Dogkennelhillbilly

You're just proposing how it was before - which is how we end up with congestion for hours every day and rubbish air quality. Doing nothing is not an option.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought that might?ve been unpopular. Where do > you actually live? I don't know if what you wrote is unpopular, but it was certainly silly. I don't live on Court Lane (or near it).

The solution to car congestion is not to supply more roads. You could bulldoze all the houses on Court Lane and turn it into a dual carriageway - there would still be car congestion at either end.

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can roads be redesignated into 'main' roads. > Would some of the problems disappear if court lane > was redesignated as a main road. > It is certainly wide enough and does not have the > bends and narrowness of East Dulwich Grove. > And would link two, presently cut-off areas. We could redesignate my back garden as a safari park but it won't mean there will be any tigers. In what sense are Dulwich Village and the top of Lordship Lane "cut off"? The whole problem is that they're heavily congested for many hours a day!

I've signed the petition and will be writing to councillors, MP, and the Estate. It is an outrage that the deadbeat pubco has allowed the pub to lie vacant and become an eyesore.

Melvyn Bragg and his art dealer brother Kelvin at sIon in West Dulwich. They were talking quite loudly about constructivist architecture and Nectar cards.

"People congregating in this manner create an obstacle for both cyclists and pedestrians." And weirdly it's only the Range Rover mob moaning about it. Loving the arguments here: not being able to drive from my house to the local shop is a breach of my human rights, but people should not be allowed to sit in the open air and listen to tweet music without a government licence. Brilliant!

"Personally average speed cameras would sort this out in a relatively short time" Not in London it wouldn't. Practically no-one is averaging 30mph+ over half a mile in ED. It's all nobbers accelerating up to 40 and zooming around corners, then stopping at the lights 200 feet down the road. None of them get to their destination quicker.

Cafes and restaurants don't have to apply the scheme. I can easily imagine they didn't know how to claim or didn't want to sign up for a scheme that involves a bunch of new paperwork and accounting and a promise by this totally inept government to get some money back in the future. They gave OP half his money back to get him to piss off. It doesn't show that they're engaged in some orchestrated scam to fiddle the tax man out of ?2.43 on OP's beans on toast. The OP is defamatory.

This is a weird thread. Unless councillors walk around with some sort of sandwich board, how would I recognise them? If I wanted to get hold of one, I'd email or phone them, or show up to a surgery or meeting.

Yes.

Karen Bardsley, closely examining the labels of vitamin bottles in the health shop opposite the Co-Op.

Well, that's encouraging!

I believe, Nigello, that that clothes bin is operated by Tvind, a bizarre Danish religious cult. However I haven't checked the label to see if the site has changed hands recently so perhaps I am wrong. But beware of Tvind, Gaia, Humana or anything with a Danish connection or website.

Every few months I sign back in to the forum and see it's the same 2-3 nobbers dominating conversation with their bonkers opinions, quixotic punctuation and chronic desire to make themselves the centre of attention. It's such a shame as it drags down the quality of the forum as a whole. Rye Lane is a bit of a dump. It's dirty (the plastic hair extensions blowing like tumbleweed outside the line of hair shops is particularly rough), with bad street furniture, and the buildings are for the most part grotty. However, it's got some useful shops, some nice coffee places etc, and good transport. The newly reopened Iceland is great- presumably.ably those who moaned at great length about the Lordship Lane Iceland closing will be heading there now. It seems like there's a cluster of buildings near the Nags Head (by the Afghan kitchen and the big fish shop) that are getting ready for redevelopment. If that's done well, it would change the whole street. Equally, TfL should imho knock down the crappy arcade that fronts Peckham Rye station and replace it with a plaza that could still have market stalls. Equally the shopping centre could be knocked down and rebuilt with far more retail and housing - if we don't get density on sites like that, then where are all these new homes going to be built? It's inevitable that fashionable and innovative start ups (cafes, arts, small businesses) are usually going to locate in low rent neighbourhoods - you don't try stuff out at Mayfair rents. It's also inevitable that when the majority of real property is controlled by the private sector, when a neighbourhood improves, rents will go up, and poorer people and less profitable businesses will end up leaving. I don't know what the answer there is - rent controls? Nationalising shopping centres? Deliberately leaving some areas to be shitty so they're cheap? Trying to make sure none of the areas of London are shitty?

