Huguenot

I would neverthless be wary of responding to your fair lady's challenge by telling her she's a forty-something woman with bad legs.

With RPI inflation running at 5.3%, I guess nobody's going to get a round of applause for fixing only a 2% raise after a 2 year pay freeze. However, I must admit I'm confused. On another thread in this section tt3 you seem to be celebrating the spending cuts (even though this is wierd given government spending is still rising) and damning the lack of coverage with a student-like desire to believe any hearsay or conspiracy theory you come across. Your question to James appeared to be deliberately baiting him, and not a small bit snotty. If you are geninely unaware why a general election is not in the interests of either party, then I can assure you that you're not the astute political commentator you think you are, and I advise you to google it. What are you actually trying to say here? Or are you just taking a contrary position on every issue? I've no desire to discuss issues with debaters with no integrity.

I'm not sure that Clegg sold out his party - it was more that getting into power exposed the contradictions and conflicting philosophies mired within it. It didn't matter who the leader was, getting into power was always going to involve significant acts of betrayal to followers whose beliefs had never been tested. Clegg achieved significant concessions, but has been let down by the fickleness of his supporters. The betrayal is theirs, not his.

I can't believe that you drive your dog to Dulwich Park in order to walk it. ;-)

Most of the attacks on Clegg seem to be utterly witless. It seems the emotional projectile diarrhoea that was triggered by the death of Diana seems to have permeated every aspect of British society. It's as if every moron thinks they have a valid opinion that should shouted from the roof tops, regardless of how poorly informed or gormless they are.

Ha! Umm.. Gulp Umm... Ehem! Nnnnn... Oh! Tsk.

It's the contradictions that make this complaint bemusing. If they make the bases elsewhere, why would they be getting spelt flour delivered from a factory unit in Vauxhall? A pointless and evidently fabricated slagging off. 0/10.

Ha! Very clever. It should really be the clumsy anglicisation of paninos, or just panini - already in the plural? A worthy installation in the grammar nazi handbook!

So much respect for DJKQ

I'm not sure that Mugabe, Hitler, paedophiles and Bin Laden are comparable, let alone with Thatcher.

Tarot?

:)) I admire the supernatural depth of your vision Tarot.

White and Christian? He sounds pretty oppressed if you ask me...

What colour skin did your American friend have?

Ideally you need to break the job down into all its component parts and then ask builders pitching for the business to offer dates, labour and materials costs against each. The builder will need to do this anyway to organise the tradesmen, so there shouldn't be too much trouble. When you look at the different quotes you'll probably see big differences on some lines - these are the ones you need to question more closesly. Look in particular for large differences in materials - builders may attempt to over order 'to be on the safe side' and then carry off surplus! You should expect to pay a small amount up front for materials, but subsequently stage your payments only against achievements of the tasks originally quoted. You should not pay for labour up front, because you can be sure that the builder doesn't!! Rip offs only happen when you pay so much in advance that it's more interesting for the builder to run off than finish the job properly. Be prepared to try and find a third party who works independently who can check on the quality of the job for you on a regular basis. Finally always keep back a reasonable sum of money until after the snagging is finished and building regulators have checked it meets legal standards. NEVER pay for a job before its finished. Materials yes sometimes, labour NO.

I understand that - but I think it's a bit disproportionate, after all it's only a couple of hours! I'd accept comparisons between institutions that have equivalence - maybe if we took it on an industry by industry basis: for example how does a UK protestant slogging electronics industry match up against the Finnish one? I'm not sure where to look for the data for that one, but it must be there.

Scottish independence as a stepping stone to withdrawal from the EU? That 's a new one. Historically I guess if Scotland were to make trading ties with the UK weaker, they would naturally turn to France, so you'd imagine EU ties would be required to get stronger? If that's the case it would need serious consideration. What part of the EU is it that you don't like? Human Rights? Common Market? Central bank? Foreigners in general?

Because I'm always spitting feathers? It was such a peculiar thing to say, I'm wondering which of his current string of prejudices led him to conclude that I must be part Indian?

I wasn't antse about the flaw in the argument, it was because it was becoming an argument about Thatcher which I had no intention of being dragged into. You have to take each country on a case by case basis. Finland is not comparative. It only has a population of 5m, which introduces all sorts if statistical aberrations. Its primary industries are electronics (like Nokia) and wood, which are both export businesses. If you cherry picked the 5m people in the UK that worked in the electronics and export industries, you'd find UK 'productivity' would be sky high too. The problem is that unlike Finland, we have an additional 55m people, and not everyone can work in electronics and exports. My point is that sweeping statements about worker efficiency based on national GDP divided by worked hours is not a valid foundation from which to build an argument about employee welfare rights. In fact it's quite the opposite - it tells us that if you want to increase worker productivity, fire a lot of people...

"I can understand you getting rattled being part Indian" Eh? Was that supposed to be an insult? If there was some 'Indian' in me would that mean that I was bad? Or stupid?

Tarot...

Gollyhonky

No, it's about self-determination. You can't let the Serbs make a decision on Kosovo.

I can see through your subterfuge silverfox, but then I think a blind warthog in a cellar with the lights turned off sporting a blindfold could do that. The 'No' campaign including yourself persistently lied to voters and treated them like gormless sheep. The only reason the electorate didn't know this was because Britain's biggest selling newspapers repeated these lies and endorsed their dishonesty. I don't think the people are 'animals with no mind of their own', that's what the 'No' campaign thinks. I think the people were ripped off and decieved by greedy, self-serving but terribly efficient liars. If you bother to use any sort of discretion in your media selection then you'd be surprised what you can learn.

I'm a bit bored with it. You cited the French as an example of high productivity based generally accepted figures. I pointed out how these figures were generated and observed that UK 'productivity' dropped as employment rose. I pointed that in periods of economic depression it's 'high value' jobs that are kept - and when employment once again rises its usually in low value roles, so due to the way it's calculated, 'productivity' appears to drop. Traditionally the Frence have less of a focus on high employment. That's why unemployment for the under 25s is running at 50% Hence their 'productivity' has nothing to do with the efficiency and capability of molly-coddled French workers - the point you appeared to be making. That's all I'm saying. If you want to carry on nit-picking issues that I'm not trying to raise you'll need to do it with someon else ;-)