Marmora Man

I've pondered this for a long time and discussed it with many pub chefs. The majority of pub burgers and high street chain burgers are bought in ready made, often frozen or very deep chilled. As a result they must cook them to death, at least medium and usually well done, to ensure that any lingering chance of bacteria is cooked out. Result - a dry and tasteless burger. If, on the other hand, you find the rare pub that really cares it will make its burgers on the premises from quality cuts of beef which can then be cooked rare to medium rare resulting in a juicy, unctuous burger. The accompaniments should be - some crisp hand cut chips (not french fries), a slice of tomato, a slice or two of pickled gerkin and a wide selection of ketchups & mustards. The only burger joint I can truly recommend remains Joe Allens in Covent Garden - and there it's not listed on the menu.

Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Universities have a lower number of entrants from > working class backgrounds, Oxbridge ditto and > social mobility is now actually > falling........crappy old elitist Grammar schools > eh... > > Thats fairly disingenious. There isn't a "working > class" now as comparable to the 60's so the > figures are skewed, there are, however, many more > non-public school educated students going to > universities. Even Oxbridge. Both are confusing % with absolute numbers. More people attend university - but the % from lower income income groups is small and reducing.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Abolition of all selective, private and faith > schools. Every local authority tests all its kids > at the end of year 6 and allocates them to ensure > all its schools have an intake of mixed ability. > > Result: no more sink schools. No more privileged > elites. Genuine opportunity for all. > > Sounds pretty good to me. Another result would be > that house prices in areas such as East Dulwich > wouldn't be stupidly inflated as a result of > parents buying in catchment areas! (well actually, > it wouldn't make much difference in Dulwich, > because it's all primary schools, but you get the > drift). But in other areas we encourage elitism - sports for example. Hot housing athletes leads to gold medals, if we left athletic selection to the local authority and ensured every sports club had a representative mix of sporting ability the potential stars would never get the assistance and encoiuragement they need. Exactly the same for children and learning. I went to a grammar school. There I was an average student and never destined for Oxbridge - but some were real academic stars and were able to get on further and faster because they were in an academic environment with high calibre teachers that could encourage and lead them. High calibre teachers are attracted to the idea of nurturing the next generation of thinkers and academics. Their pupils abilities were then used to the benefit of the country - as successful academics, doctors and other professionals. If they had all been shared out among the 12 or so other schools there would not have been a concentration of high quality teachers to assist them and many many distractions in schools where academic earning as not valued. The destruction of the grammar school system has done more to stultify social mobility than anything else in the last 50 years. Edit: I think the idea of separate "black" schools is illogical - particlarly as Jasper Lee was also proposing a separate Black orientated curriculum. Such a proposal would only lead to greater not less segregation and separation of ethnic communities - we should all be supporting proper mixing of all in our community.

This ruling by Southwark, if that's it is, cold scupper Roulier White's offer of a week's free pitch outside their shop for local entrepreneurs to try out their ideas & wares.

This ruling by Southwark, if that's it is, cold scuper Roulier White's offer of a week's free pitch outside their shop for local entrepreneurs to try out their ideas & wares.

I've still had no joy from council officials - varied and evasive replies only. One claimed there are no cameras on Marmora Road - which raises the question of why the notices? Crime deterrent on the cheap? Next step - use the elected councillors.

That's there to keep an eye on an Aston Martin DB 6!

I've not yet made it to a curry night and am not sure 17/9 works for me - but would recommend Ganapati if you're thinking of going off the ED Piste. Ganapati

One major drawback - the Sony e-reader only works with Microsoft software not Apple Macs

I agree entirely but, by definition trams run on fixed lines - cars are free to roam and thus more efficient at point to point journeys. When not biking I make much use of public transport but it's not always efficient, comfortable or pleasant. That's why cars win so many personal votes - moving around in your own personal and personalised bubble is popular. I don't know much about this tram scheme - but tram schemes in general haven't bee hugely successful the South London one I know of down Croydon way was never extended and is, I've understood, regarded as something of a failure both financially and in terms of passenger numbers. What does a tram system offer over and above a decent bus route with bus lanes?

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bit late then, innit. Marmora Man? Was your car > graffiti'd? Nope.

Does anyne know about this technology - I remember the name from a few years back as being the oirganisation that enable swapping of copyright music material. I heard last night that for ?12.95 a month it is possible to subscribe to Napster and have instant download / access to over 6m tracks to your PC and via that to a household music system. The technology sounds interesting - but not sure what hardawre I'd need to actually transmit the music from the PC and ten around the house / into specific rooms. As I was told it's possible for teeenagers to be accessing pop music in bedroom while parents listen to 60's rock and teenage musician listen to Vanessa Mae violins. Any clues anyone?

A reasonable gap allows for some ventilation - good for both sexes I believe.

