DaveR

If you had to do a google search to find out what "terse" and "laconic" mean you can go and sit in the corner of "the Lounge"............with a 'D' hat on.

The key point in that report is: "HMRC can now cross-reference information from the Land Registry, stamp duty records and property agents? records with taxpayers? self assessment to identify culprits." HMRC are looking for easy wins, and as such will always go looking for areas of the black/grey economy where they can obtain reliable information in bulk. Letting agents are an obvious target for information gathering - the rent they collect is income for someone. HMRC have been looking at (and prosecuting) landlords who have been not declaring at all for a few years now - it's an obvious next step to look at those who are declaring but, on the face of it, not enough.

To the A3 I usually go Clapham South - Wandsworth Common - Plough Lane - Haydons Road - Merton High St and straight on Avoids Tooting and the "Sainsburys of death"

A covenant would be recorded on the deed and would appear either in full or in summary on the register - you can get copies of both extracts from the register and of deeds from the Land Registry

I forgot to mention, of course, private companies, who also represent collective human activity. From the list, healthcare, education, public order and transport are all areas where there is currently a mixture of public and private provision and varying degrees of state regulation which, while well-meaning, may or may not have the effect of stifling otherwise beneficial activity. And to describe social security as wealth redistribution is, frankly, cr@p - it is the single biggest contributing factor to a culture of state dependency.

Goosemum said: "For those who visit Goose Green on a daily basis, the OFSTED report simply does not reflect the culture of the school and the dedicated staff who work there deserve the support of the local community. If you don't believe me, go and have a look around the school for yourselves." but also criticises 'middle class' parents who send their kids to the nursery there then send them elsewhere for school. By definition those parents will have been visiting the school and have made their own informed choice. Its a little bit tiresome that parents who make decisions on the basis of what they perceive to be best for their children are (i) assumed to be middle class (which is a pejorative term in these debates) and (ii) lambasted as being selfish. When effective action is taken to turn around failing schools, response from parents is usually pretty swift - look at the popularity of Heber School. Most parents in my experience would really like to send their child to the nearest school, as it's easy to get to and the child's friends will live close by, but to expect every parent to be a 'pioneer' is unrealisitc and to criticise that as a faling is wrong.

"Individuals deciding collectively what is done is called democratic government" It doesn't have to be. Collective activity encompassses every club, society, foundation, pressure group and myriad other organisations, formal and informal, throughout society. People are instinctively very good at getting together to achieve things, given the freedom to do so. However, when the state discourages independent action and fosters a culture of state dependency, behaviour changes. The result is: "the middle classes have decided in their myopic way that they 'individually' know just 'what's right for themselves' " The truth is that the middle classes have in recent history been the mainstay of collective voluntary activity throughout Britain, to the benefit of society as a whole, but if they are castigated and obstructed they will look after their own narrow interests - just like everone else.

Goosemum, you made your choice - let others make theirs

"what makes me sick is when a school like dulwich college makes a load of money by holding some over priced contemporary furniture fair which a local comp could really have done with." Some people you don't know decide to spend their money how they want - how exactly is that any of your business? Parents will choose what they think is best for their kids - end of story. When parents desert poor schools they are both behaving rationally and sending a message to those responsible for running the school that all is not well - if their is no response, or the response is inadequate, don't shoot the messenger.

"This all seems to revolve around a complete absence of faith in the process of government, which may either mean that we don't understand it (in which case get a book), or we don't use our vote well enough" There is another explanation - a perfectly rational belief that individuals generally know better than governments what they want, and even what's good for them. This leads to a similarly rational belief in the virtues of small government and the acceptence of the principle of individual responsibility. In practice this doesn't mean that everything is done individually, but that individuals choose what is best done collectively, how and by whom. The purpose of taxation can either be to raise money or to discourage behaviour (or to include otherwise excluded costs into market prices, but that has rarely been attempted). The redistribution of wealth is a separate and distinct purpose - whether it is best achieved by progressive taxation (or how progressive) is open to question.

"I'm quite enjoying the Euros without England" Me too - the ratio of good vs crap games has been surprisingly high compared to so many recent international tournaments Holland are looking fantastic and have strength in depth up front at least - picking a starting front three from Van Nistelrooy, Huntelaar, Van Persie, Robben, Kuyt and Sneijder(?) is a tough one

I thought there was a covenant covering the whole of Barry Road which required buildings to be set back a minimum distance from the street?

