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.

I would have said yes and given him their autograph :-)

"He’s very much his own person,” said Mr Griffiths (leader british communist party), when asked how close Mr Corbyn was to the party. Still, he acknowledged there were “no major differences on immediate issues”, including their shared opposition to Nato and nuclear weapons. And possibly Brexit, too.

Jacob does it again with another fabulous speech railing against those who would fetter the free speech of the press.

And particularly directed against Labour for being especially funded for it by Max Mosley, who has donated £540,000 to the Labour Party - but we all know of us know why he did that. (It was because Mosley was so personally embarrassed by the press when his "German soldiers orgy" was leaked to them and about which he hadn't even told his family he was having it, for some reason)

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6250609/tory-mp-jacob-rees-mogg-blasts-labour-for-being-in-bed-with-disgraced-racist-max-mosley/

i know The Times is no longer the impartial trumpeter of old, but nevertheless, the following from yesterday is interesting ...... note that this lead has now existed for several weeks ...... by this stage of a parliament, the opposition should have a comfortable lead ...... clearly the general public do not care one little bit for corbyn and his retro-marxist policies, nor i suspect for his public persona ...... it says even less for corbyn/labour that the tories lead moderately well despite the various messes that they have made of a number of issues (not all entirely of their own making) ........


YouGov/Times – CON 43%, LAB 38%, LDEM 9%
10 MAY 2018
YouGov’s weekly poll for the Times has topline figures of CON 43%(+1), LAB 38%(nc), LDEM 9%(+2). Fieldwork was Tuesday to Wednesday and changes are from last week. While the changes themselves are insignificant, margin-of-error stuff, it’s worth noting that this is the fourth YouGov poll in a row with a Conservative lead of 4 or 5 points, so it looks as if, beneath the noise, the Tories may have genuinely opened up a small lead over Labour.

The same movement is apparent in the best Prime Minister rating. Following the general election Jeremy Corbyn had cut Theresa May’s lead on the measure down to single figures, but it has gradually inched back up again, and in the last couple of months Theresa May seems to have had a steady double-digit lead.

Don't worry, before the next election Labour will think up a new lot of free goody bags to sway those that expect something for nothing, which is an increasing proportion of the electorate.
Venezuela managed to get into the bankrupt position it is today based upon similar policies. Even used to send free heating oil to the "poor" of NYC, as well as petrol for home consumption cheaper than water. If the last Liebour lot left no money in treasury, imagine the current rabble.

many things change even in a week, but it was interesting nevertheless ........ currently sitting in dubai airport ...... back in uk this evening

I'll meet you at the airport with a sign "Jose Mourinho".

even i have heard of him ....... i see this chap was sacked from wba :-) ....... tony pulis ...... is he doing any good for middlesbrough now?

Tony Pulis. He looks like the guy that comes to clean my windows. Likes to wear a baseball cap. Once played for Happy Valley in Hong Kong. I always thought that was Sarah Lancashire's place in Yorkshire.
Puliss has been managing for about 25 years and is known as a fill-in appointment, ie cheap. Has worked at 10 clubs, Stoke City twice - gluttens for punishment. Must be due to move on from 'borough. Never mind, just think of all that redundancy pay.

typical policy of corbynista labour ......
typical politics of envy and how to stultify any ambition to better oneself .......

ST Rich List just published, shows that 94% of the top 1,000 are self-made entrepreneurs

Shadow Cabinet Minister Jon Trickett says, "..... elite pinching wealth from the pockets of ordinary working people. Labour will overturn the rigged economy ....."

instead, the self-made (in particular) should be roundly applauded and held up as an example of what can be achieved with much hard work, dedication, and of course a modicum of luck in one form or another

Many Mafia bosses were self-made.

Hitler, I believe was said to be a self-made man.

Were you there at his conception?

you really are a nasty, misanthropic, little (in all senses) person

many very rich families and individuals are significant supporters of many philanthropic projects - and that is of their own volition

philip green is also probably self-made, but he is totally despicable for all that
sir peter lampl is the reverse

Why do you bother cynic ,that last post proved Fred is totally ignorant.

fred isn't ignorant; indeed he is quite an intelligent guy .... unfortunately, he has a severe personality disorder

Manuel,

What individuals develop into depends on how lucky they are in their genetic propensities and their fate is dependent on their response to environmental stimuli, whether the stimuli be thought advantageous or deleterious.

Also important are the vagaries of the choices they make in response to social "stimuli" and whether those responses are introjected, rejected, or revised during maturing.

It is thought, by some, that the choices in beliefs and actions made by children, (by some children), are, or thought to be, at the time of their making to be the "best" or most "advantageous" choices for themselves and are often repeated “symbolically” in later life in response to “symbolically” similar situations.

There is no such thing as a self-made man/woman.

The development of "the self-made man/woman" is dependant on his "genetic luck" and “environmental” stimuli.

For the majority of human-beings genetic manipulation is unlikely to play a major role in future generations (Long-term filtering, is becoming a more important feature of
developing societies.)

However, manipulation of social environments by changing opportunities, stimulations and providing “suitable” education will affect the outcome of human development and more thoroughly release their potentials.

A sense of social responsibility would be useful.

-=-==-=

I feel I was "lucky" in my childhood and adolescence to have had an environment which was challenging to the diversity of opinion, but at the same time tolerant of it.

We tolerated "dumbos".








.

that verbiage reads as silage and has no relevance whatsoever

Oh, ye with so little self-insight.

A little introspection might do you good.

The turnip travels first class but the beetroot gets all the action.

I always do, what seems to be the best thing to do at the time.

'Golden Rule' sorta, kinda.

It could be 'genetic propensity', I suppose, but I've never given it much thought.

Although Meghan Markle will become resident under UK tax rules and will be married to Prince Harry (a UK domiciliary), she could remain non-UK domiciled.

Fortunately for Meghan, the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 enabled women to establish a domicile independent of their husband. Under the UK rules, Meghan will have acquired the non-domiciled status of her father when she was born.

Unlike most people in the UK, this means that Meghan could benefit from several major UK tax concessions.

Whether Meghan will receive a ”salary” or an “allowance” from the Royal Household is not clear. However, if she does receive any taxable employment income, her non-domicile status means that she can claim tax relief in respect of her non-UK duties for the first three tax years that she is resident in the UK.

Non-domiciled status means that Meghan’s non-UK investment income will not be subject to UK tax, provided that she does not remit this income to the UK. This is known as the “remittance basis” of taxation and can apply for up to 15 tax years from the date that Meghan became UK resident.’

So that's nice.

And, as well as HRH, there is also the matter of IHT. However, let's get her married first.