Blah Blah

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.

Whilst no end of hideous people are rewarded with honours, there certainly is a case for objecting to IDS. It is not just his overseeing of Welfare Reform that is the issue, but that this is a man that has lied throughout his career, on his CV, in Parliament and (like Boris) has never been made to account for any of it. While he oversaw the DWP, the OCO had to get a court order to force him to release figures around suicide rates and deaths of claimants incorrectly found fit to work. He put in place a system whee the decision of disability and mental health is not made by a medical professional, but a clerk, looking for 'descriptors' in the answers given by claimants at their assessments. Information that was not available to claimants initally to prepare them for those assessments, but was eventually leaked by insiders to organisations that could help claimants. Now imagine if you were only to be found suffering from a condition if you described that condition and its impacts by using a defined set of words? For all those reasons, I've signed the petition.

Parks cost money to maintain and keep open. Cars pollute, not only the park but the route to the park. Exemptions from charges could be made for those with blue badges and genuine disability. Most people do not drive cars to their local park. Most parks do not have car parks either. So some perspective on this is common sense.

Mahoody. of course Momentum have a logo, like pretty much every organisation does. So what? I was responding to the false claim that Momentum had a flag with a hammer and sickle on it. At least try to follow the logic of the conversation! As for entryism, of course it is a problem. But how can an expelled member of the Labour Party also be a member of Momentum. The answer is they can't. That is the point. The Tory Party have also suffered the problem of entryism. UKIP members have been encouraged to join the Tories for two years now, to help Boris become leader. So both parties are being taken over by factional interests that do not represent a majority consensus, and that is a preptty dire place for UK politics to be in.

Momentum do not have any flag to be fair, and while many old time militant types are drawn to it, many more are other members are not old enough to remember who Militant were. Lansman imposed the rule that to be a member of Momentum, you also had to be a member of the Labour Party, precisely to try and keep out those old time expelled members. Some local groups ignored the rule. Momentum is a bit more diverse than those on the outside realise. It is certainly not stuffed with Stalinists but nor is it a truly democratic organisation either. That is the problem. And that is why it is easy for militant types to power grab in the way they have.

No Cella, it does not need to go. You need to stop trying to end the discussion others were having before engaging in a tit for tat that you seem hell bend on keeping going. Let the rest of us have a discussion if we want. You don't have to engage with it.

cella Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You've already tried many times to give your version of what a racist is and nobody, apart from > the tinies, are buying it so just go away. The idea that you are now trans supporting in there > somewhere is cracked. Quite. He has been exposed on more than one occasion for the Tommy Robinson loving racist that he really is. He also fails to understand the meaning of champagne socialist as well.

Seven of you sharing an IP still means that you whined to your housemates to put in false complaints though doesn't it - which was I think Admins point ;)

Today there were a group of pro Brexit demonstrators outside parliament with placards and you would think, having finally got a government that will deliver it, that they would be done. But no, their gripe now is that they want a no deal Brexit. Yes folks, they really do think walking away from any trading arrangement with the EU is necessary for their Brexit. I asked one guy holding a no deal sign if he understood what no deal would mean for business who trade with countries in the EU. And he answered by saying he was one of the uneducated majority so he didn't need to understand the those things. That is Brexit in a nutshell.

Grove boy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah Blah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > And so is Johnson kicking 21 MPs out of his > party > > for disagreeing with him a fact, so drop the > > counter claim games Grove Boy, before someone > > calls you a hypocrite ;) > > > That would be a shock, a corbyn cultist name > calling. That's all his crowd of middle class > brats have done, point the finger,deflect any > criticism onto the tories and scream racist at > people, look where it got you. The tories had a > plan whilst labour pointed out how naughty they > thought the tories were, you are doing it now. The > tories done it first argument is weak and it > doesn't mean it was okay for labour to follow > suit, student id politics at it's worst. God help > anyone that disagree's with saint Corbyn and his > cronies. > > > https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/18112219.labour-mp > -lloyd-russell-moyle-calls-anti-corbyn-colleagues- > c-ts/ I am no Corbynista as a simple search of my posting history on this forum can confirm. So go and educate yourself and come back when you know what you are talking about. The only person name calling is YOU btw. Pointing out a fact is not name calling. It is a FACT that Boris Johnson expelled 21 MPs simply for defying the whip. Stop being a hypocrite and acknowledge the significance of that. And stop assuming everyone that calls out your hypocrisy is a Corbynite too. You just make yourself look very stupid otherwise. You can ditch the inverse snobbery too while you are at it.

