Monday 20th October 2014

A home from home
Forum rules
Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
Locked
User avatar
mbc1955
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:47 pm
Location: Stockport, Great Manchester in body, the Lake District at heart
Contact:

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by mbc1955 »

Well, there you go, and most of it has been pretty turgid reading. Somebody has been fooling himself all day over what he thinks he's ben posting and his increasingly supercilious and superior tone of voice: when you get to the point where you're pointing out how much cleverer you are than the other guy whilst ignoring calmly put questions, your credibility goes out of the window.

I think I'll go and have a shower now, wash this thread off me.
The truth ferret speaks!
Tubby Isaacs
Prime Minister
Posts: 9949
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:18 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Tubby Isaacs »

50p tax rate. Good policy.

The IFS think that's pretty much about as high as it can go.
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by howsillyofme1 »

Temulkar wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Temulkar wrote: It's a good comparison though, a rising labour party splitting the working class/left vote and costing the liberals the election. Certainly the feeling of betrayal was big in what had been liberal strongolds in south wales.

History doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme. Ive learned a lot about late weimar, watching the rise of UKIP.

We should always learn from what history tells us and it is clear that the Labour take over from the Liberals in the early 20th Century shows how the political weather can change radically.

We also though have to be aware of the context and not be too superficial. The Liberals were badly hit by internal divisions and rivalries within the party. There was also a party champing at the bit with a groundswell of new voters ready to support them with the unions helping.

I think it is more likely we see UKIP doing damage to the Tories than the Greens to Labour as I do not think there is anywhere near the support for the Greens - if anything their showing has been quite disappointing in some ways after the LD collapse

In my view, and it is my view, the Greens will never get close to the tipping point to take over from Labour in the forseeable future. What they may do though is disrupt the Labour vote from the left but that may actually push Labour further to the right because of the 5th columnists waiting to pounce on Miliband.....
That's a really good point and why I find the Greens costing Labour an election rhetoric so utterly laughable. As I have stated here many times I still think it will be a labour landslide.

I'm not sure about the second point, UKIP have undeniably dragged the tories to the left. I would hope that we could be the same lodestone to drag labour back to the left.

However, I do think we are seeing the end of 2/3 party politics in the short term. How it plays out in the long term is anyones guess.

I don't think UKIP are dragging the Tories left ;)

The second point is based on what will hppen not what should happen - if Labour lose then it will all be down to Miliband and his 'communist' ideas. This will be the message from his internal critics and we know who they are. There is no strong voice I can think of from the left that is strong enough to counter that. That is the problem for the left in general - there is no charismatic leader. Miliband, I think, will do a good managerial job as PM but he isn't going to radicalise people

We all would say on here that Labour could do with taking 'a jump to the left' even if defeated but we also all know that this will not happen....unless there is a charismatic orator out there from the left (unfortunately the good orators are all a bit mad....)
seeingclearly
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by seeingclearly »

from businessgreen.com:

The Tom Greatrex regulatory measures.

http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/opinion ... -shale-gas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by HindleA »

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -charities" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re:relaxing taxi regulations outside London
pk1
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2314
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:58 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by pk1 »

Tomorrows headline in the Daily Hate followed by the Western Mail:
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (169.2 KiB) Viewed 23495 times
image.jpg
image.jpg (165.01 KiB) Viewed 23495 times
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by howsillyofme1 »

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -charities

Re:relaxing taxi regulations outside London
'cos deregulation always works so well......do the Tories actually think anything through?
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: Says it all really. Temulkar, you were wrong and you know it; I thought you'd be man enough to admit it, seems I misjudged you. Oh, btw, you don't get to set the ground rules after your performance over the past week; if I think you are talking garbage I'll let you know, if you don't like it .....tough. But you don't get to whine about people being partisan, or being aggressive, not any more.
Sigh, I am not whining, nor being aggressive, I honestly don't know how many times I have to say that. You are perfectly entitled to have a go at me and of course must respect the fact that I am then going to laugh at your inconsistencies, contradictions, tantrums, and flouncing. You keep coming back to me like a dog to vomit if you want, its been a quite amusing diversion today, and Im sure given your level of discourse the fun can only get better.
Tem, you're sounding exactly the same as Rusty does when I hand him his arse on a tray; purely coincidental I'm sure.
Thank you for engaging, well done you!
pk1
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2314
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:58 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by pk1 »

Bollocks, when will I ever learn to refresh before posting then I wouldn't have needed to edit the Western Mail pic before posting it !

