Gowrie, 55% of a turnout of <66% of the total english-in-england electorate (your words) still doesn’t make over 50%! (Even if i grudgingly accept the political compass calucaltion that the lib dems were one little square to the right of Labour at the time of the last election, your figure is far far more like 40 than 50%)

Again you are correct. But it is more than 50% of those who voted. Are those who voted a good proxy for the electorate overall? Perhaps, perhaps not. Voting intentions change, as we see every 5 years or so. There may be a huge swing to left and Corbyn’s Old Labour may sweep the board in 2020.
As for Scotland, we could muse on whether the SNP are to the left or right of Labour, but its pretty pointless because, even if Labour won every seat in Scotland they couldn’t form a government without more seats from the rest of the UK as well. Does JC’s Old Labour make that more or less likely?

A total an utter misrepresentation by newspapers who are showing their true colours. What he actually said, if you’re capable of seeing past new labour propaganda is:

‘I think we should talk about what the objectives of the party are, whether that’s restoring the Clause Four as it was originally written or it’s a different one, but I think we shouldn’t shy away from public participation, public investment in industry and public control of the railways.’
Which is a long way from ‘I’m going to bring back clause IV’.
Now I’ve read that quote several times now – I can’t construe it in any way that he denies the possibility of bringing back Clause IV. He’s showing his true old labour colours. That seems to appeal to some, but I think its going to marginalise the Labour party with the general electorate.

Firstly British Leyland. British Leyland is an exceptionally bad example of a nationalised industry as it was only ever part-nationalised, and that was only for half a dozen years or so years. If BL is any example of failure it is above all else an example of the failure of private enterprise and its lack of strategic investment.

It is also an example of failure of public investment. All it ever did was loose public money. In that respect its not a bad example, its a typical example.

British Telecom, or Post Office Telephones as it was before it was being prepared for privatisation, poured massive amounts of money into the Treasury coffers. If it hadn’t been privatised it would be still doing so today

But it was a disaster for the consumer. No choice, everything had to be rented, you couldn’t attach your own phone to their system. Ok there have been technological advances, but privitisation was good for consumers in telecoms.

Although I’ve ignored coal and steel

They were troubled industries on a world scale, admittedly, but public ownership did nothing to help them and cost the country.

it’s worth pointing that UK coal consumption is still very significant – about half that of 30 years ago. The difference is that it is pretty much all imported now, even though the UK has coal far in excess of its needs.

and it will still be there if it ever becomes economic and environmentally acceptable to dig it out of the ground.

?!?
Turnout was only 66.1% -are you saying labour, greens, plaid cymru and snp only got no more than 16% of the vote?

Sorry. More than 50% of those who voted in England (where nobody voted for the SNP.)

You realise that nearly 30% of the electorate didn’t, right? Not to make you feel old or anything.

I feel old anyway. But those not living in those times loose some of the context, I fear.

And whilst I don’t know the detail, I’m pretty sure he’s talking about something a little more refined and modern than the old model of handing out state subsidies to failing industries.

I’d heard he was talking about bringing back Clause IV?

There are loads of modern examples of the govt being involved in propping up businesses whether it’s bank bailouts or subsidising low pay through tax credits, workfare etc. I fail to see why a modern model of state ownership couldn’t work. Is it really beyond the brightest minds in the treasury and BIS to figure out some way of common ownership of key infrastructure where operation and investment can be planned strategically without private investors creaming off the profits?

Well it certainly was in the 60’s 70’s and 80’s. British Leyland, British Steel, British Coal, British Telecom etc etc etc – all almost total disasters either for the taxpayer or for the consumer.
It amazes me how much support there is on here for public ownership when its been so comprehensively discredited over the last 30-40 years. Did you not live through the 70s?
As for Corbyn, he comes across as a likeable fellow, but more than 50% of the English electorate voted for parties further to the right than the Labour party under Ed. Corbyn may bring back some cultural purity to Labour, but I can’t see how he’ll bring electoral success.

