LondonMix

I imagine he got more than 100k. To be frank, if someone offered me 100k to get belittled, punched in the face and then harassed by the public with death threats I'd turn it down flat. I'm not poor but not so rich that 100k isn't serious money to me but in no way would it be worth it.

Agreed rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I actually liked the sign. I dunno, get the > impression that whatever the did, people would be > moaning. Clearly it won't be to everyone's taste, > but at least it's somewhere new and it's good to > see pubs opening up instead of being turned into > flats for once.

Thanks DaveR-- very good article regarding the complexities of the issue. DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Health spending cannot be set by fans of Facebook > and Instagram > Pictures of dying children come up against the > hard facts of funding, writes Anjana Ahuja > To have the option of saving a child?s life and to > reject it seems more than callous. It is the > ugliest of affronts to human dignity. This > sentiment is behind the largest ever public > petition to the UK parliament. By Tuesday morning, > a campaign calling for all children under 11, not > just babies, to be vaccinated against meningitis B > had acquired more than 750,000 signatures ? far > more than the 100,000 required to trigger a > parliamentary debate. > Many signatories were stirred into action by > photographs of dying children, posted by bereaved > parents on social media. > Each photograph brings a statistical rarity > wretchedly to life. In an era when government > spending priorities on healthcare are shaped by > data and statistics but the currency of democracy > is social media, clashes between populism and > prudence are inevitable. We are moving into > perilous territory: a healthcare system that bends > under the weight of public opinion runs the risk > of overpaying for drugs and eventual collapse. > The brain and spinal cord are protected by > membranes called the meninges, which become > infected and inflamed in meningitis. The flu-like > illness can be caused either by a virus or, more > worryingly, by bacteria. Bacterial meningitis is > often associated with septicaemia (blood > poisoning), which can result in amputation, organ > failure or death. > The disease can move quickly and aggressively, > especially in very young children, with meningitis > B accounting for 90 per cent of the roughly 2,000 > cases seen in Britain each year. About one patient > in 10 dies. The infection is adept at hiding from > the immune system, making it a tough therapeutic > target, but the Swiss-based pharmaceutical company > Novartis struck gold in 2013 with Bexsero, the > first vaccine produced by ?genome-based reverse > vaccinology?. By 2015, Bex?sero was in the hands > of GlaxoSmithKline and approved for inclusion on > the UK?s immunisation schedule for under-ones. > (Parents of older children are seeking the vaccine > privately and supplies are running short.) > Since meningitis B is thankfully rare, it is > difficult to evaluate Bexsero?s efficacy; the toll > can fluctuate naturally and has dropped by roughly > half over the past decade. The vaccine?s > effectiveness has been deduced from lab tests > only, which show that it stimulates the production > of antibodies. The UK, in fact, is the only > country with Bexsero on its childhood immunisation > programme. > The main reason the vaccine has not been adopted > for older children is cash. In the UK and many > other countries, new therapies and vaccines must > pass a stringent cost-benefit analysis, tied to a > metric called ?QALY? (quality-adjusted life > years). The rule of thumb is that if a new > treatment gives a patient an extra year of good > quality life for ?30,000, then it is worth the > money. > In a system of finite resources, however, this > means that for every treatment that is funded, > another must be rejected. It is worth noting that > when the UK?s Joint Committee on Vaccination and > Immunisation first considered Bexsero in 2013, it > rejected the vaccine outright, as not > cost-effective at any price. > In an ideal world, we would all wish for every > child to be vaccinated against every preventable > disease, and for every sick person to get the very > best treatment. In the real world, that would cost > the earth and most people do not want to pay the > taxes needed to sustain a healthcare system > capable of satisfying infinite demand. > And so, alas, decent public health experts and > epidemiologists must carry out the thoroughly > indecent business of advising ministers on which > conditions merit our money and, as a result of > balancing the equation, which conditions should > miss out. Sadly, social media rarely shows both > sides of the equation.

Sorry, I responded before I saw the request not to. If you want to discuss it with me please pm me not to take the thread of topic but I agree with mrssilencio.

