Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Does anyone seriously think call me dave will be in charge after next election?



Tories opt for press regulation. We really are pretty hard to distinguish from Labour these days


By Douglas Carswell Politics Last updated: October 31st, 2013

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100243460/tories-opt-for-press-regulation-we-really-are-pretty-hard-to-distinguish-from-labour-these-days/







The longer I have been in Parliament, the more I realise that those on either front bench actually have rather a lot in common.

I don’t just mean that they did similar degrees at similar Oxbridge colleges. Or that they then went on to work as “special advisers”, before being selected in equally safe seats.

They also seemed to do all that at around the same time.

Those on both front benches seemed to learn their craft during the Blair ascendency, a time when politics was all about presentation, not principle. The most successful politicians of that era – Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Gerhard Schröder – boasted about doing “what works”. Having an underlying system of beliefs was seen as an encumberance, not an asset. It was – the ultimate dirty word – "ideological".

Yet look at some of the mess we Conservatives have got into precisely because we parted with principle.

Without any underlying system of beliefs about economics, the (post-monetarist) Tory frontbench bought into the idea that the financial boom meant a permanent addition to the UK tax base.

So instead of calling for tax cuts (“Old fashioned". "So 1980s!”), we started to talk about “sharing the proceeds of growth”. So when the Brownian boom went bust, we had almost nothing to say – a key reason, I suspect, why we failed to win the last election.

It has been a similar story with energy policy.

In the early Noughties, Labour bought into the whole “green energy” agenda. Since burning fossil fuels is easily the cheapest way of producing energy, in order to reduce CO2 emissions, the Labour government had to radically reconfigure the energy market. Instead of being free(ish), with producers generating electricity at the cheapest price punters were willing to pay, energy companies were required to generate according to quotas.

Again, we ditched our free market principles and went along with it. Modernisers, you see.

Now that the consequences of what Ed Miliband and co did when in office are coming home – with some householders priced out of being able to heat theirs – what do we have to say?

And then there is press regulation. Yet again, the Conservative front bench has opted to do what is expedient, rather than what is principled. And yet again, in doing so we have harmed our long term strategic interest.

Rather than risk a Commons defeat (there is almost certainly a majority in the House in favour of statutory press regulation), the Conservative front bench opted for a Royal Charter. “A half-way compromise, you see”. “Not really statutory at all, old boy”. Clever, eh?

Too clever, actually. Had a Labour/Lib Dem majority forced statutory press regulation through, in the face of principled Conservative opposition, we would go into the 2015 with almost every newspaper in the land willing on a Conservative victory.

Once again, tactical clever-dickery has overridden any strategic sense. May be principle-free politics isn’t such a good idea after all?

Who won the debate between Paxo and Russel Brand. I think Brand made a right fool of himself , what drug is he on now ? he was raving on like a madman.

I don't rate him as a stand up comic , and his voice is very annoying.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/31/robert-webb-russell-brand_n_4180398.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Brand said he won't vote ,and he made a fool of himself with his class war loony left views , Sound's like someone who post's on this thread ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/30/tristram-hunt-newsnight-paxman_n_4179585.html

Wednesday was not a good day for Tristram Hunt.

In the afternoon, the former TV historian laboured through his first big Commons outing as shadow education secretary, being mocked by Michael Gove for his past comments on free schools.

In the evening, the newly appointed member of the shadow cabinet received an even more forceful humiliation at the hands of Jeremy Paxman, who refused to let the plumy parliamentarian off the hook about Labour policy. When asked if he would allow his own children to go to schools with unqualified teachers, Hunt refused to answer - fives times.

Watch as the MP for Stoke-on-Trent buckles around three minutes 35 seconds.

Good ol Tristram, don't do as I do etc etc.

Hypocrite and chancer, hopefully temporary.

sticky - like i said, we have taken on 3 or 4 in NL in the last 12 months .... in uk, there are now just two of us .... as usual you are very selective in what you c+p and even more selective in the questions you answer - very few in truth

=======

so then, tell us more about these THREE holiday homes you have abroad in addition to the house you already have in uk

don't you feel that having FOUR homes is terribly greedy?
do you let them, free of charge of course, to the local homeless?
did you buy them in the hope of (unearned) capital gain?
do you intend to leave these FOUR homes to the exchequer when you die?
if so, what on earth was the point of buying them in the first place?
if not, do you hope that your family will be able to benefit from them?
how do justify owning FOUR homes with your trumpeted egalitarian ideals (hahaha)?

just thought i'ld ask so you could enlighten the rest of us here


btw, i think it must be comrade fred who has another home in spain
no doubt he'll tell us if that is not so

.