Sorry Dan, you got there before me :-)
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

pk1 wrote:Tomorrows headline in the Daily Hate followed by the Western Mail:
I take it the Mail didn't bother reading the WG response then?
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by howsillyofme1 »

letsskiptotheleft wrote:
pk1 wrote:Tomorrows headline in the Daily Hate followed by the Western Mail:
I take it the Mail didn't bother reading the WG response then?
I am taking a shot in the dark here....but my guess would be no!
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

howsillyofme1 wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:
pk1 wrote:Tomorrows headline in the Daily Hate followed by the Western Mail:
I take it the Mail didn't bother reading the WG response then?
I am taking a shot in the dark here....but my guess would be no!
:lol:
User avatar
onebuttonmonkey
Committee Chair
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 8:04 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by onebuttonmonkey »

Tizme1 wrote:@one button, Don't blame yourself. As I said to Angry as well, it was in truth probably my initial comment that 'kicked things off'. The article of itself was an interesting read.

The meeting I was at this evening was a Green party meeting. At which I argued strongly against us standing a candidate in next years g/e. My reasoning was due to local factors. The party agreed with my reasoning and so, unless there is some major change in circumstances [events dear boy!], we won't stand a candidate. This leaves me in the same position as all local Green supporters. Can the Labour leadership allay our fears and persuade us to vote Labour [despite their poor local candidate]? Or will I, like you in my Tory/UKIP scenario, have to spoil my vote? Believe you me, I am really struggling with it!
No worries. I'm frustrated with the crushing use of the Godzilla argument - which I've heard in real life too much - but I do appreciate seeing it done well, as Gary Bainbridge did. Personally, I hate the simplification of it and the easy false opposites - I think it works best with those who already support the people using it; it doesn't attract anyone else because it isn't attractive outside of those people. It's about guilt and fear, or a threat, or is just too easy to use to excuse away things that aren't good enough. Which isn't to say there isn't a very good reason to feel threatened, just that being less threatened isn't the same as being given the chance to be optimistic - it's the difference between bulletproof vests and a world where people don't shoot each other. "This man will only steal your wallet. Support him! The other one will mug you in the face, too!" Really? Why not, oh, I don't know, do something else instead?

I'm a lefty who wants something to vote for, not something to vote against. So I'm not of any party at the moment, because, well, there simply isn't one for me. I carry a bunch of beliefs around in a dufflebag, some of which are, like any luggage, largely unexamined since they got in there. A good debate makes me think about them and work out what I need to change or whether I should keep carrying them around. "Vote x because otherwise y" doesn't make me think about anything so much as how much I wish someone would offer z, a thing to vote for that looks more like what I want. It's not out of a lack of loyalty to my beliefs or the politics of the left that I get grumpy or bemoan the parties we have to choose from - it's because I believe in those left wing things, and someone has to offer some of it to merit my active support - rather than a grudging vote out of fear. *sigh*

Anyway, we'll see what happens come 2015. Tactical voting saddens me, but it's a fact of life. I'm lucky to have a good Labour candidate to vote for (despite the party leadership). Were that not the case, then being told I'm being unreasonable for wanting more or personally responsible for not accepting less - and being asked to accept a bunch of false oppositions and simplifications on the way - would probably lead to me spoiling my ballot next year in a two-way race between LibDem (who I detest) and Labour (who break my bitter little heart). At least UKIP are nowhere up here - less than 4% in the Euro elections. Thank the deity of your choice for small mercies, eh.
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

Anyone watching Newsnight?

