DaveR

How big as pool are they goping to be able to fit on that plot? More like a big bath.

I think you're being overly generous to the poster there, and the comment still doesn't make any sense.

I think there was recently a change in approach re loft conversions that extended to the rear. For a while Southwark were insisting that raising the roof level at the rear meant planning permission was required, and then refusing applications. I think that approach was challenged and it was confirmed that no permission was required. That may be the explanation, but it would be sensible to get more info if you are buying on the basis that you will be able to extend.

"I don't think it will be much longer before Adventure Bar move out, every time I walk past it seems half empty. Whereas the ones in other areas are rammed most nights. Oh Lordship Lane what have these nappy valley yummiest and their banker hubby's done to you?" I nearly missed this. Anybody who thinks that yummy mummies/bankers are the target market for the Adventure Bar has clearly never set foot inside the place.

At the risk of being a bit geeky about it, when considering competition (especially between retailers) the classic analysis is based on PQRS - Price, Quality, Range and Service - which better reflects the reality of how consumers choose than considering price alone. Successful independents compete strongly on the 'QRS' elements or they go to the wall. Unfortunately this doesn't address the issue re commercial landlords seeking ever higher rents, but, with various premises in LL and elsewhere empty at the moment, you would hope that landlords might not be quite so ambitious.

I usually do a lot of my Xmas shopping locally. Hope & Greenwood for sweets, Dr Boo for toiletries/cosmetics and treatment vouchers, Cheese Block for foodie stuff, Ed, Roullier White and Mrs Robinson for general gifts.

To be fair, Jigsaw is essentially a successful independent rather than a 'homogenised high st major'.

Not sure if you've already looked at the guidance on the UK IPO website: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/patent/p-applying/p-apply.htm One one view it's a fairly straightforward process, but drafting patent claims is a very specialised activity (patent attorneys spend years training and qualifying) so unless you're very confident, or there's not much at stake, you may be best off getting professional advice.

Defamation Act also makes specific provision for operators of websites that should make it easier to introduce systems to ensure libel risk is minimised: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/26/section/5/enacted

The contact, Kim Humphreys, is presumably the ex Southwark councillor and head of housing. I note that the proposed scheme is for "approximately 40 homes with on-site affordable housing" i.e. not 40 affordable homes, but a proportion of that number. I assume the council via the planning team have a degree of freedom to decide the nature and extent of the affordable component. At least they are 'on site' i.e. not planning to build an exclusive development on site A and cheap homes for poor folks at the other end of the borough.

The original figure for the global top 1% of income earners was $34,000 pa and came from a book by Branko Milanovic, an economist. It was then used as a criticism of US protesters who were citing stats about the top 1% of earners in the US (Milanovic also observed that 48% of the top 1% lived in the US).

Even with those caveats I doubt that ?21k pa puts you in the top 1% globally when you take account of PPP. In any event, it's not really the stat but the sentiment behind it that's bollocks. You could say to any resident of any developed country "you're really well off compared to most people in the world" and it would be true, what ever their income, so the 21k/1% thing is meaningless.

Yeah, it's bollocks. World average wage calculated last year = $1480/month, based on PPP. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17543356 So someone earning ?21k/year in the UK will be worse off (at least in income terms) than many people earning less in other countries. Although that will be offset by all sorts of other benefits from living in first world country i.e. healthcare, education, infrastructure. I saw a report recently that said S Korea is due to overtake Japan in average incomes but Japan still has massive advantage in accumulated wealth, public and private.

"I thought I had made the point, several times, that Dulwich are demanding the highest possible ground rents." Yes, you did. And as evidence for that you said 'look, Sergio's is closing'. And me and a few other people said that it don't necessarily follow. And you also said 'look at the turnover in businesses' and I said 'what turnover?'. I'm instinctively sympathetic to the basic point you're making, but at the moment you're just saying 'the Dulwich Estate are greedy bastards, take it from me'.

"Fahrenheit 451 anyone?" Closure of local bookstore (speculated) = the return of McCarthyite book-burning. Now you're just being silly. Which is unfortunate, because there is a serious point to be made. Letting failing businesses fail is one thing, driving profitable businesses out in the pursuit of ever higher rents is another. You would expect the Dulwich Estate, not being under any particular commercial pressure and having an interest in preserving the amenity of the area, to understand that. However, it appears open to question whether Sergio's falls into this category. BTW, I now know where Sergio's is/was. I knew it by a different name. I went there once and ordered a couple of coffees - I wanted to sit outside, and asked to have them in takeaway cups. The guy refused; he said that would 'defeat the purpose'. I didn't go back.

I'm pretty sure Dulwich Estate are not the landlord of the old Callow's premises on LL. Jerry, forgive me for being picky. I'm not suggesting that you're not genuinely concerned, but I am suggesting that I would need a bit more evidence before concluding that there's a real risk that 'all sole traders will be driven out,replaced by High Street chains'. You say that there has been a steady turnover of shops - that just doesn't square with what I've seen in the village in the last ten years or so. Plus, some turnover is good. Was anybody really sad to see the closure of Le Piaf?

I have never heard of Sergio's - where is/was the shop? Also, I have no idea whether the Dulwich Estate charge 'rapacious' rents or not, but there seems to be very little turnover of shops in the Village. Is there any reason to be alarmist based on one closure?

"Like the current frenzy, that was caused by the government meddling clumsily with the market" I don't think this is accurate, either. Help to Buy is a minimal factor in the current London property market. It's much more straightforward supply/demand.

Re NCAP safety tests, very little to choose from in any car in class since 2009: http://www.euroncap.com/small_family_car.aspx For reliability, Japanese makers consistently come out on top: http://www.reliabilityindex.com/ratings/best/Small%20Family Both the Golf and the A3 are great cars, but the utilitarian choice is something like a Honda Civic, and you will save yourself at least ?2k. It depends on how concerned you are with being cool.

"Generally they are not losing/risking their lives in the act of saving the lives and futures of the people of the UK." ....but that's what they sign up for. I don't see that wearing a poppy implies support for any or all examples of post-war deployment of the armed forces, or that latter day servicemen are somehow less worthy of remembrance because, having signed up, they ended up losing their lives in an operation that might not be universally supported. Even in the two world wars there were undoubtedly ops that were stupid or pointless or, arguably, morally wrong, and soldiers who had lots of different individual motivations. That's really not the point.

"The forces are agents of the state, required by contract to do the will of the government, not necessarily the will of the people and therefore for me at least the pure image of the forces as defenders of the people has been watered down significantly in recent times, possibly 50 years." I don't think this is accurate, either in theory or in practice. The head of state is the queen, and the traditional view of the state (in accordance with the separation of powers) is that it is composed of parliament, government and the courts. Do you think that British generals (and British squaddies) would simply accept any orders from the government of the day? As for Iraq, I think you may be assuming that everybody who now says they were against the war, actually was. Re poppies, I think wearing or not wearing should be an act of individual choice, and nobody should have to justify their position either way. There was a previous thread about this where I said that I thought schools requiring pupils to wear poppies is wrong, and I still do.

This

On the other hand.... http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/cancercontroversies/cosmetics/ http://www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/afe-negative-claims.html

In the top end fine dining restaurants foie gras is still pretty much ever present. And it's regularly been on the menu at the Palmerston, for example. I've lost count of the number of times I've eaten foie gras. But I agree it's a non subject.

I was there with small-ish children and tbh getting in and out was no worse than in prior years - took about 10-15 minutes to get out, but a generally patient and good-natured crowd. Agree the fireworks were excellent - I'd never seen smiley face fireworks before.