SeanMacGabhann

But if you are on a bus that lane shows how quickly you can get 80 odd people around London much faster I've crossed on foot loads of times and never had a problem - look left, look right, then left again - useful advice for any lane, any road regardless of traffic lights or not

when you say the tax burden gets larger - based on what and compared to what? although rising in the UK it remains lower than most European countries. I disagree with the 10p band abolition but generally I have always thought the UK to be pretty cheap (tax-wise) compared with other countries I haven't (amazingly!) got the time to go and source the data now so I'm open to being corrected on this of course. But

I pretty much agree Brendan, but itis a public service like no other. I can't think of anything else that has the same scale, criticality, unpredictable demand What has changed is that "in the modern world" successive governments have tried to scale it back - ok huge amounts of money have gone into the pot marked "NHS" but a lot of that has gone to consultants to look at "modernising" it - which means scale it back and get it to the stage where it is no longer a universal public service. If that means effectively breaking it and thus turn public opinion against it then I doubt any government would be duly upset But it should retain it's original goals - and if the world has changed since then (transient populations, medicines, whatever else) the fact remains: if a country broke after 2 world wars can implement something onthis scale then modern, more prosperous Britain can certainly, with the will, have a decent service in the 21st century. But I'm not convinced the will is there

hmmmm - seems that despite me saying I know that people have ailment and Im not accusing anyone here of not needing treatment, people appear to be getting defensive I'm not even hinting that Brendan or LostThePlot don't need treatment - mine was a more general question on overall volume of people hitting the NHS. I agree with Cassius completely that "Surely the NHS which is paid for by us all should be available to us all." Brendan's point about the NHS being inadequate I can't really say - I just haven't had enough exposure to it myself. But I do listen to other's experience and I have heard many people echo Brendan's point. I have also heard many people say how wonderfully they were treated. I believe both sides to be true To take the grumpy (doctor?) in Brendan's example - I can imagine dealing with a huuuge workload, many of them possibly time-wasters and when Brendan walks in, his view of humanity is less than jaunty. Does that make him/her a bad doctor? A person in the wrong job? And under-resourced doctor? A doctor who just needs a holiday? Or is it more fundamentally a flawed system? If the doctor in question had half the workload and was in better shape to treat Brendan with more care and attention, would it matter if it was private or NHS? If the NHS is offering an inadequate service then what are people's suggestions? Comparing it with private health doesn't really work because no private company could or would want to offer the same global service. I get offered private cover through work but I always tick the box that says "no" - I still retain belief in the NHS So whereas I would retain the concept but change the way it's run (how? I haven't the answer but I can see internal markets et al not being part ofthe solotion) some people fundamentally disagree with even the concept - so perhaps people should state that off the bat to avoid cross-purposes in any argument? Oh - and I wish LtP and anyone else who is unwell a quick recovery

on the subject - and please don't anyone get defensive - I know that people do have ailments and need treatment. I'm not calling anyone specifically a hypochondriac But have I been lucky? Apart from a couple of accidents when I was younger involving appendages I have never needed to go to a doctor. I often get cold-type symptoms, sometimes migraines and a few times some eye infections - but all I ever do is take myself off to bed for a few days until I feel better Approaching 40 I thought that I should at least see if there was anything deeper and registered on Crystal palace Rd and had a check up - which went fine and everyone I dealt with was great But I got the impression that as well as the sick and needy there was a lot of... people who didn't need to be there. That could be just tucked up in bed. But they LIKE spending time and resources down at the clinic. And if the NHS took a different line with them that would free up plenty more resources for the genuinely needy

No way! Well - I'm impressed. I've not heard it on any phones around ED mind. I'm not sure what I would do if I did hear it.

welcome Sephiroth - I used to play FFVII back in my East London days - the music to that last battle is still ingrained in my head!

having it on ITV is good from an accessibility perspective. From a presentation and analysis perspective tho :( I wouldn't worry TOO much about the 2nd leg being away - it can be useful. Come on the Pool

Marmora Man - am I correct in thinking this is meant literally sometimes? It is for me. As a young lad I ate nothing but cereal - 3 bowls at a sitting and if I had nothing else to read I would line up cereal boxed and whatever was in the cupboards in front of me just to have something to read hmmm.. too much info I think