And so is Johnson kicking 21 MPs out of his party for disagreeing with him a fact, so drop the counter claim games Grove Boy, before someone calls you a hypocrite ;)

What's your view on a party expelling 21 MPs for having a different view to the leader Grove Boy? Ever heard of glass houses and stones?

Agree with the above on membership. This is especially true of the Labour party where leadership contests are open OMOV systems for all members. In my opinion, the real damage was done by allowing any Tom Dick and Harry to vote for just ?3 in that first leadership election at which Corbyn was elected. And sadly, many moderates have terminated their memberships since. Everyone's fear is that the next leader is merely a puppet for the existing leadership. The level of denial from the Corbyn camp is deafening. To see Caludia Webb trying to suggest there were some good things to come out of the election on Newsnight last night typifies the problem.

He wants to put maximum pressure on the EU to agree a trade deal within the time frame. Because with that majority, he can repeal any law he makes as quickly as he sets it. The question is whether or not anyone believes Boris will really leave with no deal. He of all people knows the cost of doing that. So we shall see. On the new leader of the LP. RLB has no presence and will fail just like Corbyn before her. She is the preferred choice of the outgoing leadership because she is one of them, and through her they can continue their real agenda of a longer term socialist revolution. Will she fire Milne for example and employ her own advisors? I bet she won't. And the deluded naval gazing will continue. Personally I think the way back lies with someone like Lisa Nandy. She has been very impressive in debates, is excellent on detail and would grow in the role. Everyone might agree that Niccola Sturgeon was the best leader during the campaign, and the SNP gained by it. In my opinion, Nandy could be as good as Sturgeon given the chance. But whoever the party chooses, until they start to understand that more of the same in a different cloak is going to continue to fail, they are a lost party. Worth taking a look at 'The Wilderness Years' on youtube for a reminder of how the Labour Party have been here before, and how hard it was for someone (Kinnock) to take on the rabid hard left and save it form itself.

Take all of the above advice. Even if this landlady is abiding by the law (and lots to suggest she isn't),keeping the whole deposit for an old tv is unreasonable.

Neither main party is ever history DF. Politics is swings and roundabouts as you well know. And we have an electoral system that does not proportionately reflect how people vote either. Our Governments are consistently made from parties that got less than half the votes cast. Labour will come back eventually.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Labour was disastrously, catastrophically bad, an > agony to behold. A coterie of Corbynites cared > more about gripping power within the party than > saving the country by winning the election. The > national executive committee, a slate of nodding > Corbynite place-persons, disgraced the party with > its sectarian decisions. Once it was plain in > every poll and focus group that Corbynism was > electoral arsenic, they should have propelled him > out, but electoral victory was secondary. > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec > /13/jeremy-corbyn-labour-manifesto-antisemitism-br > exit I agree with this. I was a party member. The last three years have been more about changing the party structure, deselecting MPs, making sure the preferred left candidates are elected to governing bodies like the NEC. The whole this has been a power grab, engineered by Lansman and Momentum. These people do not reflect the wider electorate. They are fringe ideologues, born out of the militant movement of the 80s. The only question is how many elections do Labour have to lose, before they step aside.

Captain Marvel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 'Blair increased public sector personnel by three > million' > > You say that like it's a good thing. > > Anyway, it could be argued ad nauseam, I'm just > suggesting that it looks like the intent is there, > and that clearly not everybody sees demons when > they look at the Conservatives. Then maybe you would like to take a look at this afternoon's headline where No. 12 now says it no longer guarantees the worker and environmental protections it promised to guarantee to get Boris's deal through it's first reading. Still not buying the line of Turkey's voting for Christmas I suppose. And on Blair, after 16 years of Thatcherite under investment that left our schools and hospitals crumbling, I would say those extra personnel absolutely were a good thing. The point is that 50k is a drop in the ocean in a population of 68 million. Any difference is unlikely to be felt with longer life expectancy and growing needs for adult social care.

