fishbiscuits

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think most people vote in what they believe to be the best interests of the country. I really think you give the public more credit than they deserve!

Sometimes worth stepping outside of the echo chamber, and remembering that huge swathes of the country are deeply conservative. Pro-Brexit, anti-immigration, right-wing, opposing increases in taxation and spending. The majority of people are inherently selfish and short-sighted. They'll vote for what they think is best for them and their family in the short term.

Well, if you have the luxury of living in a constituency where the Tories don't stand a chance, then you don't have to vote Labour. If you're in Dulwich and Norwood, the Lib Dems have stood aside, so a vote for the Greens at least sends a clear signal that you're unhappy with Labour's stance on the EU.

Meanwhile.. Labour voters and Corbyn fanclub members up and down the country, desperately trying to convince themselves and others that a vote for Labour is a vote against Brexit. Utterly delusional!!

Yes, Wuli is definitely a little inconsistent, I think that's fair. I really think you were unlucky at Silk Rd, I have had some nice meals there. Master Wei looks good! ever tried Shu Castle on Old Kent Rd? I always pass it... never tried it... Back on more familiar Cantonese ground... Goldmine in Bayswater for the best roast duck...

Yeah MSG is widely used, and in many types of Chinese cooking, there's a good case for calling it an authentic ingredient - traditional, even. Most Chinese places use it, not just cheap ones. Some people think it causes headaches or can trigger asthma, but it's all anecdotal. I'm certainly not convinced. Wong Kei? Bog standard, but probably hits the spot on a boozy night out. Same applies to 90% of the Chinatown restaurants.

Why is "Remove valuables from vehicles overnight" victim-blaming, while "turn off keyless entry" is not? Drawing a comparison with either of these, and the profoundly offensive suggestion that women should dress a certain way to avoid attention, is really pushing it, even by this forum's sometimes bizarre standards. (BTW, I agree with the precaution of removing valuables from vehicles.. but as a piece of advice, it's of limited value in hindsight)

Addisson Lee have Uber-style car tracking too. But I couldn't say whether the drivers get a better deal than Uber or not...

I think I prefer Sturgeon to Corbyn, by quite some margin. At the time of the first Scottish referendum, I really wanted Scotland to stay. But now... if I was Scottish I'd almost certainly want out of this shit show.

Beulah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dragon Castle on top end of Walworth Road was also > ok for Dim Sum although haven't been there for > ages Yeah. I've not been for ages either... TBH mainly because we find Hong Kong City easier to get to. But it used to be quite good. I believe they actually had a dim sum chef making many of the items himself (usually dim sum is bought in), but not sure if it's still the case or not. If you want dim sum that's a bit fancy... A Wong in Victoria is quite something..

I wonder if with this free broadband stuff... they could provide free slow-ish broadband universally, and customers would have to pay to upgrade to fast (e.g. >50Mbps) speeds. And of course still charge business users and leased lines.. and it might be made self-sustaining? (the takeover still needs to be funded, though!!)

Yeah Silk road for Xinjiang style food. (not sure if it's Uyghur-specific or not, as they do have pork on the menu, but it seems geographically correct). Wulli Wulli is OK, the Szechuan section is small but it's not bad at all. The rest of the Anglo-Cantonese type menu is fine, for that type of food. Hong Kong City dim sum is not bad at all, if you've ever had dim sum in Chinatown then it is basically the same thing. I think in the evening they do fixed-priced all-you-can-eat menus, but I've never tried it... it might be fine, I have no idea.. lots of onions, one imagines. Wagamama is not really Chinese... it's more sort of Japanese-ish with a handful of pan-Asian type dishes. I don't even think they have any branches in south London. FWIW I think it's nothing special, but it is consistent... if you find yourself in a shopping mall or a random high street, it's a pretty safe bet. They deserve credit for bringing katsu curry to the masses, although it should really be pork...

