which is the traditionally less common type of jade in China (as opposed to nephrite, which was more common), and was historically mostly imported from south-east Asia.
 * Chinese wikipedia explains the auspicious connotation of the "jade plant" in Chinese culture by saying that the leaves are thick and round, thus being regarded as reminiscent of coins, and is why they are nicknamed in Chinese as "getting rich trees".
 * They are not commonly seen in mainland China and are certainly not found in most restaurants. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It's difficult to know what such an article could say except that they serve Chinese food. They have little else in common. For example if I eat at a restaurant in the Chinese Quarter, Birmingham (I'd recommend it) it is a completely different experience (and menu) to eating at a Chinese restaurant in the suburbs.--Shantavira|feed me 10:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've created an article at Chinese restaurant, I think there's enough to say. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The article can distinguish between "Chinese Restaurants" in different countries. Guidebooks and experience tell me that in London, one pays extra for rice with a main course at a Chinese restaurant, while in the US it is usually included in the price of the main course. They may have real Chinese food for Chinese customers in addition to the bogus Chinese food expected by Americans. Edison (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * While you obviously don't want a trivia section, there are some "cultural references". I hope a quick mention of Sour Sweet by Timothy Mo is seen as appropriate. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Our article Cantonese restaurant claims that most British Chinese places are of that style but I can't tell from the article what is distinctive about a Cantonese restaurant. Rmhermen (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Chinese restaurants in the UK are nearly all run by people whose other base is Hong Kong, so they are Cantonese in that sense, but British people just think of them as "Chinese restaurant", "Chinese takeaway". They tend to serve a similar range of dishes, based in Hong Kong cuisine but with much adaptation for UK tastes, and with some dishes labelled "Beijing", "Szechuan", etc. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the replies and creating the article, I've added a bit more about the "Chinese Takeout" in the UK. There still appears to be a lot to say - some books talk about the majority of UK restaurants being founded by people from a single village in Hong Kong (the 'Man'), though others talk about chinese ethic refugees from vietnam .. I didn't add that because I'm not certain how true it all is. I guess the bit about the Jade plant in chinese takeaways is WP:OR but if anyone can prove me wrong please do. 83.100.210.89 (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is academic research about the "Man" clan in Hong Kong, so a reliable source should be available. Hong Kong people started setting up restaurants and takeaways in large numbers from about the 1950s. The Sino-Vietnamese connection is from the late 1970s, a smaller group, mainly in London Boroughs like Hackney, Lambeth and Lewisham. There should be some sources for that too. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the aritcle "Chinese restaurant" needs to be "Chinese restaurants outside China" or "Overseas Chinese restaurants", since there is little to be said about Chinese restaurants in China that can't be covered in Chinese cuisine (mostly, that there is a great variety of them). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it not be possible to cover chinese chinese restaurants and overseas chinese restaurants in the same article - (the article chinese cuisine says nothing about 'chinese restaurants'.)83.100.210.89 (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you move the page back so I can cover both topics, I have no idea how to move the page.83.100.210.89 (talk) 12:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that's a discussion for the article talk page. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Cost of transportation
What would be the cost of transporting 100 000 tons of Russian diesel fuel oil (MDO) (D2) from the port of Rotterdam to Varna (Bulgaria) and Istambul (Turkey)? Kittybrewster  &#9742;  12:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is any kind of pipeline connecting those places, so tanker trucks would be the only way (short of putting it back on a boat and shipping it through the Mediterranean). 100,000 tons would mean around 4 or 5 tanker loads, but I don't have any idea what the going rate for that kind of transport would be. -- Daniel  13:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you including the cost of the oil itself ... or just the cost of transpiration? Blueboar (talk) 14:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This would almost certainly have to be done by ship, 100,000 tons is more then 2000 tanker truck loads, and I imagine a ship would cost a lot less then 2000 truck in terms of transport costs. Googlemeister (talk) 14:21, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My back of the envelope estimate is that using trucks, it would cost in excess of $5 million to haul 2000 truck loads from Rotterdam to Istanbul. Now since the only data I had was US trucking rates, European ones are almost certainly going to be higher, and I don't know if trucks can run that heavy in Europe, so $5 million is probably underestimating by at least 50%.  Googlemeister (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As an aside - the N American rail rate should be ~ 2.9 million dollar at 0.01 € per tonnekm over 2000km.Imgaril (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * For that quantity I would expect to use rail, or sea, or a pipeline - I found it difficult to get shipping costs for any of these methods - however using this http://ec.europa.eu/ten/transport/studies/doc/compete/compete_annex_01_en.pdf page 24 I used an estimate for Euro per tonnekm of 0.1 (note this is 10x the USA cost..) - you have 100,000 tonnes and the distance is (~2000km, using a road estimate from http://www.distance-calculator.co.uk/distance-from-rotterdam-to-istanbul.htm)
 * Your rail cost is 0.1x2000=200 euro per tonne (~27 euro a barrel?) so that's 20million € before profit.
 * I'm fairly certain that shipping would be cheaper. This http://www.themanufacturer.com/uk/content/9920/Freight_efficient quotes a euro price of £30 per tonne thats €33 per tonne ie 3.3 million € (after profit).
 * As I said I couldn't find hardly any figures so I don't know how reliable these are.. Imgaril (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * (Was there any significance of the two destinations - I just used Istanbul as it's further..)Imgaril (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not if you go by boat. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  18:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Possibly Rotterdam to Istanbul is beyond what is usually called 'short sea', so the figure above is probably an underestimate.Imgaril (talk) 12:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Law re children playing prize bingo
hi can a child under the age of 12 play prize bingo, where they can win bottles of spirits and bottles of wine. Although they have an adult with them they still Mark there own books and if they win and it is bottle of spirit/wine they give it to the adult, is the ok or should the child not be playing.Japkam7 (talk) 14:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The relevant law would be different in different locations. In other words... the answer depends on where you are playing bingo. Blueboar (talk) 14:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * In the UK, there are different regulations depending on whether bingo is held in a commercial premises (e.g. Gala or Mecca bingo), in a private club (e.g. a workers' social club), or for charitable purposes: see the English Gaming Act 1968, particularly sections 40 and 41. Other nations differentiate in law between charity bingo and commercial gambling.