Another drawback to the e-book is the impossibility of joining a book swap club and / or selling on second hand books. So for me - an e-book may be a useful way to store loved books but not the best way to buy / acquire airport thrillers or cheap & cheerful timewasters that don't tease the brain too much.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Definitely! Of course - it's the book addicts equivalent of dogs sniffing other dogs.

Ant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't agree, SteveT and PGC. I don't agree at > all, and think that the argument you're making is > actually quite a dangerous one. This article sets > out much better than I could ever do why this is > so. > > http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/ > securitymatters/2006/05/70886 The Wired Article in Ant's post is an excellent summary of a logical positionthat rebuts the use of CCTV and in particular covert CCTV.

The new voice on TFL buses - I'm beginning to sreen it out but is annoying the vast majority of passengers, and incurring the installation costs, for the possibility of helping one person who doesn't know the route / cannot see the landmarks a worthwhile balance? Whatever happened to asking the driver, or other passenger, to advise you of the right stop?

Blimey - a plethora of posts since I last looked. I'm against CCTV for following reasons: 1. They don't really work - most (if not all) the research and comment I've read have them simply moving the loaction of crime not preventing it. 2. There was no consultation - do residents of Marmora Road want CCTV 3. It is intrusive - the state grows by little tiny incremental steps. If we don't protest this small step we could be too far gone when we realise just how far state intrusion / oversight of our lives is. Having phoned Southwark Council four times results are: a. Put thrui' to the CCTV unit - "this is a sub contractor - I cannot comment on Council policy" b. Put thru' the Environmental Services - "You're not in Southwark - not our problem". Phone hangs up. c. Put thru' to Environmental Services - "I'll speak to my manager, please hold". Four minutes of silence an phone hangs up. d. Put through to Environmental Services - no answer. I have e-mailed them now.

That's the slow route to dictatorships. Poem

To answer / respond to Hugenot - since I made the first pot let me state that I do not believe that the energy companies are making excess profits. What happens to profits? Two / possibly three things. 1. A portion is paid back to shareholders as dividend. Usually a relatively small portion. THis benefits to country and many pensioners whose pension funds hold Energy company shares. For 2007 / 08 dividends have risen over the previous year by approx ?75 a shareholder. 2. The balance goes to company reserves - to be used for future investment and development. It usually the reserves requirement that is considered first before a decision on dividend payments. Given that all energy companies have targets to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and to shift toward renewables this is a costly exercise. 3. Least cost is on bonus & rewards for staff and management in achieving / exceeding objectives. Nobody is hauling home sacks of gold to squander on high living from these profits - the vast majority of the profits go back into the business to fund the future. If this didn't happen the energy companies would rapidly fail and we'd have little energy to buy. It is the shift from nationalised providers that allows this model where the company's profits are re-invested - in previous times the capital cost of development for the future came not from profits but from government and taxation - and you know where I stand on that idea.

I'm certainly not massively in favour of progressive taxation on the current model - I prefer a flat rate - with high tax thresholds, which in itself can be described as progressive if a significant minority (or even a majority a la Macroban above) don't pay tax at all.

TImes 8 Sept - Ideas for a Conservative GOvernment I could vote for and support a party advocating this simple set of policies - which might enable a slightly lower cost government and the raising of tax thresholds.

Walking to the bus today I spotted new yellow signs on every lamp post stating that concealed CCTV cameras were operating in my area - they may have been there for a while but I was seeing them for the first time. As they are concealed I couldn't find a camera - but it being a simple road of normal house & flats there's nowhere to conceal anything. So the camera is either in someone's house / flat or in a council vehicle posing a a normal parked car. I am not in favour of burglary, dog fouling, graffitti etc that the sign claims will be deterred by the CCTV but I am against the surveillance society and do not wish to be filmed as I make my sleepy way to the No. 63 bus stop or wobble off on my bike. Has anyone else seen such signs in their road? I intend to call the number displayed tomorrow to find out more.

Macroban, your agenda would win my broad support - except that alongside it is needed a concrete plan to reduce the size of the state. lifting threshold to 25K would reduce tax take by approx 150 - 200 billion (30 million tax payers x 5,000 - 7,000 pound). The necessary cuts would, in my view be helpful, but given growing dependence on t e state since the 50's very difficult and divisive. so many people are wedded to the proposition that "the government must do something" rather than "I must do something".

Sean, The problem is there are endless heart string situations out there - pharmaceutical companies, food companies, travel companies, clothing companies. Creating special cases skews the market - ensuring everyone has a fair living wage doesn't. Lower tax thresholds and taxes - it disproportionately benefits the less well off. For me a ?500.00 a year reduction in tax would be nice but in % terms not a lot, for a single mum currently paying ?1200 tax on a ?10,000 year income it would make a big difference - almost halving her tax bill and increasing her take home pay by about 6%, or twice any pay rise she can expect from an employer this year.