Sue

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > KidKruger Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > You can make yourself exempt by behaving in a > way > > > that would automatically want the courts to > not > > > have you on their premises as part of a jury. > > > > > Please tell us more :)) > > I suspect a BNP/EDL t-shirt would go a long way. > But the downside would be that you'd be wearing a > BNP/EDL t-shirt in public. Oh God, that reminds me of when I wore my Hope Not Hate t-shirt out locally (acquired after I had been leafleting in Dagenham in 2010). I thought I was getting strange looks, and it wasn't till I got home that I realised that although the t-shirt said on the front "Barking & Dagenham Council Elections 2010 Final Score Hope 51 BNP 0" my jacket had obscured most of the words apart from BNP :)) I've been wary of wearing it since then :))

singalto Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was once at my son's house when the postie left > a card through his letter box. I rushed out and > caught him asking why he hadn't rung the bell. He > said he didn't actually have the parcel with him, > just a card to say it was at the Highshore road > office! :)) or possibly :(

Yes it is illegal to ask your age. I stopped putting anything which could indicate my age on my CV (although of course a long work record is significant if somebody wants to make guesses). Many moons ago I used to train managers of various organisations in non discriminatory recruitment methods, and you would expect large companies to adhere to those (if for no other reason than potential bad publicity), however I suppose you can't expect a small shop to know (or possibly care) that they are breaking the law. Though there may be exemptions for small businesses, I can't remember now. Even apart from legal aspects, they should be looking at relevant skills and experience and matching those to the person spec. Many young people would be crap at the job. Many older people would be excellent. The same applies to other non job related characteristics such as race and gender (except for a very few specific jobs where there may be reasons for wanting people from a particular group, which is legal). What particularly used to bug me was companies specifiying that they wanted graduates (not sour grapes, I am one myself). In the vast majority of cases, having a degree per se bore no possible relevance to the job. Rather, the recruiter made particular assumptions about what qualities all graduates must have (eg quick to learn, maybe) without considering that many people without degrees might also have those qualities. Anyway, I could go on. Oh, I did. Gaynor I would like to know which this shop is. I suppose one consolation might be, would you want to work somewhere where you felt that they thought you were too old for them? I wouldn't. ETA: Very sorry for your loss, btw.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Here is the response, which although not what I > wanted (doesn't she and others at the GLA have the > wherewithal to have asked this question already?) > was at least fast. > > I don?t have an answer to that off the top of my > head ? I know that some borough officers do > enforce. > > We will table a question to the Mayor to try to > find out more > > Caroline > > I will give it a fortnight and pursue. That's promising, and as you say a fast response at least. Let's hope it produces results!

ollieloudon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Get over yourself and get a job And you know the OP hasn't got a job how? What a charming second post. I can see you will be a welcome contributor to the forum.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reverse detection theory would require you to > leave your home and eat a banana. When you have > only the peel in your hand you will be standing > outside the door of the one you seek. Knock it. Brilliant :) Though you would need to go in both directions and then you'd have a fifty:fifty chance of getting the right house. Or parked car. But if there were side streets, you'd have rather more possibilities :)) ETA: And it would depend on the relative eating speeds, of course. What time does this happen? Could it be a kid on the way to school eating part of their lunch several hours early?!

Dulwich Fox said .... No I am not a Vegan. I was totally veggie for 2-3 years back in the 70's. I am fully aware of cruelty in factory farming.. I written about it here more time than Sue seems to remember. It is not possible to source out where every meal I eat out comes from. We would all starve if we all did that. I can only assume that Sue NEVER eats out in local Indian restaurants. BUT No. She eats at Ganapati. I did not realise that Ganapati sourced all its Chicken and Lamb from Ethical suppliers. Perhaps Sue could enlighten us all on the matter.. a) You have not answered the point b) If you were a vegetarian why did you stop being one if you are concerned about animal welfare? c) It is possible to eat out and not eat meat if you are concerned about cruelty. Vegetarians and vegans do not starve and have plenty of choice these days eating out, particularly in Indian restaurants. How ridiculous. d) Your having written about factory farming on here is completely irrelevant, as it does not seem to extend to actually not eating factory farmed animals. e) I occasionally eat in Indian restaurants, as you know because you have spoken to me in there more than once. I will not eat chicken in them, specifically because of cruelty issues. f) I do not "eat at Ganapati". I have not eaten at Ganapati for years. However they use free range chicken and I would be extremely surprised if any of their meat was factory farmed, given their ethos. Is that sufficiently enlightening? I would have preferred it if you could have responded at similar length to my answer to your post above accusing me of cruelty, however.

Yes, complain to Royal Mail, no point complaining on here! It's not just Royal Mail, it's all of them. Mostly they don't bother to ring the bell, they flap the letterbox a bit in a half-hearted sort of way. In one case the bell did ring, I went to answer it and got there to see the van driving off and a parcel dumped on my wall (not even on the mat) by somebody who couldn't even have known I was in.

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You can make yourself exempt by behaving in a way > that would automatically want the courts to not > have you on their premises as part of a jury. Please tell us more :))

I really sympathise, I've had similar for years, not just at half term, from a family in a nearby road (not mine). Including at crack of dawn on Sunday mornings, and on some occasions joined by an adult also. My heart used to sink every day when they came home from school. I feel really sorry for people whose houses are closer than mine and who work at home or are otherwise at home. It's improved of late, maybe one or some of the immediate neighbours complained, or else the children are past the shouting and screaming stage (please God). Of course young children scream and shout, it's part of being a young child. It's also kind of their parents and carers to teach them not to do it at length outside on a regular basis in a built up area where there are other residents. The odd occasion, fine. Unless it's 7.30 am, in which case not fine.