 * It is common in the UK for children to participate in charity raffles and other games of chance that may have alcohol as a prize, but we can't give advice on the legality of particular arrangements. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've never seen a child actually given the bottle of wine they've won on the tombola, though. It's either given to an adult that's with them, or they are given a non-alcoholic alternative. --Tango (talk) 23:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Maps of Windsor, Dearborn and Hamtramck City with borders
Is there a good website that shows the cities of Dearborn, Windsor, Ontario and Hamtramck City with borders? That way, I can tell if I am reading the map right or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.32.47 (talk) 16:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * If I just go to a Google web search (not images or maps) and type "Dearborn, Michigan map", I get a tiny may with boundaries. Picking on it gives me a satellite map, though, without boundaries, and I don't know how to turn that off.  The same works for "Hamtramck, Michigan  map" and "Windsor, Ontario map".  Are those small maps with boundaries sufficient ?  (Our own articles have even tinier maps with boundaries.) StuRat (talk) 18:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't finding one good map of Detroit be better? Google Earth with the right feature turned on, Yahoo Maps (although the color are rather pale), USGS for real detail. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 22:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Use the reference maps at for the U.S. cities. Use this for Windsor. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Canadian cities affect by Canada-America Free Trade agreement
Which cities of Canada were affected by Canada-America Free Trade Agreement in the negative way or positive way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.32.47 (talk) 16:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC) &mdash;  The Hand That Feeds You :Bite 16:57, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All Canadian cities of note were impacted in some manner. Googlemeister (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The wording does not look like a homework question to me, unless the teacher is a non-native speaker of English. The consensus is that NAFTA and its predecessor, the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, benefited Canada generally in terms of economic growth.  For a more detailed regional analysis, you might want to track down this paper at a university library.  Marco polo (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * FWIW the wording looks to me like a homework question slightly reworded (perhaps from memory) by a student with imperfect English writing/speech skills, a suspicion reinforced by a related question having been asked very recently on this RefDesk. Still, no great matter. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.95 (talk) 19:37, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Given the scope of the question, the answer would be, all of them. As to how, it depends on the city and the industry. Mingmingla (talk) 02:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

is it true you have to pay taxes on things of value you 'win' by chance? (autos etc)
I heard that if someone of modest means wins something very expensive by chance, they usually can't keep it: they owe a huge amount of taxes on it (on a very expensive car for example) just for having received it! But of course they don't have that much cash, so they have to sell it to pay for it...

.... Well, now my question is: if that's the way the tax law works: what if you 'win' or suddenly receive (from the Gods, in this case) a huge IDEA demonstrably worth millions. Wouldn't you, technically, be on the hook for whatever the idea was worth? If not, what's the difference between the idea and the car? (the word "demonstrably" is pretty important in the first sentence of this paragraph: please assume it is true for the purposes of this question). Thank you.

