Earl Aelfheah

Pretty lame of Southwark to hold their only display at the very northern tip of the Borough. Could have held it somewhere more accessible to a greater number of residents - Burgess Park prehaps?

If someone's sitting in their car dealing drugs out of their window for 3 hours, you might want to consider reporting it to the police.

Anyone know why the bus stop outside East Dulwich station has been moved? There's no sign of any road works.

It's ridiculous that Waitrose don't own a single store with an 'SE' postcode. What's that about? Personally I'd like to see one in ED, or somewhere nearby. Would be funny if they opened one in Peckham, just for of the indignation it would cause amongst ED residents. The original post was clearly trolling by the way. Must have touched on something though as we're still talking about it 5 pages later.

James, great work on getting the baby changing sorted out. I too was amazed that it had been ommitted. Glad it's being sorted now.

Narnia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > What does that mean? LIfe is subjective experience. Therefore the only type of meaning that matters / is in our control, relates to how we frame that experience, through our values and actions.

There is no way to be sure of anything, except of ones own subjective (filtered perception of) experience. Life is no more than this, or at least we can't be sure that it is. Therefore, if you want to find meaning in life, live by a set of personal values.

Saw the yellow house yesterday. WTF?!?? Wow, I feel for their neighbours. It's such a nice road as well.

The reality is that there need to be cuts and you can't just target them all at the poorest simply because it's less likely to upset the papers. If you earn ?44 K and have a familly in London, it's tough. But you're still better off than the vast majority. There is little doubt that it will be the poorest who really feel the pain, post 20th October. I would like to see the super rich, especially those in the city who contributed to the crash, burden a greater share. The government (despite a bit of empty rhetoric) have done nothing to reform the banking sector, nor to seriously press the banks to repay the debt they owe the taxpayer. I think this issue is a more appropriate target for peoples ire.

My 1 year old girl has taken to shoving her fingers down her throat. Today she vomitted twice after doing this. Does anyone else know of this problem, or how to stop it?

gwod Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People on Landells sometimes get into Dulwich > Village Infants ...and they will be having a bulge > in 2012 Don't you have to be (or pretend to be) practicing Christian?

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I got home this afternoon and chilled to Sabres Of > Paradise's Haunted Dancehall. Not played it ages. > Still sounds blooming marvellous. Bravo! Great album

chewing gum is a much bigger problem in my book. Oh, and dog sh*t. That really get's my goat, and let me assure you, I clear up after my goat.

Private School, public school, charity, or profitable private business - the same principle ought to apply... Show respect to local residents, don't block the highway and don't leave your engine running uneccessarily.

I agree about the number of pedestrian crossings on Lordship Lane (there needs to be at least one more). It can be very difficult to cross.

If one is going to bother differentiating between a shallow end and a deep end - then there should be a proper difference. There seems little point in having a shallow end and a shallower end.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, my suggestion of a part tax payer funded NHS > supplemented by local fund raising efforts would > mean that the quality of the local hospital would > depend upon the quality of local support. The reality of this model would be poor hospitals in poor areas.

No one is suggesting that King's is going to be run on charitable donations. Marmora Man has pointed out that such a model of health care did exist in the past and (at least as I read his comments), seems to suggest that it is a feasible model for health care for the present. I disagree.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A tax funded, universal health care system has to > be preferable to one that relies on philantrophy. > > > RahRah - why is this so? I gave you some facts - > you have made an assertion but given no reasons. I gave my opinion, which is kind of the point of a forum. A hospital that is run on charitable donations is one that will find it very hard to plan, will be even more constrained by the whims of fashionable causes and will have to direct huge amounts of resource courting wealthy, potential donors. I find it very hard to believe that you would truelly like to see hospitals dependent on donations. The fact that hospitals were run on this basis for a long time, may be a fact, but isn't that relevant. It doesn't prove that the model is superior (in fact it suggests progress).

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a point of historical fact. Hospitals in this > country have, for the vast part of their > existence, relied upon charity and voluntary > support. Barts was established in the 13th century > as a religious charitable institution, many other > similar hospitals followed in subsequent > centuries. The biggest nationalisation ever was > the "creation" of the NHS which took over > previously charitable and municipal funded > establishments in 1948. > > So for just over 60 years we've had a tax funded > (NOT government funded) health service against > several hundred years of charity funding. The fact that hospitals were run as charities for a large part of their history is not really that relevant. A tax funded, universal health care system has to be preferable to one that relies on philantrophy. I am surprised that so many are OK with King's approaching recently treated patients for money (assuming that this is what is happening, as portrayed in this thread).

The NHS is not a charity. I do not want to see it become one. It is a public service, which should be funded properly by the government. Police don't ask for donations after attending to the victims of crim. Neither do firemen after putting outa blaze. The NHS should lobby government for funds, not individual patients.

well they may not, but as a society we have to make the decision whether or not to make funding for healthcare a priority for politicians seeking election. The NHS is a shared resource and we should all contribute to it through a fair taxation system. I still don't think it is appropriate to ask patients for contributions.

What makes a yellow house 'funky'?

I completely disagree with, what seems to be the general view ,that this is appropriate. If the Hospital does not have sufficient funding then it should appeal to government for more money. The NHS should be funded through a fair and progressive taxation system, for the benefit of everyone. It should not have to rely on charity, nor should it be approaching patients for donations, in my opinion.

Sounds like the part bus option might be best. Cheers.