Blah Blah

Yep, arrogance indeed. I was right to point to the ignorance on display from DF. That is not merely opinion, it is there for everyone to see for themselves. As for worry, leave voters are not an island. If the economy struggles we ALL suffer. If worker protections are removed, we ALL suffer. If we let ignorance reign, we ALL suffer. But not the millionaires who conned people into voting for Brexit of course. They will continue as before.

Dulwich Fox wrote 'But why do we have to pay ?Billions to have them inforced.' We don't pay ?11 billion for that. We pay it so that UK businesses can have tariff free trade with 500 million consumers, tariffs that would cost ?40 billion outside of the EU with no trade deal. So once again you show how little you really understand.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I said there are over 4,200 of them. > I do not know what those laws are or how they > affect us .... and that's the problem And there you have it folks. The admission that DF didn't know what he was voting for. A simple bit of research is all it takes DF to educate yourself on EU directives. If you had done that, you would know that most EU law relates to trade, and environmental protections, Health and Safety etc. This is also precisely why you can not answer any question that demands you show an understanding of detail. It is also why you make stuff up,. like the EU telling us to sell houses to foreigners - quite ridiculous. And the worst part of it is, that ignorant people like you are prepared to risk the future economy of the UK and livelihoods of who knows how many people for that ignorance. Totally selfish.

We can use any passport that is valid irregardless of the colour of the cover. Do you really think those who have recently renewed their passports are going to have to change them because the cover is red?

Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You might not like what I say or the way I say it > - but I promise you I'm not trying to score > points > > But nor can I just watch anyone (in this case it's > Foxy - repeatedly) just post a load of objectively > false nonsense and let it lie - it's bad enough > this is happening. It's worse still that the same > nonsense gets repeated out of the blue like this This. It is a public forum. If someone repeatedly posts stuff that isn't true, others have the right to repeatedly push back. No-one is forced to read it, and yes it can be exhausting. But that is the nature of the beast. I think it also typifies why this nation is now going to be vehemently divided for some time to come.

...

Stop deflecting DF. Answer the question.

But you still have not told us what Brussels tells us to do. And it seems from your posts that the only concern you have is around immigration, because that is all you talk about. And edited to add that under EU regulations, we have ALWAYS had the power to send anyone back to their EU country if they did not find work after three months. But Farage never told you that.

Spot on Exdulwicher. Brexit is an ideology. It is not based in detail or fact or reason. DF, you ask us to wonder why our economy is failing. How about we start with the cost of Brexit so far? It has cost us more then the entire 40 years of membership fees we have paid, over the last three years, and we haven't even left yet! Not sure either why you think the EU are responsible for any economic failure. The world has changed, was changing when we joined the EEC. Britain was already in decline in the light of post war competition from emerging economies in the far east and Asia and that will continue to be the case outside of the EU. And it is not the EU that sets the rules on property ownership either, but individual governments. So not sure where you get that nonsense from.

Brexit was never about the truth and detail. It is ideological. And as with all ideologies, all reason goes out of the window.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > PS if ?the rebate is taken off the ?350m before > it's paid, i.e. we paid ?250m up front...? then > it?s not a rebate - it?s an abatement It's all a bit academic now. Brexit has already cost us more than the entire cost of 40 years of membership. The false economy is already with us.

Yes Dulwich Fox, how does the EU prevent us running our own country? I could swear that when I got to any other country within the EU that they are all different to each other. I never once get confused as to where I am. You are writing absolute piffle. Only 13 per cent of UK law is impacted by EU directives and more specifically in the areas of trading compliance and workforce protections. Every single trade deal in the world, has aspects of compliance written into it btw, which you would know if you knew anything about trade agreements. But you don't and because of that, you have put a whole raft of trade and jobs at risk so that you could get rid of 'free movement'. There is a reason why Farage focused on that and appealed to base xenophobia (foreigners are responsible for all our woes) as the scapegoat for policy that our own governments imposed. It is because people like you are too lazy to look past 40 years of deliberately misleading headlines from a mainly right wing press that doesn't want you to have a balanced fact based opinion. You have been conned. It is just a question of when, not if, you begin to understand that.