Please note that I'm interested more from a philosophical than practical standpoint ("Philosophy of Tax Law", now there's an interest that will get people talking to you at parties!  I guess there's always brainybabe...)  --188.28.141.244 (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the nod, but I have no idea, and certainly no references to hand! BrainyBabe (talk) 18:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, you do, generally, pay considerable taxes on the idea in the sense of anything you develop or produce based on it, which changes hands at some point for compensation, will attract taxes. However, ideas are similar to skills and talents: there is no tax on a new song, just on what revenues are earned by the song; there is no tax on a sculpture (though there may be on the material from which it is sculpted) until its ownership is transferred.  In order to be involved in a game of chance, like a lottery, you have to have bought a ticket, placed and ante, and what you win, if anything, is "income" from that transfer of ownership, so it may be (in Canada, it is not) taxable at the time of the transfer. There will be other views, no doubt. Bielle  (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It just depends on what country you're in. IN the UK you don't pay tax on lottery wins. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The idea is not actually value until you make it into value — you have to actually prove the idea has value, and the way to do that is to... turn it into something valuable. The car is value unless you, say, drive it over a cliff. Ideas by themselves are not valuable unless they act on the material world in some way. It's the acting on the material world that matters to the tax man. There are exceptions to this. One of my favorites is a friend who claimed a few million dollars worth of intellectual property as part of his "contribution" when starting a new company. Donors and investors "validated" the contribution as valuable when they bought into the company. The company puttered out and failed, eventually. The result was that the friend in question was able to claim he lost millions of dollars from the company (all in intellectual property), and was given a massive tax write-off as a result (which apparently he can cash in whenever he wants — it doesn't expire). I thought that was a pretty bizarre situation with regards to the value of ideas! --Mr.98 (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That would probably depend on the country you are in. If you trade in property (for example) in UK and the investment was in a property company, the loss would only be offsettable against profits from property. Not necessarily true in other countries. Kittybrewster   &#9742;  19:25, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Even more fun is that the people giving out the prize might inflate the value to make the prize look better, which would probably mean you get to pay more taxes when you win it. Googlemeister (talk) 18:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Surely any sane taxing authority would base tax demands in such cases on legal accounting records (in the case of monetary transfers) or on independent assessments of market value (in the case of a material prize), rather than on hearsay and publicity hype? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.95 (talk) 19:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The IRS bases it on what is known as Fair Market Value, which may have nothing to do with what it was purchased for. It gets complicated. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You can think of it another way... Assume you have Bill Gates and Steve Jobs sitting at dinner and they want to avoid a hell of a lot of taxes. So, each one starts a new competition: They will pay the next person who says "Hi" to them a billion dollars! They say "Hi" to each other and give each other a prize of a billion dollars. It was a prize, so they don't owe taxes on it. Further, because they obviously are doing this as a charity of some sort - they deduct the billion dollars from their own income taxes. Sounds just as fair as letting some poor schmuck avoid paying taxes on a car because Oprah gave it to him, doesn't it? -- k a i n a w &trade; 19:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, in the UK, HMRC is wise to any such tricks by the British equivalent of Bill and Steve, and any such "prizes" would not be charitable and would be taxed as income. Lottery wins are not taxed here because, in total, the value of the win has already been taxed when the tickets were bought from taxed income.  Similarly, modest gifts that the giver bought from taxed income are not taxed again.    D b f i r s   20:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * In Australia, in principle "windfall gians" (examples range from gambling winnings to literally a bag of money dropping out of a tree as you walk past) are not taxable for income tax. The idea is that because it is not the "fruit" of your labours it is not something which under the "philosophy" of the income tax regime is not taxable. However, in reality, it often becomes a matter of dispute between the authorities and the taxpayer whether the income was "windfall" or not. If the whole thing was designed to be some sort of tax avoidance scheme, it would fall foul of tax laws (Part IVA). Or if a person makes his living from gambling, then arguably it's an actual occupation or business rather than mere gamling. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:57, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This is something most countries deal with in some form anyway even if not with lotteries. For example even in countries with a gift tax, the gift tax which is usually due on the person making the gift not the receiver and may be less then income tax. And the person receiving any genuine gifts doesn't usually have to report it as income (e.g. for the US ). This doesn't mean an employer can make 'gifts' to their employees (paying any relevant gift tax) and no one has to pay income tax. I don't know if the rate difference applies in the US but of course since the gift tax is due on the payer not the payee another alternative is for person in a country without a gift tax (like New Zealand is soon going to be) to make the 'gifts'. No this doesn't work even in the US, our article says as much. Note that the primary reason for a gift tax of this sort is to stop people getting around the estate tax not to stop people getting around the income tax. Nil Einne (talk) 14:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