Can we have some more of our NHS employees input on this one? Not sure how your GP friend's suggestion would work in reality MM. How can they guarantee those home visits and 24/7 report - unless they know those 100 families are generally healthy anyway. What if 50 of them were badly injured in a coach crash (extreme example maybe but you can extrapolate your own scenarios)? It's still a case of limited resources dealing with an unknowable amount of demand I'm not arguing that the NHS is perfect or unimprovable - far from it. But as an aspiration "free at point of service to all" is both achievable and behoves us No-one has ever argued it's "free" - I've been paying tax and NI for 21 years and have barely ever used it - so someone else has got all my money! Good luck to them... maybe they needed it more than me (and that applies just as much when I earned ?3000 a year as it does now)

anyway - now that I'm over the shock do I start with the positives or the negatives? Cheers for the response quids - I had an idea during yesterday's dialogue with others that you weren't quite the wilting violet some of your defenders had you down as. Now that the curtain has slipped tho, don't over-compensate by being over-aggressive in other threads y'hear? ;-) Glad you and Moos were happy with the resolution to your discussion - I'm less glad that unsubstantiated claims about censorship, bullying and Stepford-esque attitudes remain flung and unaddressed (not just you btw)

Nice chart... now I'm not saying I'm better than Jesus... that's for you to go home and think about ;-)

When the 10p rate abolition was announced last year I remember turning to Lady MacGabhann and saying what a bad idea it was. What I don't remember is (m)any Labour MPs protesting at the time - so the sudden noise from them strikes me as a bit whiffy

* i appear to have come over all faint * in fact (with all due credit to dulwich mum ) * swoon * when i get my hands on a proper keyboard i might reply to that one properly. But for now i live in hope you join brendan and me on wed night inside 72

Support The Warehouse? Aye Likely Success of Warehouse? Harder to be binary on this one. Strong possibility of "Nay" but hopefully "aye" (although there have been several other threads on the warehouse itself and wether people like it or not) My feeling was that one of the pioneers in the warehouse announced he wasn't able to continue and I thought that was an occassion to commiserate rather than ressurect the whole warehouse "thing" again. I was hoping to leave this thread lie but as someone has thrown a "bullying" accusation into the mix... tog_in_soz: can I reasonably assume you believe quids to be the bullied and me to be the bully (or maybe one of several bullies?) Well this means I either am a bully (and as I have no wish to be one I would love a better explanation of why exactly I fit the category and what I could do to atone) or I'm not a bully and someone who on the face of it suggests arbitration has slyly got a few digs in before suggesting everyone move on? If it's the latter case then, as Lebowski says - "this aggression will not stand. maaan." What does seem ironic is that several people seem to think that "this is a public forum you know - people can say what they like" is a useful way of telling other people to be quiet. Ie - as soon as quids was shouted down for being negative there was a backlash where people said "free speech!!! now shut up and leave him alone" I re-read the thread after seeing Asset's comments and have mixed feelings. Taken on it's own merits (ie this thread alone) there is an arguable case to be made. But apart from having "form" here was a case of: as well as being the first poster on the thread to focus on other's misfortune ("first of many is my verdict") he wasted no time in posting a follow up comment on the reasons why. And his analysis is probably not too far wrong and may prove 100% correct. But the arguments are old and have other threads dedicated to them. Again - this seemed to me like a different kind of thread. Still.. so far so normal What happened next is that people picked up on this negativity and the first punch was thrown by quids with his "I'll leave you in La Di la Stepford SE22". Once again (before it's pointed out YET again) it's a public forum and people can post what they want - but there is no doubting the hosility contained in the sentiment. Where does it come from? A bit of the usual Sean/quids banter followed but then it's not long before the baseless accusations start - "Not a free forum clearly.......or in some posters mind" - if someone is going to say they are being censored they need to have a bit more of a case. To take a fictitious example - If my junkie brother dies of an OD and at the funeral someone says "to be fair he was a junkie and it was more than likely to happen" - the remark might be factually correct but the lack of tact, motive and remorse make it highly dubious. If I were tothen get upset with that person only for them to give it the "it's a free country - I can say what I like" - well again, that person would be right.... but I wouldn't be censoring them by telling them to..... err.. be quiet "But Sean it's an internet forum, not a funeral" Does that relieve anyone of their right to have a bit of suss? Maybe people think it does.... I'm open to opinions either way and why to take a final point : "it is showing a partisan underbelly that makes it less welcoming and unsavoury." partisan underbelly is quite an emotive phrase isn't it? Partisan in what sense? What is the divide and who are the people on either side of it? It's a genuine question btw -