Everything is going to depend on the trade deal. And we won't really know what kind of Brexit we have until those negotiations are finished. For now, nothing changes. But there are signals already from Downing Street that things like maternity leave and holiday pay are going to go. So the predicted attack on workers protections is definitely coming no matter what kind of trade deal we end up getting.

There will be CCTV on the bus but more crucially, the man who attacked him will have used an Oyster card or debit card for his fare, and that will be traceable. Should be easy for the Police to find him.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Perhaps you would like to explain exactly what you > mean by "rabid champagne socialist ignorant > element"? Anyone that doesn't agree with his xenophobic far right outlook basically.

FreyaMikaelson Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The silent majority voted for this. Don't expect > everybody to be bummed out. I don't call a third of the electorate or a quarter of the population a majority (silent or otherwise). All the little Englanders have done is set this country up for decades of a bitter divide.

Definitely contact the bus company. Most (if not all) buses have onboard CCTV and there is a good chance the camera will have piced up the collision if you can identify which particular bus it was.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I see from the attachment that the lock was cut- this is concerning for those of us who do use the > bike racks by M&S. would be good if you could let us know what kind of lock was cut within minutes > of going into M&S if you don?t mind? In one of the photos you can see a cheap cable (combination?) lock wrapped round the handlebar. There is a lot of nonsense in this thread about locks. Gold standard D Locks are the only way to minimise theft. Cable locks, combination locks, chains etc are cut through in seconds. Most gold standard D Locks need an angle grinder to cut. They are called gold standard for a reason. While no-one should be stealing anyone's bicycle, we sadly do not live in a world like that. It's a hard lesson to learn.

Well Iran have put an $80 million bounty on Trump's head, so that's worked out well for him.

And now Uncleglen amazes us with his utter lack of knowledge about Dominic Raab :D

It sounds to me as though she is a cat that finds certain types of noise threatening/ certain types of activity around her threatening and expects to rule the roost. Almost certainly, she was not properly socialised as a kitten and that can be difficult to correct later on. I think the advice above is good advice and you should try everything you can. But it may also come to a point where the only solution is a different kind of home. One without much going on, without children etc. There are foster carers that specialise in improving socialisation at charities like The Cats Protection League and Celia Hammond who might be worth contacting for advice and help too. She sounds like a lovely cat though, who deserves every chance.

I would imagine most responsible cat owners already do chip their cats, but chipping is no guarantee that a cat will be returned (we've had three chipped cats go missing over the last 10 years that were never returned). Who is going to go around the country checking cat owners cats anyway? I can't see councils collecting owners cats for chipping either. Most dog charities regularly have free chipping days and that seems to be the most effective way of increasing chip rates. A similar scheme for cats seems like the best course of action. I think the RSPCA do already offer this with their low cost inoculation scheme. Other charities offer free chipping with low cost neutering.

The other thing to understand is that bedroom tax applies only to social housing tenants. These are tenants who on the whole, have the lowest rents. Who knows what logic went through IDS's head there, in singling out tenants who already cost the welfare system least. The vast bulk of Housing Benefits go to private landlords! Everything about this tax is ideological when you consider the actual facts. And assurances made on exemptions (around disability for example) were never kept. The latest figures show that nine out of ten homes are unaffordable to low income renters (which includes those in receipt of Benefits). It is a complete lack of joined up thinking to create reforms that make housing those on low incomes harder, while doing nothing to improve the amount of suitable housing stock available for them to rent. This is the fundamental flaw in Tory thinking.

