Alex K

You might get a two-up-two-down in the St Francis estate, sandwiched between the everlasting car boot sale and the railway station, downhill from Sainsburys Megastore, for ?350K. Twenty-five years old and most need exterior paintwork. Kittings-out, well, that depends.

Good heavens! What a menu! I am sorely tempted.

"Give and ask questions later." About a month ago I heard a woman scolding her children in the Camberwell McDonald's -- they seem to have demurred at some action that she took -- "It doesn't matter if she could have paid for it herself! She asked us, she said she was hungry, and Christ told us to give when we have. Always give when you have! We are so lucky to have!" Hearing her I was so abashed, and felt so low -- I have forgot this too often.

Ah, East Dulwich Deli! One visit only -- "Can you recommend a cheese? Not too pungent." This one; we are certain that sir will enjoy it. Home, biscuits, wine, and the gustatory equivalent of a cake of soap. Well, they sold it; they were rid of it; and since then I have been rid of them.

Agreed, rahrahrah, with thanks, James.

Well, NannyAdelle, take comfort in the thought that his conviction may have ensured that he was deported rather than granted asylum. (For myself, I'd rather that Britain not hold her doors open to vandals.)

**sigh** Now what!?, and also, What next!?

PeckhamNicola Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DMC Chadwick Road get my vote, the best surgery > I've ever used. The receptionists are pleasant > and helpful, rather than considering their primary > role to be to prevent you from seeing a doctor, as > in some other surgeries. I've rarely seen the > same doctor, although I don't go that often, but > I've been happy with the majority of them. This is "my" surgery, the old Isidore Crown. The receptionists are pleasant -- but they indeed are used to deny access to physicians. As the assistants are inflexible, and as they are not medically trained, this practice is not for those who are unwell but who also are faint of heart. "No appointments for a telephone call-back till Friday," I was told two days ago; this when the GP herself had said, "Call me back in the afternoon of the day when you have the blood work done at King's." On two occasions thus I found myself this week in the position of saying by telephone to a receptionist, "Thank you. I understand what you have told me. May I now speak with the practice manager?" The practice manager then, both times, listened to what I set out -- a f'r-instance -- "She told me, as you have told me, that she would not be at work today, but she wanted me to speak with one of her colleagues about the blood-work results and about how my condition is evolving. I am following her instructions and I shall be grateful if you let me discuss those results with one of her colleagues" -- and arranged for the GP to speak with me inside ten minutes. After which, things went well. In dealings with these people, then, bring determination and persistence. "Mustn't grumble" will mean that your chest cold is a galloping double pneumonia by the time the practice deigns to address your problem. Continuity of care is non-existent here, as Nicola has remarked. The physicians are younger women working part-time; good on them and their kids, who need to spend time with Mum! -- but such arrangements, with multiple handings-off, increase the chances that your problem will be incompletely understood, and indeed a faulty computer system (crashed during the GP's attempt to record her observations) led this week to notes of events at visit A not being available at visit B.

Thanks, best regards, and please let me extend an open invitation to head out for a pint. PM me. They say that all the microdecisions -- like ours -- provide a Brownian-motion jiggle this way and that to the market, with things being moved this way or that way for the best, always for the best. CANDIDE. And there you are with the jigglejogglings and the Lisbon earthquake. We guessed, we got, lucky. But... count no man happy till you know the hour of his death. Our decisions look OK from today's perspective. From tomorrow's, who knows?

@bawdynan: I like the way you think, and that you bring data to the discussion (whereas I had only an anecdote to offer). Help me understand, please, your comment on my earlier post: "Perhaps this just illustrates that small scale private financial speculation in a giddy and bubbling market isn't the best or most cost effective way to provide housing?" Two caveats. 1) It wasn't a giddy and bubbling market in early 2008. It was torpid. Almost Norwegian blue ex-parrot. But let that go. 2) Our intention wasn't so overarching as "to provide housing". Our aim was instead "to shift wealth into asset likely to hold value in post-crash financial tumult". We didn't, we don't, work cost-effectively. If we did we'd be trying to pry ?1.7K / month out of our tenants (a house the twin of the property that we rent is now on offer for something over that). The house that we rent is in our street, the folks who live there are our neighbours. We want to offer them no cause for complaint. Such considerations are, from a ruthless perspective, admittedly inefficient. Those set out, time for exegesis: Walk me, please, through what you meant.

