Loz

Ladymuck Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You are correct Mick Mac. But at least we know > that Homer Simpson is a Catholic. One less thing > to worry about. > No he's not!

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nice wind-up for the snobs. > > Umm...isn't there a BetFred on the Lane already? There was one up near the station, but it has closed down.

On a related, but different note... what is about This Week that brings out the best in politicians? It showed the world that, against all expectations, Michael Portillo is a nice, interesting guy and it did the same last night for Alastair Darling, showing he was far from a block of wood with no personality. Maybe they should go on there before their careers are over.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Like Dysons. That company will clean up. Dysons? I think they suck.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I kind of get Huguenot's point, in that if there > is a future in manufacturing in the UK, it is in > niche/innovative/low-volume products... not vast > quantities of low-cost consumer goods. Tis true. Our wages demands don't support the manufacture of commodity items. We just cannot compete. We need to do the value-add, premium items.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loz - why is it supper during the week and tea on > Sunday? Don't ask me! Obviously Yorkshire turn-of-the-century terminology.

Nothing, but one carriage is designated a 'Quiet Zone'. Supposedly their for working or sleeping, but generally full of children howling, businessmen chatting loudly or teenage girls on mobiles. And the train staff won't do a damn thing. I would actually pay more for a truly quiet carriage. Sadly, not first class rates as my company won't let me.

People talking and chatting loudly in the 'quiet' carriage on trains and the sodding staff doing feck all about it. Not to mention the highly unnecessary two-minute loudspeaker spiel after each and every station on First Great Western trains. I don't need to be told that tea and coffee and a wide selection of food is available half a dozen bloody times. Nor to take my personal belongings with me when I leave the train - who the hell needs reminding to do that?? They may as well remind me to breathe occasionally - it would be just as useless.

Good grief - what a dismal bunch. Frankly, I think that while some will be worse off in the short term, this is just a blip. All the infrastructure for a decent economy is still in place, people are still buying goods and services and the sun will still come up tomorrow. The UK is still in decent nick. Everyone - and I mean everyone - is better off than people were 30 years ago. Poverty is so unknown in this country they've had to redefine the word so the usual people have got something to wring their hands over. There are literally billions of people in over 100 countries that would swap places with the poorest person in the UK tomorrow. For comparison, I was reading this article on the Beeb today about poverty 100 years ago back in 1910. Their food consisted of: Monday: * Breakfast - Tea, bread and margarine * Dinner - Tea, bread and margarine * Supper - Tea, bread Tuesday: * Breakfast -Tea, bread and jam * Dinner - Tea, 3 stale buns * Supper - Tea, bread Sunday: * Breakfast - Tea, kippers, bread * Dinner - three pennyworth of meat pieces boiled with potatoes * Tea - bread and margarine, onions

But what was the average wage back then? Well, from this site it was ?101. Today it is about ?21000 (from this site). So, if four gallons of petrol was a quid, it was roughly 1% of your annual income in 1950. That is about 18 litres, so about ?22 today, or around 0.1% of annual income. I'll stick with today's pound, thanks.

Jah, Unfortunately, they've changed the Robin Hood Tax site - it used to be hilarious. The FAQ on "how we will spend the money" was completely nuts. They've changed it now to something a little more sober: Our campaign proposal is that the money be split: ? 50% to be used to protect the poorest and most vulnerable in the UK; ? 25% to be used to help those in developing countries hit hardest by the financial crisis; ? 25% towards much needed resources to fight climate change at home and abroad. In other words, they will spend all the money! Sod bringing the deficit down, just p**s it up the wall like the rest of the dosh. What is that saying again? "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend."

I've posted this before, but I think that Labour gets in, spends lots of wonga and does good things until the cash runs out and leaves us in a mess. The Tories come in and cut everything back and fix the economy, then keep cutting until people suffer and leave a different mess. Then, we are ready for Labour to come in and spend lots of wonga, etc, etc. This means that for the mid-term of each of the parties is pretty good government, until they overdo things. It's a bit like the Matrix. Maybe. So who is Neo? Maybe it's Clegg, bringing in whole new order before crashing down to sacrifice himself. Or maybe not. PS Gordon certainly ended the "boom and bust" cycle. He got rid of the 'boom' bit...!

