Huguenot

I think you're being too relative with this. There's a difference between subjective and objective evidence. Just because someone off their tits on LSD thinks there's an elephant in the room doesn't mean there is. A series of activities designed to feed the elephant is just going to end up in a messy carpet. Neither ghosts nor Gods pass any objective test for their existence, which whilst it provides no foundation for denying the possibility, certainly provides no reasonable excuse to claim they are more likely to exist than the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Do you believe in that? Please forgive rational people for placing ghosts or Gods in the same category.

You think I'm having a go at you Ms B? Not at all. I'm just interested that's all. I can see that for you it make absolute sense. It's the shop I can't understand. What you say is logical, but it's inefficient. There's a cost on staff, catering and even floor space and overheads. Debenhams isn't a high margin store, it's low margin mass produced stuff. Unless you spend quite a lot on clothes at one sitting then they'll make a loss on everything they sell you - they might as well not have you as a customer. They'd be better off without you. The only argument is to run it as a loss leader, but then everyone would want your special treatment and they couldn't provide it. They'd end up pissing off more customers than they won. Selfridges and Harrods make sense because of the margins and ticket price, but you've already said that you want to save money, not spend it. It's the first time I've come across the idea that this service is available to low margin high street customers as opposed to Premiership WAGs. I just don't get it.

You know what we're gonna need here? We're going to need a few more people helping us out. I'll tell you why. We are going to be spending an obscene amount of money in here. So we're going to need a lot more help sucking up to us, 'cause that's what we really like.

I can see why anyone would want be waited on hand and foot for no fee. That's a no brainier surely? I just can't see how the shop chooses who to give it to: they can't give it to everyone, I can't imagine stamping your foot and demanding it being a good reason, I can't imagine that just being tired by shopping is a good reason (isn't everyone?). The only logical reason would be the Richard Gere / Julia Roberts reason, but if you're not committed to buying anything then why bother?

Well yes and no Ms B. I don't think that science would refute the existence of ghosts or Gods. But science would highlight that the laws of thermodynamics would mean it most unlikely that ghosts would be in the shape of cantankerous old women, and God was unlikely to be in the shape of a Bronze Age patriarch. That would be an altogether too literal interpretation of the argument - requiring human interpretation in an everyday reference frame: i.e. What does this look like that I am already familiar with? On that basis you already have to believe in both ghosts and Gods in order to perceive them; they're a figment of your imagination.

I've already looked at the first chart DaveR, that was where I got my London house sales from. What figure do you want me to look at? Regarding the second house prices index and inflation chart, what's your point? None of these have experienced a sudden introduction of 10% more inventory to the market overnight? Quite happy to consider your analysis.

Ahem Jeremy... The report is clear that there are around 300,000 social properties in London considered to be in the 'expensive' bracket and would be sold under this scheme. The report is clear that the turnover on these houses is 3.5% a year (as opposed to 7% nationally), and that the properties should be disposed of as they become vacant - in other words 10,000 a year. DaveR, don't be a witless knob all your life - how would I get the figures from the report if I hadn't read it? Your own analysis is notable by it's anecdotal hypothecating. When you've got some numbers your opinion will demonstrate some value. I look forward to it.

"As for class war, you could be right, it's the middle classes with bad taste/can't cook mob having a pre-empt strike in removing working class shoppers from their local high street." I'm intrigued to hear your conspiracy theory about how the middle class have orchestrated a war on the working class of East Dulwich of which M&S is a pre-emptive strike. Tell us about those secret meetings, the plans and the strategies. Please do enlighten us?

There's good reason to visit a food store every day, but there's no good reason to visit a menswear department whose clothing line up you consider to be complete and utter rubbish. Unless you're a mad in the head delusional paranoid who thinks they have relationships with people who don't know them.

