Huguenot

Interesting little play on this from a historical perspective. It's apparent that the church doesn't have ownership of marriage, it predates christianity and involves an agreement on shared resources. From a Roman perspective it seems to be about citizenship (electoral opportunity) and the right to a roof over your head. I can also imagine growly 'Lord of the Flies' monkey thugs conceding access to water in order to meet social objectives. However I can't imagine either monkeys or partnership-prone Romans being particularly bothered about gender. That's not to say this isn't THE END OF THE WORLD. I'm sure El Pibe could constructively argue that sexual experimentation had no impact on the demise of the Roman Empire, but it always seems to involve gays when it comes to most armageddon predictions.

Well silverfox at least you agree that the church is pro-discrimination and anti-equality. In the sense that the first stage to solving a problem is to recognise it, then that's a step in the right direction. I don't really have a problem with enacting laws that prevent the persecution of people based on their gender, bloodline or sexual preference. I don't really mind members of the church pursing arcane and bloodthirsty medieval religious ceremonies so long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else and they don't get tax breaks for it.. ...oh, damn - they do don't they!

In this case 'common' does not (thank heavens) seem to imply that it recurs regularly, but rather that it's nondescript, of little intrinsic value, underachieving and disposable;-) Unlike as in 'the common tit' - which is suprisingly regular in Singapore. A Common Tit http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/AB103_Hypolycaena_erylus.JPG/320px-AB103_Hypolycaena_erylus.JPG

Limahl was from Wigan. He's now BIG in Norway.

http://www.hertfordshire-genealogy.co.uk/images/people/letchworth-city-band.jpg

But.. but... Rowzeee, Bury never was a market town - it was a parish, then a vestry, then a borough, and now a dump? Never heard of Wigan, is that somewhere cats go to die? heh heh... heh... No, don't hit me, not the face

Bury doesn't seem to have a town council, it seems to have a Bury Metropolitan Borough Council, same as Southwark? ;-)

Or in fact, EXACTLY like it ;-) Metropolitan County of Great Manchester http://www.gmts.co.uk/images/maps/countymap.gif

"Oi, Pibe! Elbow - Bury. Verve - Wigan. Formby - Wigan. I suppose we all look the bleeding same to you!" Isn't that a bit like saying "London? I'm from Southwark!!"

We don't rule by referendum in the UK, we have representative democracy where we elect people to make decisions such as this from a position of informed judgement. Leaving that aside, it is particulary ridiculous to recommend a referendum to make decisions regarding granting freedoms to a minority group that has a legacy of violent persecution lasting centuries - one that is still sustained in many quarters (including the church) to the present day. Finally it is staggering that anyone would imagine that gay marriage has anything to do with anyone but gay people themselves. If someone could only feel happy and fulfilled by oppressing other people and denying them basic freedom of social partnership they should probably be jailed themselves. Bu then silverfox, given your authoritarian religious leanings, I suspect that you'd disagree. That's why your vote dosen't really deserve to count ;-)

Well done England - oh ye of little faith!!

If you were told it by a teacher then you were 'taught' it. That's what the word means. Logic chopping doesn't get away from the fact that this is simply ugly racism. It's also a form racism that has a dramatic and destructive effect on the development and achievements of children. You think it's not racism if you believe it's true. This is racist.

I don't have a problem with property taxes in principle, and I think I discussed in another thread how persuasive I found david_carnell's arguments about a land value tax. Neither do I have a problem with most of your motivations for seeking this tax SC. However the current 'Mansion Tax' as proposed isn't fit for purpose. Cable is bright enough to know that it cannot achieve any of the aims proposed by proponents on this thread such as yourself SC. It is consequently exposed as naked populism - a point made by James Barber. There are solutions for many of my concerns (for example deferring payments for those with no current income such as pensioners to inheritance tax or capital gains premiums), but they are not part of the current proposal. As I've said before, rather than abuse pensioners with an unsupported envy tax that is unlikely to have any impact other than impoverishing people who have worked hard all their lives, an effective solution to the housing crisis needs to legislate to dissuade young people from living alone, stop property squatters, create jobs elsewhere or build more stock. You make your most important point earlier in this thread where you describe it as an 'equalization tax'. Within this you emphasize the foundation of your argument. In your mind it is essentially a socialist goal for the redistribution of wealth from the bourgeoisie to the proletariat. There are no examples of successful socialist states in the world, so it seems illogical to state that pursuing their manifesto could have anything but a destructive impact. People need incentives - if you forcibly deprive them of the rewards for their labour, they simply won't work.

I don't have a problem with property taxes in principle, and I think I discussed in another thread how persuasive I found david_carnell's arguments about a land value tax. Neither do I have a problem with most of your motivations for seeking this tax SC. However the 'Mansion Tax' isn't fit for purpose. Cable is bright enough to know that it cannot achieve any of the aims proposed by proponents on this thread such as yourself SC. It is consequently exposed as naked populism - a point made by James Barber. As I've said before, rather than abuse pensioners with an unsupported envy tax that is unlikely to have any impact other than impoverishing people who have worked hard all their lives, an effective solution to the housing crisis needs to legislate to prevent young people living alone, stop property squatters, create jobs elsewhere or build more stock. You make your most important point earlier in this thread where you describe it as an 'equalization tax'. Within this you emphasize the foundation of your argument. In your mind it is essentially a socialist goal for the redistribution of wealth from the bourgeoisie to the proletariat. There are no examples of successful socialist states in the world, so it seems illogical to state that pursuing their manifesto could have anything but a destructive impact. People need incentives - if you forcibly deprive them of the rewards for their labour, they simply won't work.

Our Creme Eggs are 39g - that's 5g more than the US version - get ready for a full on fondant festival :)

The UK Cadbury's Creme Egg is 39g and 180 calories. Despite rumours, it's been that size since the modern one was introduced in 1971. The US and Canada's are only 34g and 150m calories. Diddled 'em. The AU and NZ Egg's are no longer manufactured locally, but instead are now imported from the UK, resulting a size reduction from 40g to 39g. Ha ha!

Pwllheli 2nds

Computedshorty was around in the 20s. Maybe.

Okay, and this is going to sound weird, but it's a true story. Back when this forum was invented (before the telephone) El Pibe and StraferJack made me pay them ?32.71 a day to not reveal to Quids where I lived. It wasn't about the Euro, they provided cast iron truth that Quids was Aled Jones, and he was going to kill me. Now it all seems silly, but honest truth, you go back and read some of his comments, and he really sounded like the Anglesey crooner. With a knife. You go ahead, believe what you want. Those guys are not what they make themselves out to be.

Come on, this was 88, nobody knew what love was.

"I thought it was all big bounce these days." Well I guess it's about exchange, there's not an unreasonable argument that suggests that information is based on exchange. Unless there is a differential there can't really be an exchange. It doesn't really make much difference whether it's the big chill, or heat death, or however you'd like to define it - once there's no exchange of information existence becomes immaterial. Since the 'big bounce' theory entails an interegnum of essential passivity, then it's kind of like worrying about football whilst peering at your donut. Parkdrive?

The big freeze, or heat death. Both the same really.

Surely you're joking PaulK? It was Marion that was self-righteous, rude, judgmental and abusive - she deserves to be taken to task. You actually think her post was reasonable?

I'm wondering if flushing out the iron oxide deposits exposed a hitherto disguised leak?

I once unknowingly shagged Aled Jones' then girlfriend, and he got really cross.