> DulwichFox Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- >> > > > I'm lost for words as to the level of cruelty > > some people will stoop to. > > rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You a vegan then Foxy? Good point. Maybe cruelty only applies to wildlife and pets in Dulwich Fox's eyes, and not to factory farmed/intensively reared animals destined their whole sad lives to be slaughtered for cheap meals such as those in Indian restaurants (or to produce cheap eggs and milk).

That was a kind thing to do, Calsug.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue, > > Done - even before your peppish, good-natured > encouragement. > > I'll report back. Yeh sorry, I just reread it and I did sound a bit sharp. Look forward to hearing the outcome, it's a good idea (though I suspect that given that the police aren't even investigating some crimes these days it's likely to be the traffic wardens who do it)

Some years back, I can't remember the exact details but a journalist wrote an article basically dissing East Dulwich, and had clearly not even made it as far from the station as Lordship Lane :)) I'm sure someone on here will remember better than me!

I wouldn't knowingly harm anything (except clothes moths and slugs). I rescue woodlice I find in the house. Chilli powder is a deterrent, not a poison. To the best of my knowledge, animals avoid it because of the smell. Happy to be proved wrong, and if so I will not use it again despite the advice of somebody who as a wildlife adviser you would expect to be an expert. I do not use it at home, however I have used it at their entrance tunnels at a plot of land where foxes were burrowing and disturbing seeds and plants.

The article and quote above are about deterring squirrels, who are in fact mammals. It is by a wildlife adviser who happens to work for the RSPB. And the article clearly says that birds are not affected by the chilli. ETA: I am not sure what your point is.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > We will have to wait and see how you feel about > The charges after 2018/19 when > > a further clean air act comes into force. > > When the congestion charge is expected to rise.. > > The T charge is expected to rise > > Sidiq Khan wants to expand the Congestion Zone to > cover everything within the North / South > circular. > > On top of that there is talk about charging per > mile for motorways. > > We already effectively pay per mile when we buy > petrol. > > Thousands of people die from tobacco related > diseases each year but despite having banned it > from public places > refuses to ban it totally. Why. because it raise > ?millions in Tax. > > Recreational Drugs are totally banned. Why.. > Because there No Revenue.. (Tax) > > And where drugs are concerned money is raised by > imposing Fines. > > OK if its not a Scam.. Its a Sham > Sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying that additional measures shouldn't be taken to cut pollution from motor vehicles (by deterring people from using them) because cigarettes aren't completely banned? (BTW smoking is not "banned from public places", it is banned from public places which are inside.) What would your solution be to improve the appalling air quality in London? And why are Sadiq Khan's measures a "sham"?

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > His Lordship the Mayor could easily cut pollution > by requiring traffic wardens/police to instruct > car engine idlers to switch off or be fined. (Why > they don't do this anyway I will never know.) The > fact that simple, easily understood and fair > methods like this are not used is baffling and > depressing - it could be made to happen very > quickly, with no fanfare or fuss, so perhaps that > is why it isn't! Maybe you could suggest it to the appropriate person via the appropriate channels? No use posting about it on here!!

It is recommended by organic gardening experts and the RSPB. Here's just one link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/wildlife/3440454/Use-chilli-powder-to-repel-squirrels-householders-told.html "Lloyd Scott, RSPB wildlife adviser, said: "Using chilli powder to deter squirrels is a cheap, easy and effective solution." I'm sure you can google other sources of information for yourself, if only to prove the RSPB wildlife adviser wrong .....

"The kind of place where you could still leave your back door open"??!!

Red chilli powder can also work. You can get big bags cheaply from places like Khans.

Possibly if they do get a psychiatric report then that may shed some light. There doesn't seem to have been any suggestion that he was on drugs.

In relation to two posts above, I really don't see how polluting vehicles could suddenly be banned from an area altogether. And I'd like to know what evidence there is for anybody "lining their pockets" from this charge, or for it being "The Biggest Money Making SCAM ever." And as for "Khan could not give a Damn about peoples health. He wants to raise money to cover for failing council policies", I received the email below a couple of days ago: Dear Sue, Londoners have suffered for too long because of the Tories' refusal to act on air pollution. It's Labour that are taking real action to clean our air. The Toxicity Charge ? the T-charge ? starts today. It's part of my commitment to clean up London's dangerously polluted air, which contributes to thousands of premature deaths each year in our city. It damages health throughout our lives ? leading to smaller lungs in children, and greater risk of dementia, cancer and strokes when we get older. As of today, older and more polluting vehicles driving in the central London Congestion Charge Zone will need to meet minimum emission standards, or pay an additional ?10 daily T-charge. This is in addition to the Congestion Charge and will operate from 07:00 to 18:00, Monday to Friday. This is only one part of my clean air plan, working alongside our fantastic Labour Councils to tackle this public health emergency. We are leading by example by cleaning up TfL's bus and taxi fleets, tackling pollution outside schools and introducing more cycle lanes. In the coming weeks we will be launching a London-wide Labour Party campaign on Air Quality. I look forward to working with you to take our message to the doorstep. Yours sincerely, Sadiq Khan Labour's Mayor of London And if anybody wants to use this to have a go at Labour, please first tell me exactly what the Tory government are doing about air quality. Edited for typo

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thank you . > > It is an old banger ,just trying to prolong it's > life . > > Stitch in time and all that . If you aren't worried about its appearance, can't you just shove some anti rust stuff. (technical term) on the scratched bits?

No :))