2021 Last Person Standing January Quiz

Tauriel

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

We'll have our own game Barney

I am all about inclusiveness so how about you Barney and yourself work together on an answer, send it to me and I will pm it to GnR?

Sounds fair right?

Green&Red

@Barney and @Ted feel free to lob in an answer

Tauriel

Green&Red wrote: »

@Barney and @Ted feel free to lob in an answer via mustang

FYP

Green&Red

This was Rainbow's solution from yesterday


Let's see. The population of the country was about 3 million. Lots of children and women largely wouldn't have been working at that time. Typically a quarter of the population is under 15 in modern stats but it was probably higher back then with larger families and a lower life span, maybe as high as 30-35%. So let's say there was 1 million children in the country. Of the remaining 2 million adults, let's say half are men and half are women. Allow for pensioners. Gonna say 250000 pensioners out of the 2 million adults. So that leaves me 1.75 million- ish adults. Gonna say that 75% of women didn't work as they would have been raising children. Could have been higher. So if there were about 900k women of working age, maybe 700,000 were not in paid employment. Jobs were probably largely targeted at men.

So how many of the 900k men of working age were unemployed? Presuming that unemployment was a problem if jobs were promised in the manifesto.

Let's see. 10 years after the formation of the Free State. 14 years after the end of the First World War. Great Depression has kicked in, in America, would imagine that that had some knock on effect in Europe, hard to know what effect if any that had on Ireland. May have reduced emigration to the USA during that time period more than affecting jobs directly.

Assuming jobs were largely aimed at men and a potential working population of 900k, a relatively high unemployment rate of 10% would be 90k. If it was extremely high at 20% it would have been 180k looking for work.

I'd be confident in saying Ireland was largely agrarian at that stage, so unemployment might have tended towards the lower end of that scale. But you did say industrial jobs. Have posted on the thread asking for clarification on whether you want total jobs promised or if 'industrial jobs' is a subset of total jobs promised. Like if FF promised 1000 new nurses I wouldn't be classing those as industrial jobs.


OK so to sum up a very long winded calculation.

If you are referring to total jobs (hopefully you'll see the post on the thread), then 90k jobs for all unemployed.

If it is specifically industrial jobs (I presume factory work and the like) then I dunno, maybe a third of that, so 30k jobs? I presume some jobs would have been created in agriculture, vocational schools were established in 1930 so I presume there were some new teaching jobs along the way. I'll stick with a third of the jobs being industrial so 30k industrial jobs. I'm going with this as my answer pending clarification.

khalessi

Green&Red wrote: »

This was Rainbow's solution from yesterday


Let's see. The population of the country was about 3 million. Lots of children and women largely wouldn't have been working at that time. Typically a quarter of the population is under 15 in modern stats but it was probably higher back then with larger families and a lower life span, maybe as high as 30-35%. So let's say there was 1 million children in the country. Of the remaining 2 million adults, let's say half are men and half are women. Allow for pensioners. Gonna say 250000 pensioners out of the 2 million adults. So that leaves me 1.75 million- ish adults. Gonna say that 75% of women didn't work as they would have been raising children. Could have been higher. So if there were about 900k women of working age, maybe 700,000 were not in paid employment. Jobs were probably largely targeted at men.

So how many of the 900k men of working age were unemployed? Presuming that unemployment was a problem if jobs were promised in the manifesto.

Let's see. 10 years after the formation of the Free State. 14 years after the end of the First World War. Great Depression has kicked in, in America, would imagine that that had some knock on effect in Europe, hard to know what effect if any that had on Ireland. May have reduced emigration to the USA during that time period more than affecting jobs directly.

Assuming jobs were largely aimed at men and a potential working population of 900k, a relatively high unemployment rate of 10% would be 90k. If it was extremely high at 20% it would have been 180k looking for work.

I'd be confident in saying Ireland was largely agrarian at that stage, so unemployment might have tended towards the lower end of that scale. But you did say industrial jobs. Have posted on the thread asking for clarification on whether you want total jobs promised or if 'industrial jobs' is a subset of total jobs promised. Like if FF promised 1000 new nurses I wouldn't be classing those as industrial jobs.