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But it won't be the Labour Party running those > nationalised companies Fishbiscuits. It will be > people who know how to run large companies and > ideally keep them in the black. > As for debt, like all borrowing, investment is a > good option that ideally pays for itself over time. But I don't think these purchases can be viewed as traditional investments. Certainly not Royal Mail - which will probably have to be bought at above fair price, with dubious long-term prospects. And presumably the Openreach purchase price will need to be completely written off. So... IMO the "funding" is still a massive question mark. Rail is a bit different, as franchise renewal (or lack of) provides a bit of a clearer path.. and I have to admit I've warmed to it a bit in recent times. I really just wish they'd chosen their targets a bit more carefully.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are so many good examples of > state owned companies successfully competing in > the open marketplace and doing very well. That is > profit that goes back into the state sector. I have nothing against state owned companies, especially when it constitutes vital infrastructure. But Labour seem rather blase when questioned on the financials. If the profits are going to be used to pay off debt, then it isn't really going back into the state, is it? And if the profits are used to reinvest in the services, then how do you pay off the debt? In the case of BT broadband, it isn't going to make any profit at all, because the service is apparently going to become free. So surely the purchase is a one-off hit they will never recoup. Even with something like Royal Mail, which is presumably capable or returning modest profits... how confident are we that it will ever pay for itself?

Please nobody say "plant-based"...

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So many things Not sure any of those things are really criminal allegations, but OK.

"Bidding war"? Or sealed bids? Big difference...

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Labour is publishing a separate "grey book" > alongside its manifesto, to show how it will fund > its promises. Yes yes, but it will almost certainly claim that the nationalisation programme doesn't need funding because the asset offsets the liability. This has been their line all along.

Rail nationalisation is slightly less problematic, due to expiring franchises. But the problem I see here is that as soon as a Tory government gets back in, they will be starved of funding, and we'll be back to another 1980s British Rail scenario.

"Fully costed"... as Labour keep telling us. Except their massive re-nationalisation scheme will involve... - Issuing tens, or hundreds of billions of pounds worth of bonds - Buying shares at inflated rates, either due to typical takeover premiums, or market shock, or both - Relying on these companies to return almost perpetual profit to meet bond repayments, impeding reinvestment - Depreciating assets due to natural decline of some sectors (e.g. mail)

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > fishbiscuits Wrote: > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Isn't the allegation essentially "non-consensual sex"? > No, so much more obviously What, specifically? That the Virginia Giuffre thing is just the tip of the iceberg, and that he was actually a part of a child sex ring?

Captain Marvel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > He's a repellant, lying, sweaty shitbag but apart > from that, I'm not sure what he's done wrong Isn't the allegation essentially "non-consensual sex"? I honestly don't know if he's guilty of that or not, but it certainly sounds "wrong".

Generally it's not noisy, as the trains are not going all that fast along that stretch. What can be rather noisy are the maintenance/engineering trains that you sometimes get along there... including late at night. It's not a daily occurrence though. Ivanhoe Rd is a great location.. easily walkable to any of Lordship Lane, Bellenden Rd, Rye Lane, and Camberwell.

We had a very disappointing meal from Ganapati once... rubbery squid... tough, hard-to-check lamb. But every time since it has been good. They change their menu quite often, maybe they just don't quite hit the mark now and again.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The projected spending alone sends a shiver down my spine I'm also really uncomfortable with all the spending involved. They're saying that nationalisation of infrastructure doesn't require funding because they're taking an asset in return. But I'm not convinced... if it doesn't return a profit then how are you going to repay the debt? And if it is returning a profit, then what's the advantage to the public? As for Royal Mail... if that's not an example of a dying industry, then frankly I don't know what is! If they're going to invest huge sums of public money, I'd rather they invested in things that have a future. Renewable energy technology, electric and self-driving vehicles, motor and battery tech, battery-less energy storage, next-gen aviation... etc, etc.