RMS Titanic
How did the Titanic disaster affect the White Star Lines finances. Were they insured against the ship sinking. If so would the insurance be void because the ship was being commandeered recklessly. Also did the White Star Line have to compensate the victims of those who died in the disaster. --Thanks, Hadseys 17:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It was insured (as was standard for ships) by a consortium of insurers; see here for details. The insurance payout does not seem to have been challenged and was paid to White Star in full. Shimgray | talk | 18:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The insurance issue was the basis for the Ship that Never Sank conspiracy theory. --JGGardiner (talk) 19:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * One of your cousins? In effect, the author accuses the White Star Line of committing mass murder in trade for insurance money. It's typically safe to write potentially libelous stuff when the principles are long dead. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:41, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That's principals, doc. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, principles works pretty well there too. {The poster formerly kown as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.95 (talk) 23:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Among those principals were a number of prominent and wealthy businessmen, and even some White Star executives. So if they were murderous, at least they were willing to take down some of their own. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:31, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I was quite surprised to discover that that page doesn't actually discuss the critical issue of whether the ship was actually insured! You'd think it would be a key point of the thesis... Shimgray | talk | 20:10, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This 1912 report says: "Exciting scenes were witnessed at Lloyds underwriting rooms yesterday. Insurance losses in the last six months have been unparalleled in the history of Lloyds in liners of the biggest class.  Since the Olympic collision, both the Delhi and Oceana have been wrecked, and now comes the disaster to the Titanic."
 * This page about Lloyd's says "losses (were) paid of $3,019,400 after the Lutine Bell rang over the rostrum announcing the Titanic disaster" I've actually seen the entry in the Lloyd's of London loss ledger (they still employ a chap with a quill to write down the losses in large copperplate script). [Here's a photo of it]. No responsible shipowner would send a ship to sea without insurance. Alansplodge (talk) 20:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * $3M doesn't seem like that much, what did the thing cost to build? Googlemeister (talk) 13:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Googlemaster, you are remembering that that was a good chunk of money in those days and that it only doesn't seem like much today because of monetary inflation, right? :p Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 14:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * and say it was $7.5 million. Nil Einne (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not unusual for insurance of large risks to be shared - known as co-insurance. Lloyd's share of the payout was $3m (actually Lloyd's itself doesn't insure anything - the $3m would have been shared between a number of syndicates of investors each represented by an underwriter); other insurers almost certainly participated.
 * When a ship needed insurance, the owner would contact a firm of Lloyd's brokers. They would prepare a document called a "slip" which had all the salient details on it. The broker would go around the various underwriters at Lloyd's and might get each one to sign-up to ("underwrite") 5 or 10% of the risk. If he couldn't get enough cover at Lloyds, he'd walk out of the building and across the road to the Institute of London Underwriters (now called the International Underwriting Association) where all the major marine insurance companies had an office, each with a team of underwriters in it. Also, some of the liabilty would probably hve been retained by the owners in a Protection and indemnity club. In my days working in the London insurance market I once saw a slip for the insurance of an oil refinery; it was co-insured by more than twenty insurers and each insurer was reinsured by at least twenty reinsurers. In this way, major losses are spread around the market and indeed the whole world. I believe that all this is done electronically now. Alansplodge (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Is it true that, with the big heartedness of robber barons allied with government, the passengers or their heirs were only awarded the funds gained from the sale of the lifeboats, and the crews' pay was stopped the minute the boat sank? Thus no insurance payout to passengers or crew. Edison (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No. The White Star line has agreed to pay $664,000 in settlement of all claims arising for the sinking of the Titanic. It is correct that the crew's pay stopped the moment that their ship sank; this practice continued into WWII when merchant seamen sometimes had to endure weeks in a life boat without even getting paid for it. I believe that it was changed during the war after a public outcry. Alansplodge (talk) 14:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

From which painting is this?
http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/126/64797593.jpg

Assuming it's no amateur work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raskolkhan (talk • contribs) 22:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe it's The Bohemian by William-Adolphe Bouguereau. Gabbe (talk) 22:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)