Ernie Rocks!

Junky: understood re your comment regarding National. I mean domestic as in within the UK as opposed to at away games in other countries but both at International and Club level though.

Anyway up: Glad it wasn’t just me. I’m normally 5 minutes late for the PC bandwagon, but apparently not alone this time.

Still some racist chanting regularly associated with England fans though

Really? I can’t remember the last time I came across racist chanting at a UK domestic game? I would say it must have been 15 years ago at the very least. Not saying it doesn’t happen and all that, but the bad old days are quite long gone, nowadays, you’re more likely to have people telling you Shhhhhh because theres a Mum with a child near you in the crowd, rather than anything inappropriate being chanted.

My all time favourite football chant was Grimsby on a wet Saturday during a particularly boring game. They started chanting “We piss on your fish and you know we do”….. 😯 No doubt someone somewhere would find something to moan about about that, but it had me in tears at the time.

Don’t make assumptions would be the wisest course.

The problem is that you have received complaints about it, so it has to be addressed, so do so as you would for any other disciplinary matter. Put the complaint to him, offer him the right of reply and any support that is required. Really the first step is to agree that there is an issue. Once you have discuss potantial remedies, then a review process, plus next steps in the event not dealt with etc etc etc.

Whatever you do don’t go down the subtle route, be factual and truthful. He needs to get it. Dancing around the issue may leave you in the embaressing position of him actually not taking it on board.

You don’t know, there could be any number of genuine reasons…. diabetes being just one, such things as colostomy bags and the like are also potential culprits.

The killer blow to conspiracy theories is the fact that the most powerful man in the world couldn’t even keep the details of his personal cigar moistener secret, even though there was only one other, (and apparently willing) participant in that particular conspiracy. What chance when what we are now talking about would rate as a massively immoral and illegal, assault on their nation, which would have necessitated complicity on the part of literally hundreds if not thousands of people?

Chopping vegetables using that good old chefy hand on one end of knife, lever down with handle technique. Wifey comes in and asks a question and whilst thus distracted, I lever said chefs knife down across my thumb nail, slicing cleanly through nail down to the bone. Ouch!!

Well making an organisation successful, isn’t the same as making it honest and inclusive

Actually I think you’ll find that thats is a large part of what he has done to make BC successful.

I mean I really hope he does usher in a new era of openness and honesty, but I do have a small nagging doubt that he is just one of the old guard masquerading as change

Obviously his track record at BC supports that supposition doesn’t it? Taking a bankrupt organisation and turning it into one of the worlds finest and most successful sport governing bodies really isn’t any sort of guarantee thats hes not firmly rooted in the bad old days now is it?

Problem is history gets to be a bigger subject every year, and its not possible to cover all of it in detail. However, as the only way to see into the future is to consider the past and then extrapolate forward, it is pretty sad that world shaping events aren’t in everyones realm.

I mean WW2, took us as a species from biplanes to jets and space travel, introduced the UN, dragged us into the computer era and fundamentally changed the structure of the world from colonial to post colonial in a few short years. Massive impact on how we live today. Really, everyone should have some knowledge of the period surely??

Berm bandit. It’s easy to say we should help all those that need it but the reality is that in not too many years there really won’t be enough to go around. If more has to be spent to prop up the debt, how long before China will have to bail out Western Europe? No, I don’t think they’d bother either, so carrying on regardless and waiting for the next guy in the line to pick up the tab is frankly a stupid idea.

Thought as much. The vast majority of welfare is paid for by the recipient through National Insurance contributions and general taxation. i.e. they are just receiving what they and very often their parents have been paying into for years. Bit like buying insurance… (clues in the name).

The problem with your concept is that its actually more expensive to do as you suggest. I admit it is regrettable, but throwing people onto the streets does have a cost in real terms, as does not treating people who are ill, or not paying people the pension they have earnt throughout their lives.

spent quite so much money propping up the ridiculous levels of welfare state spending.