"3. Taxation and tax credits - why take money away in tax, filter it through an expensive bureaucracy and give 80% of it back as tax credits. To redistribute wealth." The tax credits system is a disaster (and I speak from real experience) - stupidly complicated, full of perverse incentives, and utterly pointless - it would be so much more efficient simply to distribute the 'benefit' element as benefits and raise the threshold for basic rate tax to around ?10,000.

Louisa, I'm sure they miss you sorely

Have the Irish done us a favour?

Ted Most fans don't begrudge a player a move when it will provide an opportunity to play at a higher level, get international recognition etc. Also, as Annasfield pointed out, it's the way you do it. If Ronaldo came clean and said he wanted to go to Real, but that he was grateful to United, club and fans, for helping him to get where he is, the reaction would be a lot different. As to the importance of money, I still think for the majority of players trophies come first - these days, the two usually go together!

The place in Wandsworth was Club UK - legendary

Mangosteen in Gipsy Hill serves Thai, Vietnamese and Malaysian dishes and might qualify as "a bit more special" I've had a couple of good meals there and Time Out rate it.

Woodie, I agree entirely with your views as to the behaviour of the waitress, but I'm a bit surprised that you have had problems from other men whilst taking your daughter in the gents - what happened? I'm interested because I take my 4 year old daughter in gent's toilets often (she can go by herself but, as you say, often the doors are a problem) and I've never had the slightest problem - or maybe I've just never noticed other blokes looking unhappy!

"Alcoholism is a disease, as is drug addiction" Really, how do you catch it? Just because a type of behaviour can be 'treated' doesn't make it a disease, with the implication that the sufferer is as innocent as someone with the flu. This is a very simplistic view of a complicated subject, and risks gving carte blanche to people to behave as irresponsibly as they want - maybe like the folks on Whateley Road

1. Kennedys (for sausages) 2. Ayres (for bread) 3. Shops in Nunhead (so much more real than ED) 4. Peckham (see 3. above) 5. Camberwell (see 3. above) 6. The French restaurant near the Plough (name escapes me) 7. Working mens' cafes 8. On her high horse 9. The real world 10. On another planet

Sambal belacan = food of the gods Chillis, shrimp paste, salt, sugar, lime juice Perfect with nasi lemak (coconut rice + curry + fried anchovies etc.) and prety damn good with any asian dish with rice

The current legislation extends to "pseudo-photographs" which means "an image, whether made by computer graphics or otherwise howsoever, which appears to be a photograph", so already no requirement for an actual image of an actual child. The new proposals will go further but the principle i.e. criminalising the possession of the material regardless of whether an actual child was ever involved, is already there. Putting the 'art' argument to one side it does create a worrying situation whereby an individual with a taste for child porn has no incentive to use fabricated images, where no real child has been involved, and so arguably demand will not lead to more actual abuse, rather than real images, where that is a likely conseqence.

"some of the posters here make an effort to get out of heir heterosexual ghetto" Evidence? Or assumption? "Baby groups dominated by straight mothers can verge on the desparately boring, let's face it!! " See, it's easy to stereotype by sexual orientation - even gay people can do it! "go and hang out in a gay bar, go to Gay Pride, chill at the lesbian and gay film festival" But do you want us there - we're boring and we don't understand 'the issues'? And anyway, isn't the whole point that everybody is free to hang out in any group they want? I would tentatively suggest, as I did before, that the distinction between 'gay' groups and 'straight' groups is a false one - the distinction is between 'gay' groups and groups that do not discriminate (in the passive sense) on the basis of sexual orientation. A group of the latter type may turn out to have non gay-friendly members, just as it may be dull, or full of hysterical exhibitionists, but attendance is always optional.

Strawbs, I think the point that many have made is that, in my experience at least, most parents' groups are not 'straight' or 'hettie', they are just groups for parents, and all are welcome. This doesn't mean that there shouldn't be groups for gay and/or lesbian parents, or anybody else who wants their own group, but you should be cautious about defining others by their sexuality. I also think there is a valid general point to be made about the genuine conflict between preserving rights to 'otherness' and encouraging understanding and acceptance i.e. if you discuss gay parenting issues exclusively amongst gay parents, it becomes a little more difficult to complain that 'straights' don't understand the unique issues you face. This latter point, I would agree, would be better discussed separately from a thread where someone is simply saying "can we have a gay parents group"