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You see and then when you need more money what you > do is make more available and it magically makes > everything more expensive so you owe yourself even > more when you have to borrow it off yourself and > everyone is even more richerer. > > Magic. This only seems like magic until you answer the question, "what is money"? Or, if I have a ?10 note, it says that "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ?10". If I take it into the Bank of England and demand my ?10, what do I get?

Well, I found them, Rosie - and it was a much harder task that I thought. There are two figures: Attrition Rate (from complain to conviction) and Conviction Rate (cases that get to court that are convicted). For attrition rates, I found the following on this site. I'm not entirely happy with the source web site (I like well known and believable sources). However, as the stats seem to have originally come from the Beeb, and I can't find any others, I'll go with them. Attempted murder - 14% Robbery - 10% Cruelty and Neglect of Children - 9% Rape - 6.5% Violence against the person - 4% However, it is worth noting that the 6.5% is the figure for rape complainants that end in a conviction for rape. If you take into account other convictions (e.g. sexual assault) then the figure rises to 13%. Part of this is thought to be due to misunderstanding about what 'rape' (in the eyes of the law) by the complainant, though I imagine part of it is chances of a realistic conviction meaning prosecutors going for a lesser charge. I can't find figures for any other offences. These ones were hard enough to find! Conviction Rates were a bit easier to find, thanks to a Ministry of Justice report from this year (Page 30). The author detailed the offences with he lowest and highest Conviction Rates. These were: Highest: Making indecent photos of children: 89% Death by dangerous driving: 85% Drug possession with intent to supply 84% Money transfer by deception 79% Conspiracy to rob 78% Falsely obtaining benefit,Conspiracy to defraud 77% Murder 76% Handling stolen goods,Burglary 73% Lowest: Unlawful wounding 49% GBH 48% Manslaughter 48% Attempted murder 47% Common assault 41% Threatening to kill 36% So, rape has a pretty average conviction rate, though high as violent offences against the person go. Seems sad that money/drug offences all have a higher conviction rate that any type of assault. Burglary was the interesting one, as I can't find the Attrition Rate. I'm betting it's rather low. Well, that was an interesting way to spend an hour!

Yes, but this year is a disaster - we've lost Ola early. No catsuits!! Hurumph.

Whilst the non-military rape allegation to conviction rate is a low 6%, that is pretty comparable to most other crimes. If the complaint actually gets to court, the conviction rate is about 58%. As far as the military investigation goes, were the complaints predominately soldier against soldier, UK civilian against soldier or Afghan/Iraqi civilian against soldier?

Felicity Kendal ain't half bendy for a 64 year old!

ImpetuousVrouw Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The ED caller got some flak! > > Liked the definition of middle class being someone > who wears matching bra and knickers! I do. Matching bra and knickers, with a nice suit and tie. The (middle class) ladies love it.

Oh, *that* kind of facial...

Why? Apparently last time the local funsters threw a firework in *Bob* direction, his face lit up immediately.

Done it. And good luck - men's mental health issues is a great thing to study.

'Grimshaw' needs emphasis - that boy has 'serial killer' stamped all over him.

Katie... is it Katie Waissel, Katie Vogel or Lola Fontaine?

Surely it is some sort of breach of contract with the sender? PS Big up the Abbotswood Massive!

Most websites are on a small margin and are a few pounds within each other. Austravel occasionally run their own charter flights cheap, but I tried them once and there is not a lot in the way of legroom. Think a plane configured for a two-hour flight to Spain, but flying the 20-odd hours to Oz. The normal flying rules apply - be flexible with your dates. Ticking the 'flexible by +/- 1 day' box on Opodo can show you how much things can change on a day-to-day basis. The Thai Airlines site can show you a seven-day block. In fact, I just got a bargain flight to Oz by ringing the Thai ticketing phone line and the very helpful fellow found me the right days to fly to get the best price. Saved me loads of wonga. And, after a recent unpleasant experience, I'd recommend avoiding 'Flight Centre' like the plague. They completely screwed me around and very nearly cost me a lot of money (until the Thai Airlines people rescued me). They do much in the way of promises and 'guarantees', but little in the way of delivery or results. When I complained the customer services head was very rude and completely unprofessional. Avoid.