I like this one... "The staff from the men's department at John Lewis Oxford St usually gives me dirty looks on my way to the food hall. It all started after I said their clothing line up was complete and utter rubbish. " It all started??? What, it's still going? There's 10,000 people a day using this store, you'd have to do something mighty dramatic to be remembered by a sales asistant after an hour, let along a day. Either the conviction that sales people are still persecuting him is wrong - in which case he's a delusional paranoid. Or they're right, in which case he must be stalking them.

I'm not sure why you started insulting me personally DaveR, I'll take it as a reflection of some personal issues and let you sort it out in your own time. It's also self-defeating, since I'm the only person on this thread who supports part of your argument. It would be a foolish man who attacks his potential allies first. In the meantime, let's try and sort out your figures. According to the land registry only around 100,000 of the houses sales in the UK each year actually take place against London property. That's disproportionately small, and reflects the strong rental demand and premiums that means people moving away may choose to rent rather than sell. It's that tiny sales figure alone that has driven the London house price boom. It's 'latent' value in a stifled market that makes London property appear to be so valuable. What the paper proposes (according to their own figures) is selling the 3.5% of London's 300,000 expensive social properties that come available every year through tenant turnover - that's around 10,000 That means a sudden increase in market availability in the London market of 10,000 over 100,000 current annual sales = 10%. An increase in the housing availability of 10% a year over a 25 year period is going to have a spectacular downward impact on house prices. Whilst year 1 may be met by latent demand, the's no way that's going to be sustained, so the medium term forecast would have to be a crash.

Politics is full of idealistic proposals that wouldn't work in practice, it's not a unique badge of honour for this one. It also appears to make the classic mistake of judging assets at 'current market value' - this isn't a real figure when the release of large swathes of inventory would see an instant collapse in value. What ever the merits of a reduction in housing value, the huge negative equity created would catalyse an instant economic collapse and a guarantee of terminal long term depression that would cripple the nation. So in that sense it's neither desirable , practical, nor likely to be executed transparently. So 'sensible' isn't the word I'd use, no.

I still believe that legislation to resolve the housing crisis lies in the abolition of perks for multiple buy-to-let owners who now control around 10% of the housing stock and is the single biggest creator of the current problem. The redistribution of the economy regionally is the second critical factor, driving commercial growth our of London. I also believe that the mass provision of social housing is a completely ridiculous proposition in a modern tax bearing democratic society. The welfare state should be a safety net, not a lifestyle. Welfare payments should only be made in productivity enhancing activities - in other words workfare. However, I don't believe that the wholesale sell off of existing property is a workable solution, and I share SJ and DJKQ's view that the odds of the proceeds going back into social housing is near as dammit none.

A few irritating effete Frenchmen and 300 years of colonial history.

I didn't know this kind of person existed for free, I'm intrigued. In a shop isn't that the job of the sales assistant? If it's a dedicated sales assistant just for you, I wonder how they justify the cost, or how they justify giving some shoppers precedence over others? Is there a minimum spend?

The point was, if someone wants Iceland, attacking M&S or the planning application isn't going to bring them back. I'm guessing that if you really want Iceland to take up the lease you should create a campaign group and contact Iceland head office, ask them to offer more for the lease, and you'll find the outcome would be useful. They'd love the PR and it would be cheaper and more effective for them than a single page in the Daily Hate. I don't really think that'll happen because apart from the small core of nearby residents with genuine concerns, the real motivator for the rump of protestors seems to be class war, immigration, anti government and a smattering of nimbyism. I look forward to being proven wrong.

Sure sure, but planning laws don't give you the opportunity to force Iceland to stay - they can only prevent the alteration works. People keep talking as if protesting against the plans will force Iceland to stay. It won't. Instead of complaining about M&S you should be protesting about this evil store Iceland that has simply walked off and dumped you in your hour of need. They didn't care about you, you we just a number to them, a wallet, a mark.