Singalto, have the experts involved 100% concluded that the cat in ED is linked to the mutilations in Croydon? I understand there is some forensic analysis that they are carrying out to link the mutilations.

I absolutely agree with every word of this. mrsilencio Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry, but I'm not sure how giving the colour of > his skin is going to help in any way. It could > have been a completely innocent incident, so if I > tell you it was a short white guy then what, > you're going to hunt down white guys feeding cats > with malicious intent and ignore everyone else? We > aren't vigilantes here, and it is extremely > unproductive sharing what could be misleading > information. > > 101 took a full description and have passed it on > to the team dealing with it. They are the experts > here and will use it to help build a profile or > eliminate it as they see fit. If they deem it > useful information, they know where they can look > for CCTV footagr too. I have also spoken to > someone at SNARL. > > I appreciate this is an extremely emotive topic, > but let's be rational here. Vigilance is more > helpful than hysteria.

Otta why don't you like the new relationship. Apparently its been planned for a while by the show runner but I have to say I didn't see it coming. I'm not so sure it means one of them will die (soon).

No one is trying to save the car park for parking. The idea is to make the change of use of the car park that will be in place for the next 5 years permanent. The car park can't be taken down without destroying the cinema (which is not at risk of closing for financial reasons only because of the council's redevelopment plans). So the goal is to preserve the cinema and use the car park for something more useful as Peckham Levels will be doing.

Hope you are okay fox. If you were last tested 2 years ago you should be okay as the polyps take 10 years to grow from memory (hence why early screening and detection are so important).

Thanks

That will look wrong to almost everyone. Old timers will find it preposterously high while the newest arrivals will find it ridiculously low.

And regarding the pubs, others on this thread have already stated that the characterisation of how they were managed isn't correct. I don't know either way, but given all the misinformation being spread by the pro-toy store advocates, I wouldn't be surprised.

Its a non sequitur because not always doing a good job managing their assets in no way relieves the estate of its legal fiduciary responsibility to maximise revenue. Its like saying if you have ever broken a rule, the expectation is that rules no longer apply to you at all, which of course is idiotic. I'm also not buying any line. I have read the financial accounts for myself, which I've linked- can you say the same rabbitears? That you feel the need to try to undermine and attack the bursaries for the benefit of a for profit small business chain shows a really warped sense of social justice. The revenue from the Dulwich Estate is passed on to the beneficiaries, including the Alms House and 2 state schools. 3 of the beneficiaries are private schools and with their share they provide bursaries to students who otherwise would not be able to attend (the stated aim from the inception of the charity). In the case of Jags, the vast, vast majority of the students in receipt of bursaries are very, very poor and in all instances for the 3 schools, most of the bursaries go to students who need significant (75% or more reduction) with the fees. However, even if the landlord in question wasn't using the money to fund bursaries, the toy shop has zero expectation of a discount on rent. Its a small for profit chain. The biggest hypocrisy is that if all the people up in arms actually used the toy store, it would be able to pay market rent! You get the shops you support financially. Protesting after the fact because it makes you feel good about yourself is silly. rabbitears Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Saying that Dulwich Estate should be maximising > > their revenue better with the pubs is no kind > of > > argument for why the toy shop deserves below > > market rents. Its a total non-sequitur. > > It's not a non sequitur. In fact, it sequits > closely. It shows very clearl that the Dulwich > Estate is absolutely rubbish at maximising market > rents in the reality that they're given when two > huge pubs that could be turning a profit for both > landlord and lessee are almost derelict. > > I find it incredible that you're swallowing the > charity line - this is an entity that owns a huge > swathe of south east London and yet is managing to > pay the school fees of a handful of kids. There's > a lot more private landlords that are putting > their kids through private school and own far less > land than Dulwich Estate!

That's a terrible article full of false information and inaccuracies, particularly the quote below: "More striking is the assumption that it?s okay to force viable shops out of business if it pays for the bursaries." This line from the article shows the fundamental misunderstanding of those supporting the toy shop. If the shop cannot pay market rents, then its not a viable business. No one has argued that the rents are not at the current market level and as they are, Dulwich Estate has every right and fiduciary obligation to charge that rate.

