Earl Aelfheah

[cross posted]

Well, that press conference was reassuring. He's been reading about Uranium and thinks a nuclear holocaust would be a bad thing. So clearly he knows what he's doing.

geobz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ....Its like saying oh why are you > blaming a man that his house got robbed while he > left his front door wide open... There is no > victim here, just a fool person. Just because one sees an open door, doesn't mean it's incumbent on that person to go in and nick everything. I once got home to find that I hadn't shut my door properly (by mistake obviously). Luckily, no one took it on themselves to empty my house but if they had, I would still have been the victim of theft. TBH, I reckon 99% of the time, it's perfectly fine to tie a dog up outside a shop. Personally I feel sorry for the person whose had their dog nicked and angry at the shitbag that took it.

I agree with you Jaywalker that leaks from the security services / permanent state, aimed at undermining an elected official are pretty alarming. Whilst I am far from a fan of Trump (to put it very mildly), these leaks are pretty not acceptable. If they were aimed at anyone other then Trump (say, Obama for example), there would be a lot more people speaking out against them IMO. For the security services to be releasing this stuff points to some real problems.

Looks good.

the reports pretty clear about what it's measuring and provides a fair bit of narrative around it. The measure they're using for those 'at high risk of overty' is 75% if MIS (which of course one might still legitimately question). What's perhaps most interesting is their analysis for what is likely to happen to the incomes of those being described in the report over the next few years (a further, significant drop). Anyway, read the report, it's pretty nuanced https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/households-below-minimum-income-standard-200809-201415

Formative years red devil - they leave their mark.

The commute into Central London from here can often take an hour. About the same as from many places well outside the capital.

@Otta - I've never seen 'transformasancks'. They look AMAZING!

I am in shock. I need to lie down.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway, I'm sure we'll have flying cars and > hoverboards by the time this extension is built. True

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When I was young, children were often left outside > shops in prams (you couldn't get the old big > Silver Cross prams into shops) - indeed children > were also left outside pubs (with a packet of > crisps and a lemonade if they were lucky). Some > dogs do have abandonment issues (as do some > children!), but many are perfectly relaxed about > being left tied up outside somewhere for short > times (and far better that than being left in a > car in the sun). It is a sad commentary on our > society that we blame victims for the actions of > criminals - as if criminality was the expected > norm in our lives. By doing so we validate > criminal actions (by treating them as normal and > expected). My parents used to take me and my siblings to the pub, leave us in the car and occasionally pop out to deliver a bag of crisps or a coke through the window. We'd even be allowed to put the radio on. We thought it was a great treat. Looking back at it, it doesn't really seem so much like a treat.

From today's FT: "Nearly a third of people in the UK live in a household where there is not enough money for adequate food, clothing and housing and the basics of a social life, up from a quarter at the start of the financial crisis, according to new research. The number of people living in households with income below a minimum standard rose from 15m in 2008-09 to 19m in 2014-15, according to analysis by researchers at Loughborough University for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Most of the increase happened in the three years until March 2012 and was not then reversed."

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ahah. Now I can share my feeling of having been > deceived by crisps for a lifetime, via this I > happened to see on Facebook today. Am I the only > one who didn't know this? > > http://i.imgur.com/gfjfDcR.png Oh My God

You can believe what you like quids, but you asked for a reason and I gave you one. I had the same issue with the Nine Elms / northern line proposal which ignored the needs of existing communities to prioritise those of private developers

'Boys will be boys'

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The bus is a completely unsuitable method for > commuting from SE London into the centre. The time > it takes is completely disproportionate to the > distance travelled. And 1hr (or more) of > stop/start traffic (often with a heavy-footed > driver) leaves me feeling very travel-sick. I > guess they can be useful for local journeys of 2-3 > miles though. ^this

The relative population sizes is one massive and obvious one

its for exactly that eventuality that I always wear a chocolate hat

It is a bit weird that they've created a Twitter account, linked to from their website, but haven't Tweeted anything, or even created a profile. Their website says nothing.

I'm absolutely knackered. Tired to my bones.

If it is, I'll eat my hat 🎩

I think a large amount of the public money invested in an extension to OKR will effectively get hovered up by developers and 'investors'. It annoys me when people say that developers are paying - like it's some kind of charitable act.

Sweptwind Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If the Bakerloo line extension is going to take > place at all, developer funding is going to be > required. The Peckham route offers considerably > less potential for funding - so it's got to be OKR > I'm afraid. 'Developer funding'? It's largely taxpayer funded and maintained. The development is made massively more profitable by a taxpayer subsidy to said developers. It is the taxpayer funding the development not the other way round. There are considerably more long term taxpayers in the densely populated, established communities of Camberwell and Peckham than the brown field sits on the OKR. So one could argue that the Peckham route offers considerably more funding... You just have to remember that 'government money' is actually our money.

I've only sat down to eat there once, but I really liked Burro E Salvia.