silverfox

There is no problem. Since medieval times hawkers need a licence. Pay up or shut up.

I suppose it does depend to some extent on who recognises it, otherwise every proud parent would have sired successful off-spring which cannot possibly be the case. There has to be some objective measure. As regards the tramps my answer is no, as it would be for someone who followed their own path in an ashram and spent 20 years trying to roll the perfect spliff, meeting all his goals and objectives by doing so. However on some of the woolly definitions above both tramps and levitating high as a kite hippy could be successful.

So in your opinion undisputedtruth Ghandi was successful. To put it another way, you recognize that Ghandi was successful (as do I). Therefore Ghandi has been deemed to be a success because of others, third parties, who have measured it. Had bandy legs (as he was affectionately known by Private Eye) become a hermit and contemplated injustice no one would now regard him as a success no matter how admirable his thoughts, which we wouldn't know about. Success then cannot be simply what you want it to be - an internalised rose tinted view - it is something observed and recognized by others.

There seems to be a lot of pseudo-Buddhist nonsense creeping into this thread. Reality Check - success is not a simple matter of following your own path. This is meaningless drivel. Success is what others agree it to be. It is external of your efforts. An independent universal. I might think I'm successful because of X, but if others don't agree then I'm deluding myself. Sucess is measureable, depending how others measure it. If I turned up at some ashram in India/Nepal with no money/US Dollars, a kick up the ass as they turn me away would give me all the enlightment I need to know. Edited for spelling

The example of cars is a good one. Sometimes we confuse 'the trappings of success' with the real thing. If I see someone driving an expensive Porsche or Rolls Royce or wearing a Rolex I assume they are successful. However, they may not have those desirable items through their own efforts and may have inherited money or the item or have been given them by successful(ie rich)parents. On the other hand, some people who can be generally viewed as 'failures' in their lifetime become recognised for their success after their death. For example, Vincent van Gogh or some of the great writers of the 19th Century who nearly starved in garrets writing what are now recognised as great works of art. The pity here is that their talent and creative genius did nothing for them while they were alive. 'Success' has many forms. There have been many 'succesful' ruling tyrants and drug dealers who brought misery to millions as well as many successful people who have brought enjoyment to millions (eg, Walt Disney, J k Rowling). Some successful businessmen, for example, have excelled in stripping companies of assets and laying off staff to make the company leaner, fitter and more profitable. While a small to medium sized-businessman who builds up a company that employs a few hundred workers may not be seen to be as successsful but may have made a more valuable contribution to the local community. To misquote Shakespeare: Some are born successful, some achieve success, and some have success thrust upon them.

I suppose it depends who is doing the measuring. I've known many a driven person who has been 'successful' in the sense of achieving a high position in a company with high financial rewards yet have 'failed' in two or three marriages and are estranged from their children because of their ambition. A person can be successful in his or her chosen field but can be unknown outside that field and not necessarily well rewarded financially, eg, academics, medicine etc Many a teacher has inspired some of their pupils to love a subject and to go on flourish in that subject yet It is difficult to say that teacher is a success if you measure success by wealth, position, power and being a household name, being pictured on the front of magazines and interviewed on television. In short, there are degrees of success and it is a relative term. Strangely, we all seem to recognize success when we see it.

"...talk about kicking the can down the road, when do we run out of road... And the really big elephant... what can?t be paid won?t be paid, but history has shown us ..." I see what you mean ScrumpyJack

What is this rubbish? Please keep such twaddle on Facebook - not in the Drawing Room

Depends what you mean by matter.

Albedo The difference in the reflection of light between the face of a planet facing its sun and the face turned away from that sun As in: "...They measured the amount of light coming from the planet's "night side" - when it is directly in front of its star. They compared that to the light coming from its "day side", just before it passes behind its star and Kepler sees it bathed in light. The difference between the two gives a measure of how much light the planet reflects - or its albedo In our Solar System, clouds on Jupiter give it an albedo of 52%; Earth's is about 37%. But it appears that TrES-2b reflects less than 1% of its star's light. "This albedo is darker than that of black acrylic paint or coal - it's weird," Dr Kipping told BBC News..." (Darkest exoplanet spotted by astronomers http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14476411)

True Loz. they were re-elected even though we knew they bent the rules (or they created the rules to benefit themselves). definitely a failing of our electoral system. It would be difficult to explain this to some of the rioters who are about to get criminal records for being caught up in the excitement and frenzy of the looting where a defence of "I was only doing what everyone else was doing" will not wash with the courts.

in fairness Loz we elect our representatives on trust and if every candidate had to confess every skeleton in his or her cupboard we probably wouldn't have any candidates at all. But we do expect them to act with propriety when they are in office. The anonymous writer of the article over-labours the point that there is an element of dishonesty and wrong doing at all levels of society and some of the criticism of the behaviour and morals (or lack of) of the 'underclass' is a bit hypocritical.