Winston McKenzie on there?
User avatar
diGriz
Committee Chair
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by diGriz »

This is a bit old but the first I've seen of it.

Going private? My reply to a job offer from a private health company
http://wheretheresmuck.wordpress.com/20 ... h-company/
Last edited by diGriz on Mon 20 Oct, 2014 11:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Anyone watching Newsnight?

Winston McKenzie on there?
Yeah, funnily enough I was in halls with Nihal, I dont think I ever saw him as wound up as he looks tonight by Winston.
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by howsillyofme1 »

McKenzie is a bit odd to say the least - mind you we all love an eccentric....
seeingclearly
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by seeingclearly »

Temulkar wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:I think there was some kind of Labour statement on fracking last year, several points that iirc would considerably slow down any planning process leading to fracking as well as conditions that might be impossible for it to take place. Conditionality about effluent and chemicals. At the time I thought it would stall things to the point of making fracking uneconomic.

Been racking my brains trying to remember who made it, but I'm only getting a name I know is wrong.
This ?
Labour attempts to strengthen regulation of UK fracking industry
Opposition party to table amendments to Lords infrastructure bill that would tighten rules for companies drilling for shale gas

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... g-industry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It's good and it will persuade some people, not me, Im very much against any fracking at all which is the Green stance.
Regulations that make it uneconomic can prevent it happening. It's clear that the greens have a small committed church, Labour has a larger broader one, but from the top these regulations are saying this is not something we want to do. Everywhere they go fracking companies walk in override the locals, while feasting the politicians and creating wholesale pollution. There are conditions in the set of regulations that no fracking company can meet. As far as I have just been able to see they were taken up by the all-party fracking committee. The companies have backed off over the last year, is this why? In which case Labour is, in a parliamentary way, supporting exactly what you say you want. One of these reports mentions the all party aspect.

Tisme, this was for you really.
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by ErnstRemarx »

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
I am opposed to fracking. The Labour party are supportive of the idea though with more 'checks' seemingly than the Tories. And there is the nub of it. Labour frequently are a watered down version of the Tories.

The Green party isn't just about the environment. It's about social justice too. Are Labour going to do away with workfare? Work capability assessments? Why have they started joining in with the bash the immigrants rhetoric?

As I said previously, many Labour party supporters and Green party supporters are in agreement on a lot of these issues. But the Labour leadership don't appear to be.
The Green Party supported in 2010 spending £40bn more on pensions, a universal £170 a week. Many of those pensioners have excellent private pensions.

Not much social justice spending left after that.

I think Labour should work with them at local level, but at a national level, but nationally I can't take them seriously.
I would agree with this last point except that in Bury, the Green party have been pretty braindead about about some issues and stupidly populist over others. I've probablymentioned Bury Library before now. They want it fully restored. Where's the money coming from? They never say. They want it restored to how it was. We can't afford it - we'll have to cut jobs. Reject the cuts! Refuse to implement them! And get surcharged and disqualified, and then then Section 151 officer - go on, look it up, Greens - sets the budget for you (if Whitehall doesn't).

OK, Bury Greens, tell me how many jobs in other parts of the council I should cut to preserve the library exactly as it was (and which we couldn't afford). Reject the cuts! Oppose the cuts! Yes, I get that, now how many adult care workers should I sack to protect the library? Refuse to implement the cuts!!! We've covered that: we get disqualified and fined, and someone else from outside Bury does our budget rather than us. How many social workers should we sack?

Reject the cuts! You're doing the Tories dirty work for them!! No, we're trying like fuck to make sure that the Tories can't fuck up Bury despite a 50% cut in our controllable spend. You're just like the Tory party!! Oh, just fuck off.

