Earl Aelfheah

Brendan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I understand the need to not spend public money > that does not exist. (As much as I understand the > stupidity in banks being allowed to lend money > they don?t have and then claiming the debt as an > asset along with all the other contrived ways of > magicing money from nowhere that they have) > > What worries me is the knock on effect of large > scale redundancies on the economy. It is all well > and good saving X billion ? by sacking 100 > thousand people but you?ve only saved the money > that those people weren?t paying back to you in > tax anyway which could be 50% and above, then they > are going to claim benefits, they may require > housing, they are going to stop contributing to > commerce by buying cars and video games and pooper > scoopers and borrowing money from banks, they > aren?t going to use private healthcare or > education etc etc. > > So there must be a tipping point where it causes > more damage than it solves. You are absolutely correct. Government debt also re-emerges into the economy and stimilutes private sector business. The government have done nothing to prevent any repeat of the credit crunch. A proportionate response to the irresponsibility of the City, which largely got us into our current mess, would not lead to the collapse of our economy - in fact quite the reverse is true. There is definitely an ideological element to the current government's approach to reducing the deficit, which is simply opportunism. We do of course need a reduction in the deficit - there is no doubt about this. But so much of the response is not logical, but political. Why are we ring fencing the NHS for example. It was by far the biggest recipient of Labour's largesse. Billions was poured into feather bedding consultant doctors. Even more was lost, employing useless (private sector) management consultants, failed IT projects etc. It's the worst type of populurism to ring fence health. To suggest that banks have played no part in the current deficit problem is nonsence. The reduction in tax recipts is down to the recession, which is largely a result of the credit crunch. Billions upon billions have now been poured into the banks, which leaves an even bigger hole in the public finances. And yet the government will not take action to curtail even the most extreme antisocial and irresponsible practices of bankers.

I've just googled it and it seems that the vaccination is offered in a number of Boroughs (not what I'd heard talking to people). Can't actually find out exactly where it is and isn't offered though. I'm still unsure how necessary it is. Any opinions (especially medics out there), apprecitated.

Everyone I know who started out with a Bugaboo, or other, similar 'big' buggy has ended up getting a MacLaren. They're just much more practical - smaller, lighter etc. Unless you're really into cross country buggying, I would opt for the MacLaren Techno.

My 9 month old daughter is due to recieve her BCG vacination. I remember having my BCG at school and it was very painful. I understand that they only administer this vaccination within two or three London Boroughs and that if we lived a couple of miles to the west, she wouldn't be getting offered it. Is it really necessary? Any views / insights appreciated.

We have a huge deficit problem. Part of this is down to our having bailed out the banks with public money. Banking is now a hugely subsidised industry. The big banks are once again paying out huge bonuses. The government seems to be doing virtually nothing to start clawing back the billions in public money that was sunk into these organisations. Cameron paints a picture of the 'hard done by' private sector, talking of "public sector boom ? and a private sector bust". There are huge cuts coming to the public sector. Anyone who believes that this won't mean the loss of real jobs and a reduction in front line services is in my opinion, mistaken. We are going to see public money funding city bonuses, whilst doctors, nurses and police are made redundant. Why are the public accepting this. Have we forgotten the role bankers played in the recession? Where is the response from government which we were promised? Is it just me, or does this all seem quite unbelievable?

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Vick Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Just two, industrial strengh fireworks, in > June. > > What's that all about? > > xxxxxxx > > Birthday? Some other celebration? Two bangers. Quite the birthday celebration.

I really am not that bothered about football, much to the horror of virtually everyone I meet. I'm not sure when / how it became such an apparently, compulsory interest (like ???? says above, it wasn't always like this). I like a good kick around with mates, and I will admit to watching the occasional international - but I have friends who literally organise their entire lives around sitting infront of the TV, watching someone else playing football. The level of obsessiveness seems completely wierd to me.

I'm fairly new to the area and just 'discovered' Dawson's Hill. Amazing views of the capital, I'm surprised it's not better know. Someone should set up a cafe / lookout point up there.

I love it!

I used to go to the Brunswick Park Surgery in Camberwell (before I moved to ED) and they were the laziest, rudest people I think I have every encountered. The receptionists would completely ignore the queue of people lined up in front of them, whilst they discussed the previous night's Eastenders episode with someone over their mobile (or similar). Eventually someone would politely ask whether they may like to consider ending the call, at which point they would say something along the lines of "are you being aggressive, because if so we will have you removed and banned from the surgery". I always felt that if you so much as said hello to a receptionist there you were at risk of being pepper sprayed.

I came across this terrible story in the Independent. Truely shocking: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/as-one-teacher-is-cleared-of-pupil-assault-another-tells-of-her-life-sentence-1977673.html

arriety Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If equality of opportunity is a good thing, and > all children should be given the same chances in > life, how can private education be a good thing? > it seems to me that the more engaged parents would > be better off sticking with the state schools and > helping to bring the standards up for all. Best > thing that could happen to this country is the > abolition of any private education, and an > increase in the standards and provision of state > education. Saying that though i completely > understand why parents choose private schools, > because it is after all impossible not to put your > own children's needs as a priority. Complicated > issue. I couldn't agree more. Clearly parents want the best education possible for their own children, but surely they also want the best civil society for them to? Individuals will act to give in their children's best interest. This is as it should be, but it is for this reason that government should show leadership and intervene, in the wider interest. If independent schools were outlawed tomorrow then you would see massive social changes which, overall, would see everyone better off.

Maybe you could trtavel using a fold up bike. then you could park it IN the wheelie bin when you arrive home?

I'm intrigued! Of what wheelie bin misadventures do you speak?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What's the problem converting it into flats? > Apparently it wasn't viable as a pub... We might have to accept harsh financial realities, but that doesn't mean we need to celebrate them. So many pubs in London are being lost and personally I find it sad. Often it is not that a pub is no longer viable, it's just that flats are more profitable. It is fairly easy to turn a quick buck, chopping up a historic pub for flats. But it's difficult to reverse the trend when markets change. Government is here to act in a regulatory role, taking into account the character and history of an area, the public interest (both now and in the future) and consider the 'bigger picture'. A property developer isn't (and shouldn't) be expected to think about any of this, which is why the Council's role is so important. Having said all this, I don't know this specific case intimately, so I guess I might be off the mark. I still find it sad though....

Southwark Council (in their wisdom) have approved it's conversion into flats. Very depressing. Details of planning application / decision, here.

I wonder whether this comment is merely overt snobbery, or whehter it's mixed with some covert racism too? Either way Maurice, I agree that you should not be living in Camberwell. You might want to reconsider South London generally.