@LondonMix -- thanks for asking. If your wealth is in cash, it earns nothing, and inflation gallops ahead of you. If your wealth is in savings accounts, it earns a pittance, a i g a o y. If your wealth is in an asset that rises in value as inflation makes a pound buy ever less -- then you have a hope of staying abreast of inflation. It may throw off a little income as you age. It may even, when sold, pay for a few years in a non-abusive care home. Perhaps house-price growth reflects, in part, the perception that no government will keep its promises -- look at the shifty chicanery of private-public partnerships! -- and that it's safest to, as Will Rogers said: Buy land. They ain't makin' any more of it.

@Salla: "i'm however in the negative camp (I see house price rises as negative).. primarily because, it feels like the government are trying to inflate their way out of debt, and they see house prices as a sacrifice in that process. i.e. they don't mind a bubble in house prices, cos ultimately that's a weird daily-mail vote winner anyway - so not a huge sacrifice! "but they *need* to get out of debt... so inflation may be their quick fix option" Yes. Debase the currency, and debt incurred in good money will be paid in bad. Substantial loss in value of cash; therefore put what you have into land / property, and hold on. That reasoning -- and the corollary, that any and all pension promises will be broken as "unaffordable" -- prompted us in the winter of 2007 - 2008 to put everything that we had into a second property, despite all sorts of qualms about becoming landlords. That rent will now be our pension. We don't trust the government, or our employers, to provide one.

@Loz: "When considering rents, you have to look at the rate of return on the investment, i.e. the property value. Generally, a landlord would be looking at a fair return of about 6%. Remember, this is not 'profit', as costs such as repairs, insurance, voids, mortgage, etc have to come out of it. "So, if you are renting a property worth ?500k, then a 'fair' rent would be about ?2500 pcm." Indeed. We were able to acquire an ED property at ?250K five years ago and have rented it at ?1.3K / mo ever since, to rise to ?1.4K this coming year. That it notionally is worth rather more crosses our minds now and again -- but we're making our 6%, the tenants are lovely, and Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby is still one of our heroines.

20 October, 2010, when you twice used asterisked obscenity to attack me as a poster. *** My case is -- you post CEASELESSLY. You monitor, chide, contradict, and rebuke across all aspects of the forum, and you do so all the time. What breathing space do you leave to other people? To be tagged as a member of the ten-thousand-club should, I think, cause one to ask herself -- Am I simply loud? Do I offer more opinions than I have thoughts? But you seem to glory in how much noise you have made. In my eyes, your postings above are characteristic of the lack of insight for which I initially took you to task. But, that said: A perception of mine, nothing more.

A quick heads-up -- our James has a letter published in the current number of PRIVATE EYE. Hurrah James! Good on you for the cogency of the rebuttal presented. And no, I'm not being snarky, I truly did and do enjoy seeing the ghosts laid that their team attempted to raise.

Case rested. Thanks, Sue, for confirming the point.

Sue writes: "On that wider issue, I was talking to somebody only last night who was saying that she won't post on this forum for fear of being set upon by the forum bullies. She has lived round here a long time, and I think it's very sad that she feels that way." This post may set a benchmark for lack of insight into the flavour of the poster's own contributions.

If one Disapparates improperly, this form of splinching may occur, with Reapparation at one's goal in nude or partially clothed state. Hilarity often ensues. Correspondence courses to address problems in Disapparation are available -- a few knuts a session. PM me.