Interesting thought process so which part of the ridiculous welfare state spending do you propose to do away with?

with the greatest respect to the wit and wisdom of the footy types everywhere, may I suggest that if two expensive recruitment cock ups are made in close order, it may be time for the recruiter to look in the mirror rather than to blame everyone else, otherwise surely the firing of someone for cocking up takes on a slightly hypocritical tone……

…… just saying 😯

…. I reckon its TJ

no one to talk to, unable to relate to people without causing upset, no helmet….. it all fits

It’s entirely the point. The state is not allowed to execute people, regardless of when the crime was committed

<Types slowly>

If the law states that the penalty for a crime is based on what it is at the time of the crime, not as susbsequently changed, then surely that should be the same both ways around: i.e. either penalty should be as at time of crime, or as at time of trial, not as in the example where the punishment for a crime committed when the death penalty was law to be based on current rules. Its contradictory.

Try to move pass the death penalty bit, I think we’ve got the fact you don’t like that and try to grasp the inconsistency between the two things.

I’m hard pressed to find anything in this judgement that is unacceptable to me on an emotional level, but I’m also not a great believer in the death penalty on an intellectual level. However, I do wonder if a life time in solitary in an Indian Jail, with the constant threat of a violent unsanctioned death hanging over them is any more or less abhorrent than a quick exit.

Difficult all round IMHO.

Theres a moral to this somewhere.

I care little for politics, but I’m pretty interested in the maths being talked about properly.

So we agree that the debt is increasing, we agree that there has been substantial debate on here about the difference between deficit and debt, thus indicating that many people are unaware of the difference or the technicality of the language, but we don’t agree that the Tories are “doing a number” by the use of semantics such as “addressing the debt”, which where I come from does not mean deliberately making it bigger….. fair enough, we must agree to differ.

I think you are confusing the national debt with the defecit. The defecit is decreasing, but we still need to borrow dollar to cover the defecit, thus the national debt is rising.

I don’t particularly like to defend the Govt., but they never said that.

Could I suggest that reading a post is sensible before commenting on it? What I said was that the Tories have done a number on convincing people that THE DEBT is coming down, while in fact it is going up. I never mentioned either their stated policies or the National Deficit. So would either of you care to re read what was written and explain rush to “correct” it in light of what you have written in your respective posts?

I wonder where the national debt would be under labours policy?

Not sure that really the point. The point is that they have been busy convincing the great unwashed that they are dealing with it and bringing it down, whilst predictably the policies they have been pursuing has in fact increased it dramatically. If this were done on the High Street the retailer would have trading standards all over them.

Regarding the OP, this in fact would be probably the biggest single reason (of many) why his thread title is utter twaddle

PEN 15 is Steve Parrish off the tele

First owned as described above though, way back before it was a popular thing to do i.e. in the 70’s

PEN 15 : Used to be owned by the heir to Lancaster Garages. Says all you need to know both of the owner of that and personalised number plates in general IMHO

There is some truth in the lack of training investment in engineering over the years, but that’s the past the thing is right now there is a lot of opportunity. The UK still has a decent manufacturing industry

The fact that something has happened automatically puts it into the past, so I’m not sure what the point of that comment is. The changes to our education system are political and deliberate to reflect a change in emphasis in the nations economic activity from manufacturing to other, mainly service orientated jobs. Therefore far fewer people training as engineers or even learning the basic skills like maths etc etc, which is hardly surprising as there are far fewer jobs in that sector. (NB: My school in Ipswich in the the 60’s/70’s expected about 90% of the school to work in engineering. At that time there were any number of large manufacturing companies in the town, Ransomes and Rapier, (walking dragline), Ransom Sims and Jefferies (Ploughs, lawn mowers etc) Cranes, (pipework fittings), Compair Reavel, (air compressors), Bull Motors (Electric Motors), Rola Celestion (loudspeakers), to name but a few. Only one remains, and that in a much smaller way than it used to be. Most of the site, now being a retail park and Industrial Estate.)

I think if by decent you mean high quality, I’d agree, but if you mean a decent proportion of the workforce are engineers I’d have to say you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Like I say when I was at school 90% of my peers trained to be in or around engineering as a career…….and yes the demise did mostly occur during “her” reign.