Why did the music stop? Was the music offering mismanaged or did punters just loose interest?

Like I said, I am pretty sure your higher number include the junior school (though not DUCKs). The bursaries are only for the senior school (year 7 and beyond) and so I am using the senior school figures to calculate the percentages.

bawdy-nan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I took the information from the published official > accounts on their website. I'm not clear whether > the 75-100% figure is additional to the 100% > figure. My information is from their published accounts as well. Bursaries are only for the senior school which is why the pupil numbers differ. You might be right about the 68 including the 19 full scholarships. I can't be sure about that. So at worse, 5.1% are on 75-100% and 11.8% in total are on some kind of partial bursary. JAG's information is much more detailed. I've heard before that Alleyn's offers the highest proportion of bursaries of the 3 schools but I haven't come across their accounts.

For those interested- here is JAG's information. http://www.jags.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/JAGS-Statutory-Accounts-Year-ended-31-8-15.pdf They disburse 1.9m in bursaries of which 1.4 typically comes from the Dulwich Estate, the rest comes from additional fund raising they've done to provide more scholarships. The provided 121 bursaries in 2015 (which is 15.5% of total pupils- senior school population is 781) Of these: 53 covered 100% of the fees 49 covered between 99.9% and circa 75% of the fees. So roughly 84% of all of the bursaries were awarded to cover vast majority of the fees. To get full fee remission household income can't exceed 13k (among other factors) so those 53 children on full awards are genuinely from very low income families.

Either way, its clear they need the funding to support the bursaries. I'm aware Alleyn's is trying to fund raise an additional endowment so that it can offer more scholarships. They are in the process of raising millions so they can permanently offer an additional 12 full fee bursaries in perpetuity (on top of what the offer with the funds from the Estate).

I found the information on page 7 here which doesn't exactly match http://www.dulwich.org.uk/docs/default-source/annual-report-and-accounts/dulwich-college-financial-statements-for-the-year-ended-31-july-2014.pdf?sfvrsn=10 Dulwich College has 1,339 pupils. The college provided 158 pupils with bursaries in 2014-- so 11.8% of the school's intake is on some form of needs tested bursary. 19 are on 100% bursary-- 1.4% of the total school population 68 are on 75%-100% bursary- and additional 5.1% of the schools total population So 87 kids are on near full scholarship, more than half of the total bursaries the school provides.

Actually never mind, 48 pupils on near full bursaries if they were boarders would actually be 1.8m which almost the cost of the annual bursary from Dulwich estate. If you have the link though, I'd be interested in reading more about the breakdown.

Bawdy-nan can you provide a link please? The figures sound slightly off. 4% of pupils would be about 48 pupils.

I think the first few series were the best-- the analysis of human nature and the danger human beings become to each other during crisis was really interesting. I still love it though as its a show with genuine suspense. They regularly kill of longstanding well-loved characters though it has been a while since a truly core cast member died. Hershel was probably the last time. Does anyone think they have the guts to kill of any of the core characters: * Daryl * Carl * Carol * Michonne * Maggie * Glenn If I had to guess, it would be Maggie or Carol but the show has enough secondary characters now that probably won't feel the need to kill of a main character this season. I think Daryl, Glenn and Michonne are virtually unkillable at the moment.

I agree. Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jah Lush Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Mick Mac Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > I think people in ED are more likely to go > out > > in > > > Peckham than Herne Hill. It's got something > > > different from ED but HH doesn't. Cant see > much > > > attraction with HH. > > > > > > I don't agree with that at all. I've lived in > > Dulwich and some surrounding areas all my life > and > > I've always frequented the Half Moon and other > > places in Herne Hill too. Probably much more so > > than Peckham. > > I mean now rather than before. I see HH as > offering something similar to ED, but I now know > more people in ED who would see Peckham as the > obvious alternative to a night out in ED. > > I'd love to see the Half Moon reopen. I'd travel > to that. I was there a couple of times to see > music but it seemed to be dying even then. I think > it maybe stopped offering music well before the > flood?

Malumbu- the deptford cinema is showing some good films. I can recommend both Gamorra and The Secret in Their Eyes.