Long, and mostly in German -- from the set of restrictions that people taking their dog to Austria should know about. Excepting "working dogs" (police dogs, guide dogs), dogs can be barred from certain public areas; or allowed into them (schoolyards, children's playgrounds, shopping zones) only on a lead AND with a muzzle; or allowed only on a lead or only with a muzzle... depending on the municipality, each setting its own rules. Outside the municipality's borders, in the fields and farmlands and woodlands surrounding a town, generally no rules (unless the township imposes some); similarly, if the town wants to establish zones in which dogs can run free, that's permitted. Seems a rational approach, aimed at helping people live with people, dogs live with people (and vice versa), and dogs live with dogs. http://www.austria.info/de/praktische-hinweise/grenzformalitaeten-und-einreise-von-haustieren-1161923.html Leine und Maulkorb m?ssen bei Ihrem Aufenthalt in ?sterreich mitgef?hrt werden. Ein bundesweites Gesetz in dem die Anlein- bzw. Maulkorbpflicht genau geregelt ist gibt es allerdings (noch) nicht. Im allgemeinen wird vom ober?sterreichischen Hundehaltegesetz ausgegangen. Ein Auszug daraus: LEINEN- UND/ODER MAULKORBPFLICHT Im Ortsgebiet* besteht Leinen- ODER Maulkorbpflicht. Bei Bedarf, jedenfalls aber an Haltestellen, in ?ffentlichen Verkehrsmitteln, in Schulen und Kinderg?rten, auf Kinderspielpl?tzen sowie bei gr??eren Menschenansammlungen, wie z. B. in Einkaufszentren, Badeanlagen und bei Veranstaltungen besteht Leinen- UND Maulkorbpflicht. Ausgenommen von diesen Bestimmungen sind im Einsatz befindliche Polizeihunde, Hilfs- und Rettungshunde, ausgebildete Jagdhunde, sowie Hunde auf deren Unterst?tzung bestimmte Personen angewiesen sind (z. B. Blindenf?hrhunde). Die Gemeinde kann durch Verordnung bestimmen: + wo Leinen- ODER Maulkorbpflicht im Ortsgebiet NICHT gilt (Freilauffl?chen) + wo Leinen- UND Maulkorbpflicht im Ortsgebiet gilt + wo das Mitf?hren von Hunden im Ortsgebiet generell verboten ist (Hundefreie-Zone) + wo auch au?erhalb des Ortsgebietes Leinen- ODER Maulkorbpflicht besteht Die Gemeinde hat mit Bescheid entsprechende Anordnungen f?r die Haltung eines bestimmten Hundes zu treffen, wenn Gef?hrdungen und Bel?stigungen von Menschen und Tieren nicht anders vermieden werden k?nnen (z. B. erweiterte Leinen- und/oder Maulkorbpflicht, Errichtung eines Zaunes usw.). Letztlich kann sogar die Hundehaltung bescheidm??ig untersagt werden.

A lot of scrolling -- and never the word "muzzle" encountered. Dogs broken off lead or set to run free -- if muzzled, the chance that they will bite a human, another animal, surely must lessen. Compulsory for any dog in a public place -- on lap, on lead, however: Muzzle off only when at the animal's home-flat or -house. Should make many people feel safer, reduce objections to sharing spaces with dogs.

http://www.animalphotos.me/moth/moth-jer.htm A Jersey Tiger (identification, thanks to the above site) in the hollow of a foxglove leaf this morning, a jewel against the green. The site remarks on "a small population in Southeast London" -- otherwise, the Channel Islands, as the name suggests. At least in 2013, the small population persists.

Acromantula venenosa rowlingi. Be on your guard.

The critters are under the eaves of our next-door neighbour's porch; their flight path seems calculated to make one flinch on coming up our walk. But none of us has ever been stung. We've shrugged and said, "They won't be back next year." And it's good to have them around, even if they are close enough to make us nervous.

Oh dear. We do like our burgers (and shortly after payday our butterflied leg of lamb, although we take the bone out ourselves and buy the original leg at the Co-Op, not at William Rose) slightly carbonised. We worry about kippering the neighbours. And we do take a look two houses down, two houses up in the terrace, from the rear window in the back, to see that no one has laundry on the line before we light the pyre. Now and again we ourselves are lightly kippered (when neighbours upwind offer sacrifice). We cough, just a bit, and close the windows. All part of getting along, eh?

Hey, DJKQ. We don't lock Mike or Sonny away. But we DO ensure that they not leave the back garden, either. We think of ourselves as the "houseparents" in sheltered accommodation for the not-quite-bright. Dear to us though they are, neither Sonny nor Mike is the sharpest pencil in the box. Yes, their horizons are limited. But we'd so hate to lose them; and even in our little cul-de-sac, there are some who between sleeping poliemen put their foot heavily down. VROOOOOOMMMM!!! So we restrict our cats' horizons. Sing with me: Oh, baby, baby, it's a wild world / Hard to get by / Just upon a purr -- yes, I am quoting "Cat" Stevens.