His critics stated repeatedly that the downturn would be more severe and more extended that it proved to be

C’mon 2008 – 2013 is going a bit ….isn’t it? 😯

Think you’ll find it was Brown the ageing population that f**ked up pensions for pretty much everyone in the private sector.

Plenty of the very limited sample defined as folk I know, have had decent pay rises this last few years, mostly in engineering and pharma, but that’s a good thing IMO. Plenty of jobs and opportunities in engineering right now due to the lack of trained and skilled people caused by the demise of the UK’s manufacturing industry over the last 30 years

FTFY

and another..

Marketing costs, TAX, retailers cut, testing, medical certification, etc and so on.

marketing, advertising, licensing, transport, packaging etc

I take it you have heard of Drug “Cartels”? I’m guessing you’ve not worked out what a cartel is though?

From the office of Fair Trading website:

In its simplest terms, a cartel is an agreement between businesses not to compete with each other. The agreement is usually secret, verbal and often informal.

Typically, cartel members may agree on:

prices
output levels
discounts
credit terms
which customers they will supply
which areas they will supply
who should win a contract (bid rigging).
These agreements are prohibited by the Competition Act and Article 101 TFEU of the EC Treaty. In addition, the Enterprise Act makes it a criminal offence for individuals to dishonestly take part in certain specified cartels, essentially those that involve price fixing, market sharing, limitation of production or supply or bid rigging.

That is why a state controlled supply would remove the financial benefit from criminal enterprise. In essence where we are now with drugs is where the US was during prohibition with alcohol. That defintively proved that it is not possible to ban something for which there is a demand, as you simply drive it into the hands of organised crime, effectively scoring an own goal.

I really can’t get why people are unable to realise that the Drug cartels biggest friends are the “hang em and flog em” brigade. It would not surprise me in the least to find the Medine cartel and the like contributing to Republican and Conservative party funds. Good investment basically.

a ban as you have an illegal substance in your body,

Very much doubt that.

Reasons

1) I am innocently in a place where its being smoked I receive secondary smoke.
2) I am given something with it in, cake for example, I innocently eat it without being aware of what it is.
3) etc etc etc

As with alcohol there has to be a level at which it is deemed to be a significant intoxicant.

Anyone proposing to make crack legal has never known someone who got addicted to it.

Surely the point is would the process of making it legal make someone more or less likely to become addicted to it, followed by if they did become addicted to it by which method are they most likely to receive support as opposed to having to prostitute themselves to apy for it, and by which method is it most likely to be in the hands of organsied crime?

Currently method A has been tried and appears to me to be a massive failure, so in my book that makes method b worth a go. Not rocket sceience really is it?

Current approaches to drug abuse, (including alcohol) don’t work. Therefore, it is blatantly obvious that continuing to do something that doesn’t work, or in fact doing even more of that which does not work is daft. (NB: Happy to defend that statement should anyone disagree).

IMHO therefore the sensible thing to do would be to open our minds to more constructive approaches to the issues. Bringing the issue out from the shadows as has been done with alcohol may not resolve the issue, but it does remove it from the hands of criminals to a large extent, which is quite a part of the battle.
You can see very clearly that this is a narrow path to walk, where undue attempts to influence behaviour tend to drive the problem back underground into criminal hands. See cigarettes for the most obvious example.

So in short re OP yes it probably should be “Decriminalised” as should all other “recreational drugs” that however is not the same as saying its open season per se.

I was stationary right next to a multi car pile up in similar circumstances on the opposite carriageway on the M4 near Heston years ago. Its the scariest thing I’ve ever seen/heard/experienced. Very quiet, then a screeh of tyres and a horrible bang, then silence again for a few moments and then it happens all over again. What made it worse was quite a few fires started and you could hear a sort of whump sound when they started and then see an orange glow.

That was in incredibly thick fog, which was why my, much less busy carriageway (west bound early morning), had ground to a stop.

