mockney piers

uncanny, is this the start of something beautiful?

I guess you smoke the hops or something, but to be honest I haven't the foggiest.

well yes and no Huguenot. Many of the banks that are only still there because of taxpayers money, and some specifically have the government as either large or majority shareholders, a government supposedly acting in our interest with our money, so I do think we have a say whether excessive bonuses are paid to those who are making huge profits thanks to UK plc underwriting their toxic debt and injecting huge amounts of liquidity into their organisation for them to gamble again. And yes it was those who borrowed more than they can afford to pay back who were at the root of this, though in many cases they were knowingly missold and indeed misinformed about what was happening and what the risks were. Those that did it were only interested in their commissions and were happy that greedy bankers were buying up this rubbish debt because greed and arrogance made them think that their clever quants had finally learned how to turn base metal into gold. This couldn't have been done without the deregulation they'd leaned on governments to do and the rubbish regulatory systems said governments had acquiesced under pressure (and err greed) to install. Most of those 'greedy' people on the bottom rung just wanted a modest roof over their head; to place full culpability on their shoulders is twisting things too far in my opinion.

I did have some smoked lager the other day, and it was surprisingly quaffable. Mind you it was 7% so you had to take it easy.

Cheddar is like soooo overrated. I think we can safely say BigBadWolf Axeman wasnt very funny though, but we should't speak ill of the recently deceased again

Bloody self interested middle classes, damn them, damn them to hell.

Lovely lb. Bob I'm not sure that's ambiguous, but it is marvellous!!

:)

Hmm now you mention it I do recall some cute red devils on perforated paper from my more youthful days. Apologies Ridgely, I was mistaken, it was a drug reference after all!

pencilist!

How do you 'do Red Devil'? Is it a type of drug? And they call us grammar nazis? We have punctuation and spelling for demonstrably good reasons you know.

A long term obsession of mine, poorly and particularly ambiguously worded headlines, that I recently discovered are called crash blossoms from "Japan Violinist linked to JAL crash blossoms" I'll kick off with this one from Excite News MEXICAN MAYOR SLAIN IN DRUG-PLAGUED STATE

how about this?

spot on mr carnell. As one of the sundays said (the papers, not the band) its the same old tory mantra dressed up as necessity.

Or radio six national anthem type thing.

I now think it's about Moos' window.

As an aside 'costing' is one of those words that REALLY wind me up. It's managementeze; make a word more important by adding superfluous letters. The traditional word 'cost' can suffice in every situation. When 'costing' (legitimate use) something up the end results are surely just costs are they not? Grrr baaahh humbug etc. Anyway, as you were.

Are you suggesting there are plot holes in Spooks stories giggirl? Perish, I say perish that thought right there young lady, it's flawless I tell you. Like those sleek narco subs used to smuggle the bomb up the thames....or an actual narco sub, fine for getting some cocaine to a godforsaken Louisianan swamp, but powering up the Thames undetected like a deadly shark?

ooooooooh. I like that. Setting the bar high already!!!

tbh it's mostly just the kids from next door and around the estate, all jolly nice. I do tend to forget about it until it's too late and have to scrabble around for packets of crisps and things. Right a think a pumpkin off is the order of the day. Lets post our efforts up on here in a bid to outdo not only each other but all our past efforts to date!!

"I gather houses decorated for Halloween are much more likely to be trick-or-treated so if you don't like it, stay pumpkinless." Aaaaaaah, that's my mistake. I just like carving pumpkins!!!!!

Really? I would have thought the ability to survive as species with a lower reproduction rate is a sign of things getting better rather than worse.

I thought the ability and tendency to leak like a government department was a prerequisite to appearing on the show full stop!!

Child benefit is a drop in the ocean compared to child care costs. Having spent 6 months taking care of my child whilst mum worked I can certainly say that some sort of paternity benefit would have been welcomed as I'm now so poor that I have no choice but to go back to work and pay for child care costs, universal child benefit or no. I'm hoping that the Tories don't overturn that piece of progressive (oooh sorry MM) legislation due to come into force next year as a soft win for themselves as I was rather hoping to do it again with child number two one day.

So in fact making something from fish or fishes is fine but the latter almost certainly implies a number of different species whereas the former leaves it entirely ambiguous or implies that it is unimportant, is that right? Third person present, I missed singular, as in "you fish (second person singular simple present tense), he fishes", not that present necessary implies it's actually present, it could imply future or past, you'd need the present continuous "he is fishing", but then I digress...or am i digressing. In fact as digression implies some sort of vector then I'm digressing is perhaps a directional description as much as a temporal surely. Aaaaaaanyweay, so actually instead of being workshy, the lad without the house has sneakily been fencing of the wooded area whilst house boy builds his shelter with his collected wood. WHen time comes for maintenance he loans him the wood at exorbitant interest rates using the shelter as collateral, eventually getting hold of the house when the chap is unable to catch enough fish to satisfy the interest payments. Now out on his ear he is forced to work himself to the bone, exposed to the elements every night, whilst fence boy is well fed and sheltered and even rich enough to burn wood for mere comfort, yet still able to pay enough of the fish guts and heads into a welfare pot to stop the lad from actually starving to death or being forced into crime (ie eating some of those fish he catches for himself rather than give them to his creditors)!!! Which one's the bludger again? But now I'm just being silly...or a damned pinko liberal, it's hard to tell.