To EVERY Dutch student!

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

Just cos I'm an accountant doesnt mean I have anything what-so-ever to do with tax, in fact I don't :)

Also you are wrong about those IR figures. What they have quoted is over and above the peronal allowance:

Peronsal allowance: 4615
Starting rate 10%: +1920 (OVER AND ABOVE 4615)
Basic Rate 22%: 1921-29900
Higher rate 40%: after 29900

This means you get:

4615 Tax free
Between 4615 and 6535 at 10%
from 6536 to 34515 at 22%
above 34516 at 40%

I had neglected to take into account the 1% decrease in 2002, my apologies :) Make sure you understand the tables before you quote them pls Thur ;)

But yeah I agree NI is a charade, although I dont think anyone sees thru it. It's more tax, plain and simple... However, 'fiscal drag' is not such a great killer in my eyes. The 40% tax bracket is increasing in line with inflation - earnings are increasing at a greater rate... So what?

Why should the tax bracket increase with the earnings increase and not the inflation level - inflation reflects the rate our economy is increasing at, so why should the higher tax rate go up with the earnings and not inflation?

If the government were to increase the higher tax bracket in line with earnings ratios then higher earners would be getting a 18% tax reduction on certain percentage of their earnings while the people in the lower tax brackets see no benifit.

Likewise, if the government were to keep the higher bracket increase in line with earnings increase the higher earners would suddenly see a profit increase - this cannot continue over an extended period of time, things like this have to be kept in line with the economy's increase as a whole and not certain sectors whose income levels may fluctuate vastly over shorter periods of time...

You have 2 options, increase tax in line with earnings and create riched workers and a poorer economy, or increase in line with inflation and keep the level of earnings flat (well, not flat but in line with inflation) and put more money back into the country.


Edit: I know the tax figures make sense but not sure about the earnings bllx, pls correct me if I'm wrong but that is my impression of the situation :D
 
Last edited:
lol grizz! quick quick Spirit is being condescending get im get im!!
 
Last edited:
well jokos in 1st year so the homework was probably: calculate the number of pints you can drink before being sick. hehe:P
 
how long do i have ;)

But seriously

wot the fuck are "acrylamide adducts" and y would i not want them when fragmenting a protein and usin mass spec ....?

and wot reagant would i use to reduce i disulphide bond?
ive got beta mercaptoethanol at present but i dont know if that the right one??! :confused:

Everything else im stuck with will take too long to explain :)
 
beta mercaptoethanol is spot on mate


The acrylamide adducts im not too sure about, ill look into it for u

Come onto to icq gimp :P
 
as I remember from 1st year chemistry acrylamide has a tendancy to form covalent adducts... ie they bind together, this would be bad form mass spectrometery because as you said molecules need to be fragmented, since only single atoms can be analyzed using the apparatus.

cant help u more unless u tell me more but if you are talking about amino acid composition and sequence analysis, i did a bit of that years ago too, basically u gotta perform alkylation of the proteins before the electrophoresis treatment, this stops the acrylamide adducts forming during electrophoresis.

aye!
 
Last edited:
That is probably correct

Makes sense to me and u defo need to fragment anythin goin into a mass spec with electrons

ta Foxy :P
 
cheers m8ys, icq aint workin for me just now ... doh

how about this one


2. (10 marks) A modern MS is able to identify many proteins on the basis of its ability to measure very
accurate relative masses (Mr) of peptides.
1.But why is this i.e why does knowing the Mr of each of its tryptic
fragments often directly lead to the identification of a protein. 2.Under what circumstances might mass
spectrometry fail to identify a protein even if all the tryptic peptide masses have been measured very
accurately?

first bit something to do with the particular bits being broken up will give unique masses, so u can find the structural formula from them and build it up to identify the whole protein

second bit stereisomers right? ... but how the fuck can i pad that out for 10 marks :confused:
 
well what u say sounds ok and by the time u padded out by explaining what stereoisomers are eg because ligands remain in a fixed position around a central atom or ion, different isomers , or arrangements, of the ligand groups are possible. When there are four or more ligands around a central atom, different stereoisomers, or spatial configurations, are possible...u should be close to 10 marks

geez I did learn summat at uni after all lol
 
Shut it Lex :p:

k well 5 marks for each part

so part 1

1. Trypsin digest cleaves the protein selectively, reducing it down to polypetide fragments. Digested protein is placed into the Mass spec , and fragmented into individual Amino Acids ( i think they bombard it with electrons, but im not sure as i just read that they also hit it with helium atoms :confused: ). From the spectrum produced the distances between the peaks are measured allowing the order of a/a's to be determined, and the precise Mw is also calculated.

This data is input into a sequence database, which finds known matches and thus identifies ur protein
 
Last edited:
well whether thats right or not Gazzy it sure sounds good..:)

...we should start charging eh Gazzy?! £5 a question
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back