I can’t really comment on the wisdom or otherwise of drivers, but I’m pretty sure nobody intentionally made this happen. I reckon its a lot like the accusations of rubber necking you hear about all the time. actually the Highway Code does suggest you should slow down and take appropriate action when you see blue flashing lights. When you do you get accused of gawping. I suspect that some people slow down more than others in fog, and the disparity in speeds is probably the problem, especially so when as in this case you are near a river. You often suddenly run into much thicker fog. etc etc

Its just not always as simple as someone is to blame and someone is a **** when things go wrong IMHO.

I’ve taken the time and trouble to read through some of the tosh thats being bandied about as “evidence” etc on here, and if people think the Western governments are fabricating stuff, Christ alone knows what they are thinking looking at this stuff. Grainy extracts from unattributed videos, recycled news shots, a series of bland unsupported statements that could just as equally be untrue as true.

Truthfully we don’t have a clue, nor the resources to find out. The only people who are likely to have a clue are the UN investigators, and perhaps some national governments secret services. Personally, I don’t think the blocking of the UN inspectors access by Assads mob, and the liklihood that the chemical agents have a rapid dispersal inbuilt are unrelated. But hey thats just another guess.

dickheads gonna be……. 🙄

irritated people are going to get irritated…… then perhaps rethink and temper their response

I love the way you folks……

Steady on Junky he started out by admitting to being Bat Shit Mental… no need to mock the afflcited.

Fit birds with not much on cavorting about and the Mrs insists that I sit and watch it …. whats not to like?? 😯

Personally, I reckon the UN is about to find out that the weapons used were in fact of Iraqi origin. Thus proving conclusively that S. Hussein esq did have em, (albeit we already knew that he did, just that we didn’t know where he put them), he shipped them over the border along with his dosh. This will lead to the world deciding that G Dubyer and Tone are in fact proper geezers and on our side after all, thus leading to even more lucrative lecture tours..

For that reason, I believe that G Dubyer and Tone are at the root of this situation as those with the most to gain from it.

……… I can do conspiracy! 8)

So all motorcycle accidents are self-inflicted then?

So who said that then?

Errr….no it’s not.

Err yes it is, its an arbritary decision as to whether you pay or not. I’ve both been charged and not charged and for both an RTC on a bike and on a motor bike. Frankly I couldn’t work out the logic behind it, but they did it.

Or do we leave them to die?

Like I said before, It has been the case since the 70’s if you take ride in an ambulance for something that is deemed to be self inflicted. I haven’t noticed the roadside populated with mashed up motorcyclists, cyclists etc etc in their death throes.

EDUCATION EDUCATION EDUCATION. the sooner people realise it is not a taxi service because they’ve gone over on their ankle and can’t be assed anymore, the better

I think thats the point of rendering an invoice…..

I do think a bill for £43,000 or such like does focus the mind quite nicely onto what actually consitutes an emergency. Obviously that can work both ways, however, generally the prospect of ones own imminent death does have a way of making cash seem less relevant and therefore helping with making the choices.

Unfortunately it would also make people think twice before taking their kids for a walk in the Lake District in good conditions. We should think very carefully before labelling our national parks as places where you need insurance to step off the tarmac.

As others have said, it would create an unwanted bureaucracy around the charging, chasing and division of the funds.

I’ve not noticed that happening in respect of Ambulance trips for motorcyclists and other “self inflicted” problems, where that has been happening since the 70’s. Nor is it noticable in the Alps where helicopter rescues are charged as a norm. In essence its the same argument about the Royals being a toursit attration. i.e.not a shred of evidence to support the supposition, but if you say it loud and often enough people start to believe it. That apart, in what way would making people more cautious of the consequences of say, going up Snowden with inappropriate footware/kit/food/preparation be a bad thing?

Personally, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to render an invoice for the service. Up to the individual how to cover/cope with that, certainly insurance may well be one way that would work for many. Ultimately if it made people stop and think for a moment before thoughtlessly or needlessly putting themselves in harms way it would be a good thing.