... and that's how the Bury Green party have been over the subject of Bury Library. I'm sure that on a national level, they're perfectly level headed; in this area, they're band wagon jumping opportunists. Deal with them? No. I don't think so. Not until they grow up.
User avatar
TheGrimSqueaker
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by TheGrimSqueaker »

howsillyofme1 wrote:McKenzie is a bit odd to say the least - mind you we all love an eccentric....
I've heard him called many things (none of them complimentary) but eccentric has never featured on that list. Is there a political party (apart from the BNP) he hasn't stood for?
COWER BRIEF MORTALS. HO. HO. HO.
Tubby Isaacs
Prime Minister
Posts: 9949
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:18 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Tubby Isaacs »

Barroso mocked Grant Shapps, the Conservative party chairman, who had mocked him as an “unelected Eurocrat”. Pointing out that he served as an elected politician for 29 years in Portugal, Barroso said: “I was 12 years in the government of my country, as prime minister, as foreign minister. I don’t know who the gentleman is, but he certainly doesn’t have more democratic legitimacy than I have.”
:lol:
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

seeingclearly wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote: This ?
Labour attempts to strengthen regulation of UK fracking industry
Opposition party to table amendments to Lords infrastructure bill that would tighten rules for companies drilling for shale gas

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... g-industry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It's good and it will persuade some people, not me, Im very much against any fracking at all which is the Green stance.
Regulations that make it uneconomic can prevent it happening. It's clear that the greens have a small committed church, Labour has a larger broader one, but from the top these regulations are saying this is not something we want to do. Everywhere they go fracking companies walk in override the locals, while feasting the politicians and creating wholesale pollution. There are conditions in the set of regulations that no fracking company can meet. As far as I have just been able to see they were taken up by the all-party fracking committee. The companies have backed off over the last year, is this why? In which case Labour is, in a parliamentary way, supporting exactly what you say you want. One of these reports mentions the all party aspect.

Tisme, this was for you really.
Im not sure fracking (at least for oil) is that viable at the moment with oil going through the floor, which I think has affected their stance. Gas maybe your right though. However, when the price of oil goes up as it inevitably will, were likely to see renewed interest from the oil companies.

frighteningly I am agreeing partially with Huhne on newsnight.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

ErnstRemarx wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
I am opposed to fracking. The Labour party are supportive of the idea though with more 'checks' seemingly than the Tories. And there is the nub of it. Labour frequently are a watered down version of the Tories.

The Green party isn't just about the environment. It's about social justice too. Are Labour going to do away with workfare? Work capability assessments? Why have they started joining in with the bash the immigrants rhetoric?

As I said previously, many Labour party supporters and Green party supporters are in agreement on a lot of these issues. But the Labour leadership don't appear to be.
The Green Party supported in 2010 spending £40bn more on pensions, a universal £170 a week. Many of those pensioners have excellent private pensions.

Not much social justice spending left after that.

I think Labour should work with them at local level, but at a national level, but nationally I can't take them seriously.
I would agree with this last point except that in Bury, the Green party have been pretty braindead about about some issues and stupidly populist over others. I've probablymentioned Bury Library before now. They want it fully restored. Where's the money coming from? They never say. They want it restored to how it was. We can't afford it - we'll have to cut jobs. Reject the cuts! Refuse to implement them! And get surcharged and disqualified, and then then Section 151 officer - go on, look it up, Greens - sets the budget for you (if Whitehall doesn't).

OK, Bury Greens, tell me how many jobs in other parts of the council I should cut to preserve the library exactly as it was (and which we couldn't afford). Reject the cuts! Oppose the cuts! Yes, I get that, now how many adult care workers should I sack to protect the library? Refuse to implement the cuts!!! We've covered that: we get disqualified and fined, and someone else from outside Bury does our budget rather than us. How many social workers should we sack?

Reject the cuts! You're doing the Tories dirty work for them!! No, we're trying like fuck to make sure that the Tories can't fuck up Bury despite a 50% cut in our controllable spend. You're just like the Tory party!! Oh, just fuck off.