I dont share specific personal things on here or any board.

But I can answer all your questions in two sentences,

1. self made millionaire and never recieved a penny handed down .

2. What I leave will go to the funding of a college of further education for the under priveldged, my son will recieve the priveledge of making sure my wishes are carried out to the full on the college, nothing else.

Now back to my post.

Sticky SNR I was refering to your company as a high skilled Oil related company.(from what you have told me and others here)

I think you have taken my post the wrong way, it was not meant to be a slur on you or your company but a slur on the government who are putting youngsters on as many tills as they can find and not finding placements at skilled companys like yours.

Sorry if I offended you, a full apology given it wasnt meant to be offensive to you. Should have in hindsight been worded far better.

A Real-Time Map of Births and Deaths

This simulation gives an eerily omniscient vantage on the world as it fills.


http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/10/a-real-time-map-of-births-and-deaths/280609/

Manuel,

I am at home wherever I go.

I don't seem to be jealous of others, and quite content with myself and my lot. Nor do I seem to suffer from avarice, which you seem to think, from your personal expressions, to be the main motivating drive for yourself and the majority of others.

I do admire the knowledge, talents, skills and sometimes possessions of others, but would not wish to advantage for myself, if it was directly at their expense and detriment to them. Although, often it may have stimulated me to acquiring similar if they were to my taste.

Again, your reactions and blustering postings seem as attempts to maintain a status quo, in order to protect your own personal advantages, which might often have been gained at the expense of others.

You strike me as knowing the price of much, but the value of much less.

But whether you like it, or not, changes are occurring in society and the benefits of those changes are being shared more equally through society. There are still gross inequalities between certain sectors of society, but again these will be diminished as they are made more obvious to the general public via the different media outlets.

The UK is no longer a thiefdom for pillaging by a chosen few at the expense of the majority and also, the recognition that “full employment” is a probably a long term an “impossibility” and redistribution of it and the rewards from such will be distributed more evenly. That does not mean equally, but it does mean not disproportionally unequally.

As you note I can return as good as I receive, but personally I would prefer to concentrate on the argument rather than abusing the proposer.

=======
With that, good night Manuel and I will have bacon with two eggs and black coffee for breakfast.

Are you on drugs?


The UK is no longer a thiefdom for pillaging by a chosen few at the expense of the majority and also, the recognition that “full employment” is a probably a long term an “impossibility” and redistribution of it and the rewards from such will be distributed more evenly. That does not mean equally, but it does mean not disproportionally unequally.

fred - it merely seemed to me that sticky is very good at dishing out but not at all good when the boot comes back at him
frankly, i don't care whether he has 4 houses or 24, but his stance looks pretty hypocritical and i'm quite amused that he won't answer questions that he doesn't fancy

as to what you think of me from your padded armchair, i don't care one iota, but then i am very rarely offended and only cross on occasion and then only for a short time

what do i think of you?
not that you care, but i guess it's ok to dream of utopia and at least you won't get burnt at the stake like sir thomas moore ..... that i and most others don't share your dream except in snippets, i am sure does not worry you either

Just a little sad.

hey sticky - of course you don't offend me - see above in response to fred

we can't turn back the clock, and i'll be as succinct as i can be

i think a great deal of blame lies on the cultural perception that going to any old uni and getting some very silly degree is the holy grail and will guarantee a material utopia (a special for fred!) ..... in fact, it is probably only say 60/70% percentage of those students who will truly gain benefit from having gone to uni ..... the others, and some "true" graduates too, would have gained far more had there been proper work-placement schemes .... however, that requires a far greater involvement by local businesses at the secondary schools etc etc

i wonder how many schools actively encourage and foster that sort of thing, especially in the state sector

Uni is a gift to gov of whatever flavour.

it's keeps a fair % of em off the unemployment figs.

heaven forbid that that thought should ever have crossed my mind!

Found your web site...

http://cynicalbastards.com/ubs/edegad.gif

StickySNR please dont judge others by your own standards.

Its dangerous to give out to much info on public B/boards i thought you would have known that.

On the other issue not hypocritical at all, my life isnt focused on greed like yours, I beleive like a lot of others knowledge is wealth and if knowledge provides me with wealth so be it thats a bi product.

What I chose to spend it on is up to me.

Dont forget I havent been given or had wealth handed down to me like your good self.

Reminds me of something or other.

Damn my tablets.

Perhaps, why somebody was dropped for Bing Crosby or was that desperation.

.