If your BP comes down, and that’s associated with changes in lifestyle or circumstance, then you can come off them. But its a suck it and see approach – you won’t know if you still need them without coming off them and testing your BP.
(I’m on lisinopril and amlopidine, hoping to get off the amlopodine soon)

Moto e or g

Agree. My wife has a Moto G and apart from being a little heavier, its as good as my Nexus 5

Oh and go and watch The Dons as they are on the Up again

As Buff Hardy used to say – “the finest football team in Merkland Road….”

I was brought up just outside Peterhead, my mother still lives in Stuartfield. Peterhead was pretty grim when I was there (nearer 40 years ago than I’d care to admit), but everytime I go it seems even more down at heel now. If I had to choose a place to live up there now it might be Ellon, or some of the little villages around. I really like it north and west of Inverurie, but that’s maybe a bit far if you’re working in Peterhead. Some like the small ex fishing villages, but personally I’d stay away from the coast.

Northwind said

They don’t need to change their spots- there isn’t any contradiction between wanting independence, but also wanting the best country you can have while part of the UK.

Of course they don’t and won’t. But seaso was implying that the anti austerity, anti trident etc etc had to be understood by the English. It doesn’t. All England and those in favour of the union need to understand is that the SNP are dedicated to the breakup of the union, and deal with them accordingly.

And what was Nicola on about this morning on Andrew Marr? She wanted more for Scotland and more now – ergo less for everyone else.

Seosamh

It wasn’t nationalism. They barely campaigned on it. Referendum and independence were only in the debate because it is often all the English establishment seems to be able to see.

That may well be the case, but many, many in the rest of the UK will find it difficult to separate the cries for independence heard less than a year ago from the SNP campaign of this past election. Why would the people of England take any notice of what SNP were campaigning on? We couldn’t vote for them.

And I think a lot will require more convincing than one election campaign to get them to believe the SNP have changed their spots.

They are warm as toast as well. Maybe a bit too warm for a sunny day at the end of March, but a real boon at this time of year. And they’re good for carrying your goggles.
Just do it.

It gets taken down after the 11th, I believe.

Diabetes? Hyperthyroidism?

Our local vet couldn’t sell a cat worming tablet without examine for “free” , they said they would but the government won’t let them ? Is this correct ?

Yes

Ben

Those are the straws you must keep clutching, I suppose. But every indication is that its still strongly No.

No it isn’t. It never has been. No has always been well ahead.

Alternately:-
Support for independence appears to have stalled

My favorite budget airline. Flown them lots out of Leeds and Manchester to Rome and Geneva. At least as good as Easyjet, far better than Ryanair.
Easy to recommend.
Colin

Did anybody see the poll in the Aberdeen Press and Journal on Monday? Conducted post George’s currency comments.
From the paper –

A Press and Journal-commissioned poll has revealed support for Scottish independence has dipped across the north and north-east over the last year.
The survey conducted after last week’s intervention from Chancellor George Osborne on currency found that 65% of respondents intend to vote “no” in September’s referendum.
Just 17% of 500 people questioned said they will be voting “yes”, while 18% said they were still undecided.

Something else not moving yS’s way. Salmond is my mother’s MP. Plenty of tales locally of him behaving like a spoilt child

No they don’t

We’ve used Norman Atkins in Keighley these last 20 years. Good, friendly fast efficient.
And Watsons from Silsden, although they’re maybe a bit more industrial biased.

Colin

Its Shetland’s oil

Which is why you should read the book

Is their evidence in there? Studies showing match cohorts of skiers – helemt wearers and non helmet wearers – and measuring and comparing the risk appetite of both?

I still am genuinely interested, but not in unsubstantiated theories.
There are plenty of other books I’d like to read before I’d get to reading this one.

Something that demonstrates a causal relationship between helmet use and changed attitude to risk. And specifically that it encouraged more risky behaviour.

But my point is … what could that “something” possibly be? How could one demonstrate this causal relationship to your satisfaction?[/quote]

Well a study which measured the risk appetite of skiers prior to their wearing of a helmet, followed by measuring risk appetite after they started wearing helmets. That would do, I suppose.