... and that's how the Bury Green party have been over the subject of Bury Library. I'm sure that on a national level, they're perfectly level headed; in this area, they're band wagon jumping opportunists. Deal with them? No. I don't think so. Not until they grow up.
Yeah that's dumb behaviour, not typical from my experience round here, but we are tiny in west wales.

Although Im pleased to say swansea barrage picked pu 100 mil of funding from the Pru, so it is looking more and more likely to happen.
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

Been to a few meetings regarding the barrage, if the Tories get in I reckon it's and no pun intended dead in the water, it will require higher subsidies than wind, and I doubt the formerly greenest government will be too obliging?
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Been to a few meetings regarding the barrage, if the Tories get in I reckon it's and no pun intended dead in the water, it will require higher subsidies than wind, and I doubt the formerly greenest government will be too obliging?
Are they able to overule the assembly on it, I thought the decision was devolved?
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

Temulkar wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Been to a few meetings regarding the barrage, if the Tories get in I reckon it's and no pun intended dead in the water, it will require higher subsidies than wind, and I doubt the formerly greenest government will be too obliging?
Are they able to overule the assembly on it, I thought the decision was devolved?
Not sure, I just know each watt (if that's the right term) will require a higher subsidy than wind, and there's enough bleating about that, I have quite recent literature somewhere on it, and email addresses of people involved, be interested to see what the current situation is, I hope it happens, and if labour get elected the Severn barrage gets taken up, a gigantic shortsighted measure in cancelling that IMO.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

Talking about compromises for the greens, Barrages are a real compromise for some greens. Some are very much opposed to it, use of concrete, environmental impact etc. I know I was v much in the minority over the severn barrage being in favour.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

letsskiptotheleft wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:Been to a few meetings regarding the barrage, if the Tories get in I reckon it's and no pun intended dead in the water, it will require higher subsidies than wind, and I doubt the formerly greenest government will be too obliging?
Are they able to overule the assembly on it, I thought the decision was devolved?
Not sure, I just know each watt (if that's the right term) will require a higher subsidy than wind, and there's enough bleating about that, I have quite recent literature somewhere on it, and email addresses of people involved, be interested to see what the current situation is, I hope it happens, and if labour get elected the Severn barrage gets taken up, a gigantic shortsighted measure in cancelling that IMO.
Yes very shortsighted. If Labour committed to cancel HS2 and build a severn barrage instead I could live with trident in the short term.
Tubby Isaacs
Prime Minister
Posts: 9949
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:18 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Tubby Isaacs »

Temulkar wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:
Temulkar wrote: Are they able to overule the assembly on it, I thought the decision was devolved?
Not sure, I just know each watt (if that's the right term) will require a higher subsidy than wind, and there's enough bleating about that, I have quite recent literature somewhere on it, and email addresses of people involved, be interested to see what the current situation is, I hope it happens, and if labour get elected the Severn barrage gets taken up, a gigantic shortsighted measure in cancelling that IMO.
Yes very shortsighted. If Labour committed to cancel HS2 and build a severn barrage instead I could live with trident in the short term.
I think HS2 will get pushed back a couple of years whoever wins, because it's supposed to start in 2017, which is a very tight year even without unfunded tax cuts and whatever else Cameron pulls out of his arse.
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by ErnstRemarx »

Temulkar wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote:
Rebecca wrote:Morning all.
Off topic,but sort of a general warning for people who,like me,are not very technically minded;
Had a call this morning from somebody saying that my computers are all infected with some virus and that he was calling from windows support.
Sounded quite genuine,in a difficult to understand Indian ish accent as per usual from tech support.
So I started up my chromebook,but,he didn't really know what a chromebook was.So he asked me to start up the desk top,and when he began to ask me to type in a file name I asked for a number to call to verify that he was from microsoft.
Didn't call the number he gave me,but contacted microsoft.They NEVER call people in this way,it is a scam.
I'm sure most of you would have been too smart to even switch on,but when it comes to difficult to understand tech talk I sort of freeze up mentally.
Correct. Microsoft never call you like that. Do what I do (two variations). The first one is to tell them that you can't follow their instructions because a PC running Linux doesn't have the same layout as Windows, and so you're confused now. The second, and more fun, way is to wait until they've finished their opening spiel and then gently ask: "have you ever considered letting our lord jesus christ into your life?". Works a treat for me; 100% call termination.
So Ernst,