* agrees with Keef on the Fry's Turkish Delight * * disagrees with him on the Cadbury's version with little squares *

am I the only one who.... didn't smell this "whiff"?

if Brendan really used the word "bucko" in that conversation......

cheers Bren - first one is on me

Safe to assume that's at least partly aimed at me. Obviously I'll disagree with it. But your initial point about quids making a valid point is correct. And as I've said already it's a point I share (to a certain extent anyway) - so I'm not having a go at anyone for making any kind of point There is one person who can claim ownership of the forum an it ain't me. And patronising me with stuff like "Whether you post once or a kjillion times we all have as much right to be here and to post." doesn't endear one. No-one I'm aware of is suggesting anyone NOT post. Let's be clear.. one person took particular time out to berate a whole series of posters for being automatons who can't see any bad news- none of those targeted took a defensive "but it's the internet! I have a right to post" stance - they kind of have a grown up attitude to the world - they post, people will disagree, they will disagree back etc But I took particular issue with quids's series of posts not because of his basic point about the warehouse - but for his unremitting negativity not just in this thread but in almost everyone since he joined. And a slow build-up of that negativity led me to post what I did As a basic right he is perfectly entitled to do that. I'm not going to suggest anyone stop him or anyone else. But wether in real life or on the internet, no-one has a "right "to be a boor. Be one if you like but don't get upset if people call you on it.

are people nervous before the next batch of CL games? I'm still crushed we won't be taking part but am lookingforward to the games anyway I'm rooting for a Liverpool v Barca final btw

Has it really been 9 days since someone posted on this one? Anyway - memories of MTV's Ray Coke aside... a gem from Edwyn Collins And another (with a crafty steal from the Velvet Underground)

Third page in! come on people... I saw this today and... well, dear reader.... nostalgia got the better of me

pffft - Lady Moos you deliberately misunderstand me - you know I wasn't referring to geological manifestations of goo.. I was just saying that, y'know... goo - it ROCKS (man!)

where to begin? This post isn't going to be about the Warehouse so feel free to Lounge Administrator ???? - you are beginning to sound ever more hostile and troll-like with every visit. You have posted long enough and frequently enough to paint a picture of an intelligent guy - albeit very embittered about something. I have no idea what but frankly at this point I could care. You would think that someone who posts as relatively regularly could find something positive to say ONCE in a freakin' while, but not you. And then when people turn on you you get all defensive and passive-aggressive. So.. Where is the personal insult to you? Calling you mean-spirited doesn't count.. that's not insulting just factually descriptive. But on the subject of insults: Do I find that insulting? yeah.. but I'll live. But let;s not pretend that you don't stoop to insults Horseshit - the consensus is what it is. You think that the Warehouse isn't commercially viable - most of the people who expressed an opinion on the same subject (including myself) TEND to agree with that point. We agree, FFS. Stop looking for conflict where there isn't any Because yes, the voice of censorship is always prone to politeness viz: "I don't see the need to". It;s a suggestion... think about it before you call it the voice of censorship Why - why keep repeating this? You think you are the only one on here who gets disagreed with? If, everytime someone disagreed with me I started a post with "this is a forum I'm allowed to voice my opinion" I would shoot myself. It's a forum, no-one is stopping you doing anything - they just disagree with you. Deal with it People have been disagreeing with you civilly. Until now I hope. You clearly have the capacity to engage in intelligent debate. People don't have to agree but MY problem with you is you REVEL in the conflict. You rarely, if ever, engage with anyone when there is common ground. You delight in stirring shite. You love teasing people about being "nice" and "stepford" and the pretending that the forum is hypocrytical. I've sent you a couple of PM's personally asking you along to the next drinks and you have blanked me. Which is fair enough - entirely your perogative. But don't give it the large "you all only PRETEND to be nice" when all you are here for is aggro Grow up