Earl Aelfheah

Loz - you're talking about an extreme and unrepresentative sample. When people say it's more difficult for those from the poorest backgrounds to get to the top', that's generally true. I doubt Rendel literally meant 'the top 10 richest people in the world'. But you know that of course. To suggest that as long as a small number of people in the top 10 list come from 'humble beginnings', then everyone should 'be happy' is mischievously reductive.

[deleted - posted twice for some reason].

Come on Loz - looking at the top 10 richest people in the world? It's a tiny and extreme sample. It tells you almost nothing about social mobility generally.

The phrase 'tory scum' is used almost exclusively on this forum, by those complaining about the use of the term 'tory scum'.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So, basically, and as expected, middle-class > socialists hate the tories more than they like an > improvement in equality - quelle surprise Quids, what are you talking about? The most notable thing about this thread, is the unironic, vitriolic, political tribalism, of those railing against vitriolic, political tribalism.

UK has a very high level of income inequality compared to other developed countries, but of course it's good news if the gap is reducing. As noted above though, it's not a straight forward picture and of course wealth and income are not the same thing (and if one looks at assets the picture is very different). I also saw today, Oxfam suggesting that the World's eight richest people have same wealth as the poorest 50%.

So have you got a link to the researc?

.

pop9770 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Questions > How much slower do speeds need to go if at all or > should they go up on roads like this? I think 20 is fine - but not when you have speed bumps. Then it is a case of 20 down to about 5, back up to 20, down to about 5 etc. This just leads to huge frustration, which also IMO, often leads to people flooring it when they do get an opportunity. 20 mph, actually enforced by either average speed cameras, or (sharp intake of breath) real traffic police. > Is it just a few speeders the same ones who speed > on every road how to stop them? Yes. They're often the ones in big vehicles that barely notice speed bumps, or commercial ones that don't care about the damage to the company van and consider bumps sport. The lack of any real enforcement (cameras / police) means they drive with impunity. > What are the accident figures? see http://www.crashmap.co.uk/ > What other speed reducing options are there? Chicane / priority to one direction, average speed cameras, real people stopping dangerous drivers (not just a machine measuring speed) > Buses speed everywhere why are they not > electronically restricted to set speed limits many > are driven my maniacs? Good question. Even better one - why are not all vehicles electronically limited in order to restrict their speed to the road they're on (hardly beyond the ability of current technology). Why does anyone need a car capable of 130 mph and 0-6 in a few seconds when they only drive it on public roads?

Oh and some pretty hardcore pruning in the spring in order to encourage new growth.

.

I had similar problem. Found that regularly feeding it with some liquid fertiliser helped it revive.

I meant their 'metro' services, which I think was the original plan http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/12113029/TfL-to-take-control-of-Londons-suburban-rail-services.html .

The street lights in ED are ridiculously bright. They were upgraded a few years back and now everywhere if floodlit. It's not great for birds. light pollution isn't taken that seriously unfortunately. If you walk around Dulwich Village and surrounding streets, it's lovely at night - their streets largely still have the old, yellow lamps... it actually feels like nighttime.

We should be campaigning for devolution of train service to TFL, something which was previously agreed and has been stopped for purely political reasons. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38238980 Grayling should be sacked and responsibility for Southern, Southeastern and South West Trains placed under the remit of TFL.

The whole thing stinks: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/11/rail-franchise-boss-peter-wilkinson-gave-southern-contract-client-consultancy?CMP=share_btn_tw (Rail franchise mandarin's board gave Southern contract to client of his company)

It also amazes me how there are politicians and commentators here in the UK, who are still happy to defend him. I know people have a degree of 'tribal' allegiance when it comes to politics, but come on.

That might not be a bad punt

Wow, just seen the press conference. It's just unreal. How is this man president elect?

So reading this https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/10/buzzfeed-publishes-donald-trump-russia-documents-ethics-questions I have to conclude that this latest story (of secret contacts with the Kremlin) lacks credibility. It's pretty poor of buzzfeed to have published it without any real evidence of the reports veracity. I don't like Trump and his dismissal of evidence of Russian hacking, does open him up to these kind of stories.... but, even he must be afforded the same right not to be smeared in the press that anyone else has.

So I see there is now a suggestion that Trump may have had 'secret contacts' with Russia in the run up to the election. It's hard to know what to make of it frankly https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contacts. My instinct would be that it's all far too far fetched, but then Trump's behaviour is so erratic, who knows what's going on.

Sounds pretty scary Buddug hope you're not too shaken.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > We have to accept that things haven't been as > bad > > as was predicted. > > Sums up a lot of remainers opinion (but not mine) > - "we have to accept FFS"? You, like many, clearly > would rather things had gone badly.... > > It's done, we are out and we have to make the best > of it and we are in betters shape than most on the > left are willing to admit - with a lot more > leverage than you realise. This Forum is like the > fooking Guardian - negative, sanctimonious, full > of woe, country hating - typical middleclass left > wingery nothing positive to contribute. Why I gave > up with left to be honest What do you mean "I would rather things had gone badly"? You do talk a lot of sh*t quids. Also, you're insistence on making everything an issue of 'left / right' is silly. The EU debate cut across both parties.

It's really hard to get a GP appointment and there are very few drop in centres (as Jeremy says, they've stopped doing drop-ins at the Lister Centre). People will invariably resort to visiting A&E in the absence of reasonable alternatives.

I think you missed Abe's meaning Malumbu. He's mocking the person in the queue not agreeing with them.