BrandNewGuy

Ah, the right to be forgotten - now being used by the embarrassed and powerful to censor Google: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/02/eu-right-to-be-forgotten-guardian-google

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > True. > > And girl bass players are always hot!

malcolmchurch Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The capitol is definitely closing. Staff have been > told it will be a cinema. Obviously the change to > a cinema might need several hoops to jump through > but it is definitely not "my mate says..." posts > on local forums and that's it". I find your > comments quite insulting! You're entitled to find my comments insulting, and I'm entitled to suggest that what we've heard so far is hearsay.

Hmmm, this Forest Hill cinema thing is beginning to smell a bit rat-like. Couple of "my mate says..." posts on local forums and that's it.

They're using it as a euphemism too. They mean "cheap". If I have ?10 million, nearly all houses in London are affordable to me, but this doesn't make them cheap.

"Affordable" means it can be afforded. All houses are affordable to somebody. "Cheap enough for the less well off to buy" is not a euphemism. "Affordable" is.

The euphemism "affordable housing". You mean "cheap", don't you? No-one talks about getting "affordable flights" with Ryanair and EasyJet, for instance. But I suppose no-one likes to think of themselves living in a cheap house.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So his country who were responsible for him at the > time, lose him for one match (they won't get pst > their next match I don't think), and Liverpool > lose him until the end of October. As I read it, he's also suspended for nine international matches, so Uruguay will lose him for quite a while. Nowhere near long enough ? he should have been banned from all football for a year and made to accept treatment for his 'issues'. But then I guess the lawyers would be all over it like vultures.

JoJo Maman Bebe - wannabe francais And we refer to ED's finest craft beer bar as 'Le Cochon Volant'. Not entirely sure why...

From popbitch: "Some things in life are beyond parody. The Guardian, for example. At a drinks party to celebrate their Sustainable Business Awards they served guests espresso martinis. But they weren't made with Vladivar or Smirnoff or any socially dubious Russian vodka. No. The drinks were made with FAIR vodka: "The world's first vodka made from Fairtrade quinoa". FYI: A big winner at their awards? The CEO of Unilever. FYI2: Unilever signed a "seven-figure" partnership with Guardian News & Media to do "branded content" centred on sustainable living.""

The consultation period ends on June 4th: http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9554210

JamesViktor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have noticed on this thread though, people only > seem to care about East Dulwich! If nothing goes > through East Dulwich there is no point in having > it at all! Perhaps because it's the East Dulwich Forum.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And I tend to agree with Maxxi that Picturehouse's > prices to suit the local area probably means that > the ED Picturehouse will be a bloody expensive way > to see a film. But time will tell on that one I > guess. Well, a quick check reveals that Godzilla (3D) at 18.00ish tomorrow is ?12.50 (adult) in Clapham, Brixton and Hackney, while it's ?12.00 in Greenwich. It's ?8.20 (in 2D) in Edinburgh. And York (also 2D) is ?8.10. So London loks pretty uniform in price.

PokerTime Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There's a general disillusionment with > politicians at the moment, which is why we had a > hung parliament, and look to be heading for > another one next year. Well, we had hung parliament because the votes were split in such a way that no party had an overall majority. This could just as easily be the case with an engaged and positive electorate. Some would argue that the 'all or nothing' nature of majority governments under first-past-the-post has been detrimental to this country over the years and leads to millions of 'wasted' votes.

I think enough voters know that in a proportional system, their Green vote will count. Plus there is already a significant Green group in the Euro Parliament, so they won't be alone.

Euro votes for Southwark: Labour 31,591 Green 9,710 Lib Dem 9,170 Conservative 9,152 UKIP 8,035 BNP 561 Good showing for Labour (unlike in much of the country) and the Greens, with the racist rump trounced.

northlondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > And why are they picking on Picture House when > so > > many other ED businesses don't pay LLD? > > > > The negativity and student union style > posturing > > on this MB often dismays me. And I'm a left of > > centre person, so I can imagine how people on > the > > right feel. > > Characterising people concerned about a living > wage as " moaners" makes you appear selfish and > simple. No, some of those professing to be 'concerned about a living wage' have concentrated their ire on Picturehouse, with no mention of those chains and independents locally who almost certainly do not pay the LLW. That's what looks like posturing rather than genuine concern.

I'm sorry for Robin - she's been as good a local representative on the council as any other, but suffered from the national party effect. I long for the day when all local councillors are independents (as they are in many places in Europe), but I'm not holding my breath.

Labour are still a long way from power. Odds are another hung parliament with post-election horse trading deciding the occupant of No. 10.

I've tried hunting down who does pay LLW locally - or at least has signed up to it. It's not easy to find out, which gives the lie somewhat to the idea that companies would trumpet it from the rooftops. No Sainsburys, Tesco or Co-Op for starters, as far as I can see, so there's lots more boycotting to be done...

But not all small businesses are struggling, just as not all 'chains' are wallowing in cash. It would be interesting to know what percentage of those earning below the LLW are working for small businesses.

I work for an independent business and we pay (more than) the London Living Wage. Why do you think small businesses should be exempt? And what about 'unsuccessful' chains?

Or any other local shop or business that doesn't pay the London Living Wage?

Use the URL on your reminder.

Hmmm, in my experience, your average French bar has generic lager on tap, two customers drinking the local vegetable spirit drink and a bookies in the back room. Can be fun, though, until you realise it shuts at 8.30.