Something that demonstrates a causal relationship between helmet use and changed attitude to risk. And specifically that it encouraged more risky behaviour.

IanMunro said

If you’re genuinely interested, then read John Adams book ‘Risk’

I’m genuinely interested but not to the book reading level. Having read the blurb and scanned one or two of his other bits, it looks like he’s got a theory. I was looking for evidence.
Earlier mrmo had said :-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
for starters

The wikipedia entry references 6 studies with regard to helmets and and skiing/snowboarding. Two of the observe a correlation between helmet wearing and speed on the slopes – but no causation. It might be that those that ski fastest are more likely to wear a helmet for reasons other than risk compensation. One study is on overall injury rates being the same – again difficult to see how risk compensation could be evidenced as related to this. The final 3 suggest there’s no difference between risk behaviours in helmeted and non helmeted skiers – and that wearing a helmet reduces injury rates overall.

Many thanks for your responses.
But in answer to my original question (emphasis added)

Is there ANY EVIDENCE for this? It keeps getting trotted out, but I’ve never seen anything other than heresay to support it.

from what’s come up so far I have to conclude – No, none at all.

I think it can make things worse, skill compensator and all that, false sense of security.

Is there ANY evidence for this? It keeps getting trotted out, but I’ve never seen anything other than heresay to support it.

Which bit of your body’s ph are you monitoring?

+1 for not worth it.

My wife’s original Kindle had 3g – she never used it. So her new paperwhite hasn’t 3g. She anticipates no problems.

When you say saving rates were high, you’re really saying inflation rates were high, which ultimately robbed savers of their savings. I live in a in a very mixed community with a high level of minorities and disadvantage. Its as happy now if not happier than anywhere I lived in the seventies (which were generally more advantages communities – rural and city – than where I live now).
Are you really old enough to compare?

Do you remember the seventies or the early eighties? Have you ever had mortgage rates at 17%? In comparison this is a soft prosperous time. And things are getting better – slowly and not equally every where, but definitely on the up. I feel the next thing is more likely to be “loads a money” rather than “winter of discontent”.
Hurrmph!

The Nexus 4 is lovely

kjcc25 – Member
I grew up on a farm during the 1960’s and never saw a badger. Now dead badgers at the side of the road are far more common than dead hedgehogs. We never had TB on the farm either.

Northwind
Factors influencing this:
More traffic
More roads
More loss of habitat
More intensive farming
More transporting of cattle
Probably loads more tbh but that’s a start.

Northwind – you missed the most important one – More badgers.
A lot more badgers. Since badgers became a protected species, their numbers have soared. They have no natural predators.

AFAIK there is none. For other requirement contact the US embassy or consulate. It’s their country, they set the rules, which can vary from state to state in my experience.
Why would 7 hours in a well sized travelling crate be considered to be cruel?

Thanks guys, I’ll look into those.

Our flue goes up the outside of our house – we need to get the cold air moving in it before we light the fire every time – warm of cold outside. A firelighter isn’t hot enough to do it – we need to get some paper roaring up the flue first. We could just leave the fire door open for half an hour before we light the fire, but that just cools down the room ( and we usually don’t have the time).

So they won’t care if you do any damage to the cat. Great

I don’t think so. There’s an asymmetry about this legal status. The owner isn’t responsible for anything the cat does. But the cat is still protected in two ways. Its the property of the owner, who has the same property rights as they would over any other chattel, and its protected by the animal cruelty regulations.

I think they would care. They actually now have a legal responsibility to care after the last set animal welfare legislation.

Colin

1)-If its a single piece of earth, get some netting – it can be quite open mesh, and peg it about 1-2 inches above the surface. The cats will hate walking on it – they’ll stop going there, essentially.
2)-Ultrasonic movement triggered cat scarers work and are humane.
3)-Get a dog

You can talk to your neighbour, but he doesn’t have to do anything. As I understand it cats are legally regarded as being not under the control of their owners – the owner isn’t responsible for any damage a cat does.

Colin