Kier Hardie or Herbert Asquith?
Sorry what was the question? My instinctive answer is "Kier Hardie's cap", but I did watch Brass too much.
seeingclearly
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by seeingclearly »

HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... -charities

Re:relaxing taxi regulations outside London
Not a brilliant idea. In fact quite a scary idea for a person dependent on taxis to get anywhere. A friends daughter was attacked and seriously injured, a couple of years ago, for no reason other than the driver demanded more money on top of what she had just paid him. She gave him what she had left. Her jaw and nose were broken, but the worst damage was to her mind.

There's good reason not to reduce regulation.
letsskiptotheleft
Home Secretary
Posts: 1767
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:44 pm
Location: Neath Valley.

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by letsskiptotheleft »

Brass was brilliant! Christ is that the time?! Nos da, as we sometimes say in this Labour ravaged wasteland!
User avatar
mbc1955
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 718
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:47 pm
Location: Stockport, Great Manchester in body, the Lake District at heart
Contact:

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by mbc1955 »

Re my post earlier: how ironic that you should thank me Temulkar, it shows just how deluded you are about yourself.
The truth ferret speaks!
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by ErnstRemarx »

HindleA wrote:My comment was not addressed to anybody in particular,I'm honest enough to pinpoint any criticism should I feel.the need to a particular poster.I'm in the main systematically ignored,that's fine I don't give a flying fig,just seems to me the ones with an agenda dominate any discussion(if you can in reality call it that,beyond the ping pong of every increasing posturing ).It's very much like the Guardian which the trolls have basically stopped me commentating,not through sensitivity,you just know you will be ignored or pounced on.
FTN is moderated. I've spent the evening reading the thread with a little unease. I would like to remind people that the basic tenet of this place is, if you wouldn't say it to someone in the pub, or your mum, or someone else you'll have to meet again (repeatedly) then it's probably best not to say it. We came here for a reason and because we share some values. Let's respect that. That is all. Ba-dum.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

ErnstRemarx wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote: Correct. Microsoft never call you like that. Do what I do (two variations). The first one is to tell them that you can't follow their instructions because a PC running Linux doesn't have the same layout as Windows, and so you're confused now. The second, and more fun, way is to wait until they've finished their opening spiel and then gently ask: "have you ever considered letting our lord jesus christ into your life?". Works a treat for me; 100% call termination.
So Ernst,

Kier Hardie or Herbert Asquith?
Sorry what was the question? My instinctive answer is "Kier Hardie's cap", but I did watch Brass too much.
Ah, it was about the 1910 election when Labour cost the liberals a majority putting at risk the liberal reforms. Sadly it was Arthur Anderson not Kier Hardie.

My maternal grandparents were from liberal-Labour families (grandma married beneath herself) and there was the usual wedding fight between my great uncles over the split. It left real scars in the chapel community at the time, with blame for the decline of non-conformity being levelled at labour supporters on sundays.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

ErnstRemarx wrote:
HindleA wrote:My comment was not addressed to anybody in particular,I'm honest enough to pinpoint any criticism should I feel.the need to a particular poster.I'm in the main systematically ignored,that's fine I don't give a flying fig,just seems to me the ones with an agenda dominate any discussion(if you can in reality call it that,beyond the ping pong of every increasing posturing ).It's very much like the Guardian which the trolls have basically stopped me commentating,not through sensitivity,you just know you will be ignored or pounced on.
FTN is moderated. I've spent the evening reading the thread with a little unease. I would like to remind people that the basic tenet of this place is, if you wouldn't say it to someone in the pub, or your mum, or someone else you'll have to meet again (repeatedly) then it's probably best not to say it. We came here for a reason and because we share some values. Let's respect that. That is all. Ba-dum.
I agree with that, Ernst and I can honestly say I havent said anything I wouldnt have said down the pub tonight.