Frank Furedi buying childproofing socket covers in Dulwich DIY.

"Note to youth ... when you start paying your own phone bills, your college accommodation and living expenses then tell us where society is going wrong" Note to oldies ... when you start paying your own heating costs, transport costs, living costs and care expenses then tell us where society is going wrong. Note to sick people ... when you start paying your own healthcare costs and living expenses then tell us where society is going wrong. ...etc etc.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > judges have a > very narrow view of the 'real' world and the > general public is often outraged at too lenient > sentences. This is an argument made by people who have very little experience of the criminal justice system. Criminal judges spend thousands of hours a year listening and reading about the most depressing, harrowing crimes, depraved people, people horribly abused, people at the absolute lowest points of their lives, and their circumstances, and addiction, and poverty, and illness, and evil...and you think they don't know what the real world is like? You think the social media consultants, shopkeepers, stockbrokers and scaffolders know more than they do about this stuff? I know a judge that spent a year and a half doing nothing but child sexual assault trials. She is not Oxbridge, white or male. She started out as a duty solicitor not a million miles from East Dulwich. There is a huge shortage of judges in England and Wales. And of course 90% of criminal trials are dealt with at magistrates courts. Magistrates rarely oxbridge lawyers, and usually not lawyers at all. In fact you could apply. And finally it's a myth that judges are more lenient than the public - there have been loads of studies in which real life fact matrices were given to members of the public along with sentencing guidelines, and the public almost always gave a more lenient sentence than was actually handed down.

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > quoting that particular statistic > about London, completely misses the point that not > everyone in London is part of the (sneering) > liberal elite. It is therefore a very bad point. It's a very good point. Sneering and suggesting Bremainers are a metropolitan elite is a bad point (in fact, a bunch of cockwaffle). You can't make out that the elite consists of 48% of the UK population or 60% of the London population, especially when it was the poorest parts of London that disproportionately voted remain. You're just going to have to get over yourself and realise that plenty of people disagreed with you, and you can't paint all of them as "teh elite". Why do you care anyway? You won and you're getting your way - shouldn't you be pleased? Saying "a lot of people are saying the same thing as I believe" is simply Trumpian and just shows there are other people talking rubbish.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > what is selfish about not wanting to > donate half your tax and national insurance money > to free-loaders and their dodgy families Which families were you thinking of? The Barclays, the Candys, the Hindujas, the Bransons, the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas, the Thatchers, the Kalanicks, the Bezoses...?

"unfairness: the predispositions and world-views of judges, the pantomime of the trial, the ill-educated nature of juries, the refusal to see social determination of crime (ressentiment and revenge, all the time)." Why do you think those prejudices only lead to unduly harsh sentences? Why do you think it harms the independence of the judiciary when one part of the judiciary reviews the conduct of another part? Why do you think juries are inferior to you?

robbin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "The Brexiteers can then be sent back to the > periphery of politics where they belong." > > Ah, the pompous metropolitan bubble's sneering...It > was 52% of the population that voted to leave, you > numpty. I dunno how you get to the conclusion there's a metropolitan remain bubble when 48% of the UK voted remain and 40% of London voted leave. (You numpty).

I am strangely gripped by his thread.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jules-and-Boo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > what exactly is the specialism of the company > > May's husband owns? Tax avoidance? > > All sorts - Mr.May works in the pensions division, > which obviously benefits from the firm's overall > investment strategy. > > According to The Independent last year: > > portfolio also includes $20 billion of shares in > Amazon and Starbucks, both of which were cited by > the Prime Minister-designate in her pledge to > crack down on tax avoidance yesterday. > > Latest filings to US authorities show that Los > Angeles based Capital Group owns huge stakes in a > variety of companies, including investment bank JP > Morgan Chase, defence giant Lockheed Martin, > tobacco company Philip Morris International, the > pharmaceutical sector?s Merck & Co, and also > Ryanair. > > So p'raps not the most ethics-driven outfit one > could imagine. Not that I've got a brief to defend him, but global capitalism is inherently interconnected. You can't just work in the "nice department". If you're not working for Starbucks, you're certainly connected in a chain to them (or someone of equal stature) somehow.

it's just providing a way for a higher court to review a sentence to see if it's ridiculously lenient. The sentencing power remains with the judiciary and not the executive, and the courts are perfectly happy to tell the prosecutors to sod off.