Loz

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A friend just compared buy-to-let to this analogy. > I take out a loan to buy a car and I let you use > it Brendan providing you pay the loan off for me. > Once the loan is paid off then I get to keep the > car and then continue charging you to use it. > That's money for nothing. You mean like the business model of every car hire firm?

The real problem is that this issue, in the short to medium term, is impossible to solve. If house prices stay as they are in real terms, then the change in the number of households being able to afford to buy will be negligible. If they fall, then a great many people with perilous finances are going to plunge into negative equity, creating an all new problem. And if property prices fall that dramatically, the economy will probably dip rather alarmingly as well, considering that this recession was ignited by a residential property bubble bursting. Really, all you can do is hope for the first (stay in real terms) and come back to the issue in, say, 30 to 40 years when the average wage is about ?250K (average house price) divided by the mortgage multipler (say a generous 4x) = ?62,500. Face it - the problem is so huge as to be unsolvable.

ruffers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nando's. There's one in Camberwell. Jump on the bus and you'll be there in 10 mins.

Well, if you study hard, go to a good school and have jolly rich parents you probably have quite a good chance of an offer from either Cambridge or Oxford. Oh. *Ux*bridge. Sorry. :))

Whilst I understand some of the points raised here, I thought we had already established that Brendan himself has not actually been priced out of the market - in fact, his household salary is more than enough to afford a two (and maybe three) bed home. The problem he does seem to face is that he does not have enough of a deposit to satisfy the currently very nervous mortgage providers? That is a very different problem. And one that will almost certainly right itself in time as the economy turns around.

If you are planning to do video editing, you will probably need a Firewire connection as well. Most video cameras need one. You have have a pretty good list of requirements - you should be able to shop with that. Providing you recognise the name, you should be OK. Though I would say: - big screen (at least 15 inches) - fine - HD screen (we have got just got an HD camcorder) - fine - at least 4GB memory - you can always put more memory in from Crucial or Kingston. Don't let this be a showstopper. - decent processor speed - look for a dual core, especially of your video editing software can make the most of it. - at least 500GB hard drive (we have loads of photos and music) - I put all mine on a portable USB drive. More than one, in fact (just in case). 320GB should be fine and will give you greater choice. - integrated webcam for skype calls with family; - Shouldn't be a showstopper - portable cams are cheap and probably better quality that integrated. Have a look at reputable online stores like DABS that often have some rather good deals.

I'm with fractionater on this one. Sniffing salty water is what scuba divers do if they have sinus issues (not least as they are surrounded with billions of gallons of medicine). Clears things out PDQ. If you think your sinuses hurt on land, go down 20m underwater and see what it's like!

What HAL said. It would help if you posted: - Operating system (Windows 7? XP?) - Browser (Internet Explorer? Firefox) - Which site you are accessing and how you access it (bookmark? email hyperlink?) There are possibly harmless explanations for this, but as HAL noted, since you've had a virus tread very, very carefully until you are sure no nasties remain on your system. Someone could be watching your every step - and every key pressed.

Apologies for my political pessimism, but just saying something needs "serious debate and reform" seems like a jolly good soundbite, but little in the way of actual ideas and/or impetus to do anything. A bit like the Tory/LibDems "let's have a review' line they took 28 times.

nashoi, Interesting article, though as other readers pointed out he talked of cutting public sector pay and then gave the example of a private sector worker, which conveniently left out the cost of employment that would have ruined his article. Down in the comments section, when others made this point, he started getting very rude and abusive! (example: "And stop being an idiot without an ounce of intelligence or ability to argue, let alone comprehend.") But it does start to sort of answer Brendon's question. His figures came up with a net gain to the govt, for a person earning ?25K, of ?9140. You need to add in the salary (?25K) though you can probably leave out NI, etc, as these go back to the government and nets itself out, but you need to add in 17% (?4250) for public sector pension costs. So, to employ someone in government has a net cost of ?21110. This does not factor in costs for buildings, lighting, heating, support services (ie HR departments), computer licensing, etc, etc, but those are difficult to quantify on the back of a fag packet. According to the article, an unemployed person has a net costs to the government of ?12160 (this does not include any redundancy payments, which could be up to 2x salary in the PS). This cost would hopefully be temporary, though in a recession that may not be the case especially as most public sector workers usually jump from one PS job to another. An employment freeze would stop this and force them out to seek work in the private sector - which is the general idea, but may take time. Not an exhaustive analysis, by any means.