Not sure it's that simple Fabricio. And while the academic excerpt you posted has some interesting points it doesn't help me much. I'm not sure it is just about overcoming the death of another person. In rural areas even today (eg, agricultural parts of France, Ireland) it is not uncommon for the majority of the town/village to turn out to pay their respects at a funeral. this may be because of the relatively small size of the community and the deceased was known to them, or at least members of the family are. They were part of the group/community. In areas with larger populations, less agricultural and therefore less bound by group norms, it was still common in the recent past for local neighbours to line the streets as the hearse went past and men could be seen tipping their hats as a mark of respect. However, the action of purchasing flowers and a card to leave at the scene of a fatality of a total stranger does not seem to me to fall into this category. It appears to be the conscious decision to become involved, to share (somebody else's) pain and by doing so - well that's the point - by doing so ... What? Is it that the Internet age has led to such fragmentation, dividing people into smaller and smaller groups according to their (perceived) interests that the very act of kindness in purchasing flowers for the deceased stranger is a yearning to be part of a bigger community or group?

Interesting how the reference to the riots suggests this letter is contemporary. The writer is obviously unaware of the death of David Cameron's father (widely covered in the news earlier this year) which makes him or her look rather foolish.

Interesting Fabricio and I'm sure there are all sorts of psychological and group dynamics going on here. I can understand hundreds of school children laying flowers and leaving messages on the death of a school member - the deceased was one of them, part of the group. However I can't fathom what motivates a person who, on hearing of the tragic death of a child killed crossing the road for example, decides to go to a florist and lays flowers at the scene for a total stranger. What makes that person want to, or feel the need to, get involved in something that has nothing to do with him or her? It's as if they feel part of the events unfolding and there is the desire to become one of the 'actors' in the drama.

Good question Marmora Man - it's something I've always wondered about. The need to get involved. It's as if the private realm has become confused with the public realm. It's also a form of ritualisation, probably because of the decline in the influence of religion. And don't forget, this social phenomenon was happening before the rise of social media.

One cannot 'feel' pedantry ... One can consider it a waste of time or regard it as ... etc etc

I had to do an emergency stop there the other night when a driver trying to cross from Underhill Road pulled out into the middle of Barry Road hidden from view behind a number 12. It's getting like dodgem cars there now. Why not re-open the bottom of Friern Road so cars can head down towards the park that way to relieve the pressure on the junction?

Hi edhistory, Are you saying a renaissant catholic church in England was asking parliament to deport the Irish Catholics? This is not a loaded question. I'm genuinely interested in your reply. (edited to correct predictive text)

This handsome couple might be interested http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019320/Jacqui-Moore-celebrates-divorce-asking-new-partner-tattoo-ENTIRE-body.html

Showboat said: "...As for Silverfox...wow. Were you mugged by a tattood person in your youth or something? You bigoted freak. Get a sense of perspective and stop being a hater. Or get to the Village where your way of life isn't threatened. Disgusting..." I don't know why you're getting your knickers in a twist, with all these accusations of hatred etc. I'm actually doing Pedro a great favour with his market research. I'm sure Pedro is sensible enough to realise that the handful of people expressing enthusiasm for the idea above and the odd butterfly on a misshapen cellulite buttock aren't going to help him put bread on the table. If it's that good an idea why don't you put your money where your gob is and go into patnership. When it all goes pear shaped and you're pushing your inks and needles down Lordship lane in a broken Sainsbury's trolley don't blame me.

Wandsworth prison might be more your clientele - plenty of highly paid creative and artistic types in there - although you may have to be paid in snout.

Fascinating interview on Radio 5 this morning. A Norwegian lady* made a very well argued defence of the fact that in Norway criminals serve a maximum of 21 years in prison no matter what the crime. The 21 year limit is a proud principle, a mark of that enlightened and civilised society and the lady argued Norway should not abandon its principles because of the terrible actions that have just occurred. To do so would weaken Norway's liberal identity. However, sticking to this principle could result in a man who has been arrested for killing more than 100 people walking free in his late 40s/early 50s, which I imagine would be an insult to the memory of the victims. (* sorry, missed her name and position)

Vegetarians are the biggest threat to humanity. If they stopped hogging fertile land growing nutritionless mung beans and soya there would be more room to graze cattle, sheep and geese (for fois gras) etc to feed the growing population

Dunno, perhaps you have to be inked and tatted to understand the slang