Your deflection from the facts is deeply offensive Uncleglen. Justifying the deaths of thousands of people with some exaggerated nonsense about benefit fraud. Is that your rationale? Drive the most vulnerable to an early death in case they defraud the system instead? I would say that when a diabetic dies because his insulin goes off, because he can not put electric on the meter to keep his fridge on, because he has been sanctioned, that causation is everything. The DWP were fully aware he was a vulnerable person. When a middle aged woman, leaves a note, blaming welfare reform and the bedroom tax specifically, before walking out in front of a lorry on a motorway, that causation is everything. Do I really have to list links to a long list of coroner's reports to get through to you? Are you really that determined to casually pass of the deaths of thousands of people as nothing? To pass off a deliberate move to leave millions of people with NO money for six weeks, having to use food banks? Let's see how you cope with no access to any money whatsoever for six weeks! Let's see how you cope if you are found fit to work while dealing with a degenerative illness that kills you a month later. UC has also put two thirds of tenants into rent arrears. Because you see, that is what happens when you make people wait six weeks for any welfare. What people like you forget is that most of us pay tax at some point in our lives that is supposed to pay for a dignified safety net when we need it. What IDS created was a welfare system with punitive and cruel failures built into it. Now if you were arguing that any new system might have unforeseen issues, then fair enough. But the real crime is that IDS did NOTHING when the obvious issues became apparent. Like you he tried to brush them off as insignificant and bury his head in denials around causation. No-one in any professional capacity could make him see the evidence. There is no defense of his attitude to those adversely impacted, none whatsoever, and even less defense of his failure to act. Benefit fraud has never been more than a tiny percentage of all claims. But then researching the real facts was never your strong point was it? Well here are the facts for you. More than two thirds of decisions that found claimants fit for work were overturned by tribunals that ruled that the DWP got it wrong, and those people were waiting on average for a year to get to that decision. The only people who should be making decisions on a person's claim for disability, is a qualified medical professional. Leaving that decision to admin staff with NO medical qualification whatsoever, who never even meet the client, is a recipe for disaster. You don't have to be Einstein to see that. Claimants with genuine conditions, especially those being assessed for PIP, still have to go through hoops to get the help they are entitled to. And they are being treated like they have never worked in the process. I have had eight years of clients facing difficulty navigating this system and know a great deal more than you about the reality of that. Amber Rudd did make some crucial changes to eradicate some of the problems. But then she was happy to engage with and listen to the professionals having to clean up the carnage of the system. IDS never cared, and never gave any of it a second thought. So give it up Uncle. This is one issue on which playing Devil's Advocate will not serve you well.

IDS resigned because Osborne reduced the percentage of income that could be kept by a UC claimants. It does not absolve him from imposing and overseeing a system that directly led to the suicides of thousands of people. A system that left many more dying from the conditions they were ill with after being found fit for work, or the millions requiring food banks while being denied any benefits for six weeks after transferring to UC. ALL of that lies squarely at IDS and he did nothing in face of the evidence to address any of it. The DWP had to be taken to court again and again, and it lost again and again, and still IDS did nothing to change anything (and you might want to look at the cost to the DWP of all of this. It far outstrips any savings that were supposed to be made). IDS lied to Parliament over available data and again, had to be taken to court to release what he knew would be indefensible figures. Only when he was gone, did his successors (and especially Amber Rudd) start to make the changes needed to ease the problems. I will embarrass you with the details if you persist with your nonsense Uncleglen. As for bedroom tax, even there, you fail to understand the issues. The percentage of those under occupying social homes was very small, and most were doing so because local authorities had nowhere to move them to (something the legislation took no account of and subsequently the government had to give grants to those lumped with the tax and no option to move). Similarly, the extra bedrooms in social housing are so small that most of them can barely accommodate a single bed and wardrobe, hence a successful court challenge that defined a minimum floor space before a room could be considered an extra bedroom. That is before we get into the issues with those using an extra room for carers and medical equipment. Even one suicide is one too many. I know many Tory voters who wouldn't even defend what you are defending.