What they say they will do and what they actually do still remains to be seen Captain Marvel. One of the odd things about investment is how much of it finds its way into the coffers and share portfolios of big contractors too close to ministerial private interests, as opposed to being genuinely felt on the ground. Where is the investment for small business, education and the individual? Tory economic thinking tends to favour big business and grandiose infrastructure, over that start up some long term unemployed person with skills could get going in a declining region. Fifty thousand nurses may also sound great, but Blair increased public sector personnel by three million. Which figure do you think is the one where people really do see a difference in their local community? We all remember the Downing Street speeches where Thatcher quote St.Francis and May promised to help the poor. Neither delivered. Words are easy. Actions speak louder.

I think Louisa got closest to why the working classes have fragmented and didn't get behind Labour this time. Corbyn is a republican, but the working classes traditionally are not republicans, and nor are they interested in ideological arguments around radical politics. Corbyn and his stalwarts had become a parody of a student revolutionary movement. The manifesto was naive and failed completely to understand the underlying aspirational culture of the electorate. People don't want socialism. They want opportunity. Access to decent jobs, owning their own home, good education and healthcare, and so on. All things that a fairer form of capitalism can deliver through a mixed economy. When Labour makes that case, it wins elections. The next leader needs to be someone free of controversial baggage, who can make those arguments and win back working class support, while persuading the middle classes that a fairer society is a more harmonious one. What has gone wrong since the financial crash of 2008 (and let's remember that was a global crash that emanated from the USA), is that austerity policy, felt hardest by those on the ground, the poorest, has been exploited by the likes of Farage (and a xenophobic underbelly led by the far and alt right) who created bogeymen to deflect from the real culprits that have delivered this unfair system of capitalism, namely our own successive governments, that have stripped away upward social mobility. A good example of this is housing supply. The statistics around changing demographics, affordability, non replacement of sold off social homes, and failure to build enough new homes, have become thrown out for some nonsense about immigration. It's almost as though our own governments have had nothing to do with it through their own regressive policies! That is the cognitive dissonance at play here. Labour were right about quite a few things. We do live in a world that is being asset and profit stripped by a ridiculously small number of corporations and individuals and at a time where a growing global population is increasingly aspiration. These two things are going to clash at some point. And what government do to tax and regulation matters in addressing this. This will become an increasing area of discussion in the future. There is nothing that Boris offers in way of addressing any of this. And there is real concern that his Brexit means taking the UK into tax haven territory. Well tax havens increasingly use indirect taxation to fill the deficits lost through direct tax cuts. And the people most affected by that tax structure, are the poorest. But it is also true to say that Boris is not as home and dry as he thinks he is. He now has to deliver on all those promises. He also has around 80 MPs who represent former Labour heartlands, where working class people feel disenfranchised precisely because of the broken structures I cite above. It is not in the Tory mindset to do the kinds of things that need to be done to fix some of those things. So for me, the thing to watch over the next five years, is how hard those 80 MPs work to try and move the direction of the Tory party to genuinely serve those constituents. Or will they not bother? Worth remembering that Boris is the PM who threw out MPs for defying the whip. This is dark territory. Also the noises being made about redressing the power balance between the courts, civil service, Parliament and the Executive are dark territory. There will be plenty for Labour to chew on in opposition, if they finally find the right leader, and a real chance for the Tory party to step into the center ground, if they choose to.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'd like to know who these 'people' are at risk,(or even extreme danger') from 5 years of Boris- I could go so far as to liken the thought of 5 years of Labour to the 'Great Leap Forward' and we all > know how that turned out! Here you go. Here are some of those who have died directly because of the polices of the last nine years, policies that will not change under Boris. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/13/suicides-of-benefit-claimants-reveal-dwp-flaws-says-inquiry https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/a-man-has-killed-himself-because-he-was-found-fit-to-work-exposing-the-monstrous-cruelty-of-the-dwp-10511436.html https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/12/stephanie-bottrill-worried-bedroom-tax-committed-suicide-coroner https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-clapson-benefit-sanctions-death-government-policies https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/thousands-died-after-fit-for-work-assessment-dwp-figures I could list hundreds of these stories. And then don't forget this either! https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/01/homeless-deaths-in-2018-rise-at-highest-level-ons https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48692703 Stop embarrassing yourself with your willful ignorance.