And before any jokers ask if I get slapped a lot, nope, Im 6.5 and 18 stone, people rarely threaten me despite the fact Im soft as shit (As my rugby coach always used to despiar).
User avatar
ErnstRemarx
Secretary of State
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:04 pm
Location: Bury, in the frozen north of England

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by ErnstRemarx »

Temulkar wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: The Green Party supported in 2010 spending £40bn more on pensions, a universal £170 a week. Many of those pensioners have excellent private pensions.

Not much social justice spending left after that.

I think Labour should work with them at local level, but at a national level, but nationally I can't take them seriously.
I would agree with this last point except that in Bury, the Green party have been pretty braindead about about some issues and stupidly populist over others. I've probablymentioned Bury Library before now. They want it fully restored. Where's the money coming from? They never say. They want it restored to how it was. We can't afford it - we'll have to cut jobs. Reject the cuts! Refuse to implement them! And get surcharged and disqualified, and then then Section 151 officer - go on, look it up, Greens - sets the budget for you (if Whitehall doesn't).

OK, Bury Greens, tell me how many jobs in other parts of the council I should cut to preserve the library exactly as it was (and which we couldn't afford). Reject the cuts! Oppose the cuts! Yes, I get that, now how many adult care workers should I sack to protect the library? Refuse to implement the cuts!!! We've covered that: we get disqualified and fined, and someone else from outside Bury does our budget rather than us. How many social workers should we sack?

Reject the cuts! You're doing the Tories dirty work for them!! No, we're trying like fuck to make sure that the Tories can't fuck up Bury despite a 50% cut in our controllable spend. You're just like the Tory party!! Oh, just fuck off.

... and that's how the Bury Green party have been over the subject of Bury Library. I'm sure that on a national level, they're perfectly level headed; in this area, they're band wagon jumping opportunists. Deal with them? No. I don't think so. Not until they grow up.
Yeah that's dumb behaviour, not typical from my experience round here, but we are tiny in west wales.

Although Im pleased to say swansea barrage picked pu 100 mil of funding from the Pru, so it is looking more and more likely to happen.
There's a dreadful degree of Unobtainia that I just don't get. I realise that all parties can be shitty in localities, so I don't hold it against the Greens nationally, but I fucking wish they'd sort Bury out. They're really oppositionist for the sake it, which makes them as bad as the Tories, I'm sad to say.
Temulkar
Secretary of State
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by Temulkar »

mbc1955 wrote:Re my post earlier: how ironic that you should thank me Temulkar, it shows just how deluded you are about yourself.
Sigh, it was me being ironic. Look if you don't like me fine, don't engage with me. I'm really not here to argue with you.
User avatar
51A
Committee Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri 19 Sep, 2014 8:06 pm
Location: South Wales

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by 51A »

I have a new job. It's ok, it's with a Housing Association. It's full time. I work full time, some paid, some not, but my former employer has been reducing hours because they were largely Legal Aid funded so I gave my free hours for free to CAB. Now I won't be able to. If you can, please do, no matter what your abilities, they will find and use them and although they can't pay you, you can go home and sleep nights because you know you did your best and did no harm.
User avatar
refitman
Site Admin
Posts: 7691
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:22 pm
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by refitman »

51A wrote:I have a new job. It's ok, it's with a Housing Association. It's full time. I work full time, some paid, some not, but my former employer has been reducing hours because they were largely Legal Aid funded so I gave my free hours for free to CAB. Now I won't be able to. If you can, please do, no matter what your abilities, they will find and use them and although they can't pay you, you can go home and sleep nights because you know you did your best and did no harm.
Congratulations on the new job.
seeingclearly
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Monday 20th October 2014

Post by seeingclearly »

In tune with some of today's conversation which, while it was not all pleasant, was valuable.

The extinction marathon.

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign ... ert-george" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Locked