That was their opinion (of themselves). Seems that teacher's and school's views were a little more mixed.

That doesn't actually help your argument, IV. That's a bit like saying, "I know a bit about driving - I used to be a White Van Man".

Why do you say that, LM? As far as I know BECTA was only responsible for school IT procurement. That will either fall back to schools or back to the DoE itself.

Whilst I agree that arguing with what sounds like a fairly issued ticket is pointless, the sad part of this is that traffic wardens no longer feel that warning people when they have the opportunity is part of their job. A couple of words recommending that the driver may want to park differently would have been welcome here. Sadly, the pressure to issue tickets these days means that this no longer happens. Traffic wardens complain that the general public give them a hard time and their job is distinctly unpleasant. That may be true, but sometimes they don't exactly help themselves, do they?

I saw this moron doing a wheelie coming around the blind corner on Abbotswood Road. I suspect if the UK law doesn't get this guy soon he is going to become a nominee for a Darwin Award.

The Thai Corner Cafe won't be winning any Michelin stars, but at least the cooking is solid. And the BYO makes it great value.

I went there a couple of times. I thought it was awful. Don't miss it one bit.

I generally agree with both your statements MM. But, if you are going to try and change things for one demographic (as parliament - and Mad Hattie especially - has been trying to do with the imposition of all-women shortlists) then you have to start looking at all demographics. You can't only balance things partially. There is a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. If you take a good look at the system and establish that male, female, black, white, asian, whatever all have the same opportunity to run for office then you have equal opportunity. You don't actually need 51% female, etc, etc. That is equality of outcome - and is generally a bad thing as it leads to accusations of tokenism.

sian Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LoZ - Mark Serwotka seems to have been a bit > quiet. Is this going to last for the next 5 years? I'd not heard of this fellow and had to google his name! Union leaders aren't really an area of interest for me.

Oh don't be stupid. As I pointed out earlier, 'Road Tax' is a misnomer. Replacing it with another incorrect name is just as wrong. Why do do you persist? Road Tax - wrong. Car tax - wrong. Sea Kittens - wrong. Horsebox - wrong.

I believe the best solution would have been to have stood up and loudly called her back to explain herself. In your best "teacher to a ten year old" voice, ask her to explain exactly why she was so rude and abusive to you. Let her try and explain. Point out exactly why she was wrong and misheard the conversation and tell her why eavesdropping in other people's conversations is rude behaviour and causes such misunderstandings. Tell her she is offensive, bid her goodnight and send her on her way.

But not if it is a 'van', 'bus', 'motorbike', etc. VED covers all sorts of vehicles, but of course 'vehicle tax' wouldn't make the same political point, would it. Besides, he's hoist on his own petard as 'car tax' isn't payable on some cars. It's like trying to refer to income tax as a 'Policemen Tax' because you pay tax on your earnings as a copper. It's a nonsense. Lobby groups do come up with some stupid approaches to arguments sometimes. This one is almost as daft as PETA's attempt to reclassify fish as 'sea kittens'.

Googles and got this...

'Car Tax' is still just as incorrect as 'Road Tax' though.

That ipayroadtax site is weird. It took me ages to find out exactly what point he/she was trying to make. It seems to spend an awful lot of pages trying to stop people saying 'Road Tax' (which admittedly is incorrect) to using the phrase 'Car Tax' (which is also incorrect). He then calls the site 'I Pay Road Tax' which is groaning with (I think unintended) irony. Summary: Someone with too much time on their hands. But decent web design skills.