"I'll probably could offer [sic] an expert shopper service for men given my knowledge of fashion but I often wondered if I could do a similar service for women." Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha *weeps* I'm guessing the 'could' was an edit added later on that caused the syntax error, before that it was just a straight offer. A sort of cross between Gok Wan, Marvin and a cross-eyed Big Brother braggart Of course! Alan Partridge (with thanks to Jeremy). As David Hasselhof said 'I've got taste, it's inbred in me'. Hahaha

addy, there's at least two threads on this forum of people asking about car wash and valet - those might be the guys to ask, no? It's not rocket science!

South Africa might do on recent form, but to claim that Australia or India deserve it more is crazy talk. We thrashed India 4-nil last year, two of which we won by an innings. Australia recently barely beat a woeful West Indies team. In the face of such obvious results it beats me why people would come out with such crap. It's tedious 'boo boy' sports trolling. I'm interested ladida, do you actually believe what you're saying when you say that, or are you just trying to show off?

Sorry AM, I wasn't saying that Iceland doesn't offer value, it most certainly does - apparently all of its fruit and veg is organic, who'da known? I was commenting on the campaign to prevent an M&S. If you want Iceland to stay that's another question entirely, for which you'd surely be better off petitioning Iceland themselves rather than the Southwark planning unit? After all, the planners can't force Iceland to stay can they? They can only prevent the freeholder's renovation works. I imagine Iceland would be overjoyed about a local petition asking them to retain their presence on the ED vital community contribution list. You'd have TV cameras everywhere talking about it. Might be a bit embarrassing though. You could get UDT to front it up ;-)

The motivations of the objectors are intriguing. There seems to be a small but legitimate foundation of those in the immediate neighbourhood concerned about traffic and delivery management, but a huge rump engaged in class war hysteria. Others aligned to a 'save our traditional high street' agenda seem wilfully and bizarrely blind to the fact that the current shop is that flagship of seventies clone high streets, an 'Iceland' store. A nastier example of plastic blandness is hard to find. It's also a monstrous carbuncle of post war architecture for which a total facelift is a moral obligation, not an aesthetic conundrum. There's even a disturbing subset of objectors who seem to be using this store application as a proxy to engage in right wing propaganda about too many immigrants having access to houses. Oh, and of course we have a berserker contingent who are determined to prove this is the government stealing from us all. Doolally. UDT is on some sort of uncontrolled rampage against M&S because other people are 'suckers to brands' at the same time as admitting that he never enters the store, and so any view he has must be based on prejudice and assumption derived entirely from the brand itself. Amazing. Delicious irony. Most of those in support of M&S are simply interested because it seems to be a fairly straightforward convenience shop that delivers food marginally better than Vesta meals. This doesn't seem unreasonable surely? Apart from the fact that the application really has little to do with M&S and more to do with commercial expansion. Hilarious.

Oh grief. As John Cleese says, it's not the despair, I can live with the despair.... It's the hope I can't stand.

Yes, that's why DVDs are only similar to LPs, but the other way around? DVDs are read from the centre of the disc out, not from the outside in. In DVD R discs there's a second layer inside the disc, and usually the laser would read from the outside in, but that's literally inside the disc. In a single layer pre stamped DVD there's no inside, just the outside. This reminds me of a tea towel description of cricket...

A CD or DVD reads data in a similar way to an LP - in concentric circles (but from the inside out rather than the other way). If you scratch it in parallel with the data stream (ie. in a circular action) the reader can easily lose its path by following the scratch. However, if you scratch perpendicular to the stream (along the radius of the disc) the reader will just hope across the gap and carry on wherein left off. So that toothpaste recommendation looks crazy for two reasons - one is that the circular action will result in parallel scratching, and secondly that some toothpastes are abrasive. I tend to use spectacles spray and a spectacles cloth, gently stroking the spray off from the inside edge to the outside - to avoid scratching and leave the surface completely clean. I'm not sure what the long term effect of this is, but it's never failed to rescue a DVD.