OK so to sum up a very long winded calculation.

If you are referring to total jobs (hopefully you'll see the post on the thread), then 90k jobs for all unemployed.

If it is specifically industrial jobs (I presume factory work and the like) then I dunno, maybe a third of that, so 30k jobs? I presume some jobs would have been created in agriculture, vocational schools were established in 1930 so I presume there were some new teaching jobs along the way. I'll stick with a third of the jobs being industrial so 30k industrial jobs. I'm going with this as my answer pending clarification.

For that she deserves straight into next round.

Trigger

That's all well and good, still got it wrong

Green&Red

Still waiting on 18 people


Lots of people saying its very hard. Thats kinda the point of me taking questions from books, no one will know the answer straight off, so its about using some logic with some info thats stuck at the back of your head

Electric Nitwit

Green&Red wrote: »

Lots of people saying its very hard

In my experience you'd better get very used to that

Zaph

Green&Red wrote: »

Lots of people saying its very hard.

Electric Nitwit wrote: »

In my experience you'd better get very used to that

aaronjennings

wrestlemaniac wrote: »

I could really do with that bye for today! Barely survived yesterday

Me reading this thread:



:pac:

Posy

I have answered, despite not fully understanding what the hell a "rep" is.

I made a big mistake.......

feargale

Green&Red wrote: »

So Day 3

So do one rep and they are done, not able to lift a second rep at 100kg.

Can you clarify please? Do you mean they have done two lifts?

Green&Red

feargale wrote: »

Can you clarify please? Do you mean they have done two lifts?

Theyre only able to do one rep

feargale

Green&Red wrote: »

Theyre only able to do one rep

I don't know much about powerlifting but as I understand it rep means repetition. Is it just one lift or does one rep mean two lifts? Sorry to trouble you,

P.S. "not much" is a euphemism for f**kall.

Electric Nitwit

Pretty certain it's one lift

If 100kg is the most you can lift, but you're broken after one lift, then what's the maximum weight you could lift seven times?

khalessi

Electric Nitwit wrote: »

Pretty certain it's one lift

If 100kg is the most you can lift, but you're broken after one lift, then what's the maximum weight you could lift seven times?

If it's me, none as I would be pinned under the first lift, moaning quietly for help:D

Green&Red

feargale wrote: »

I don't know much about powerlifting but as I understand it rep means repetition. Is it just one lift or does one rep mean two lifts? Sorry to trouble you,

P.S. "not much" is a euphemism for f**kall.

1 rep is one lift

Green&Red

Electric Nitwit wrote: »

Pretty certain it's one lift

If 100kg is the most you can lift, but you're broken after one lift, then what's the maximum weight you could lift seven times?

Toto Wolfcastle

I took one number (provided by my brother in law) from another number (provided by my sister) and that’s my answer.

Neowise

khalessi wrote: »

If it's me, none as I would be pinned under the first lift, moaning quietly for help:D

you can scale down the 100kg to your own abilities, then do the maths and scale the answer back up.

Electric Nitwit

Neowise wrote: »

you can scale down the 100kg to your own abilities, then do the maths and scale the answer back up.

Say, 100 helium balloons

Sawduck

I don't fully understand the question but I just did the most basic maths(the only type I know) pretty sure I'm waaaay off but sure isn't it the taking part that counts

cj maxx

What was the last question???

the purple tin

This question is, to quote marty mcFly..'Heavy!' :p:p

cj maxx

the purple tin wrote: »

This question is, to quote marty mcFly..'Heavy!' :p:p

Is it the 100kg 7 reps one?

Collie D

cj maxx wrote: »

Is it the 100kg 7 reps one?

Yes

cj maxx

Collie D wrote: »

Yes

Phew . I got sidetracked on a call. This is going to be fun

cj maxx

Its obviously 100/7

the purple tin

cj maxx wrote: »

Its obviously 100/7

No, that's what i though first, Greeny said in an earlier post it isn't 1 seventh.