"The chairs are so small, it looks like a children's library..."

... says Dinero.

And he would be completely correct.

Baffling.

They have gone stark raving mad.

Gleefully regurgitated by The Guardian:

Office workers should spend a minimum of two hours on their feet at work – building up to an ideal four hours – in order to avoid the ill effects of a sedentary lifestyle, according to a study co-commissioned by Public Health England.

Research has long linked excessive time spent sitting to increased risk of morbidity or premature death but the advice, co-commissioned by Public Health England and published on Monday, represents the first time British workers have been provided with quantifiable targets for getting out of their seats.

The study authors, who include experts from the UK, US and Australia, call for a revolution in the workplace through the use of sit-stand desks, standing-based work and regular walkabouts.

They also urge further research into whether facilities such as toilets should be moved further away from staff, some emails could be replaced by hand-delivered messages and employees could have alarms on computers or personal motion assessment devices prompting them to move.

Ricardo's Law of space?

I came across an interesting video on space saving furniture. At 2.45 the salesman points out that his furniture can allow you to live in a smaller apartment, presumably making a more desirable area affordable on a given budget.

Does Ricardo's Law not apply to space as well as rent? If, by using space-saving furniture, three people can afford to live an apartment that would otherwise only be big enough for two, is that not likely to push up the cost of those apartments, thereby rather defeating the object of the space-saving furniture?