Jump to content

Recommended Posts

a pint of milk at exorbitant prices


Would that be milk paid for so that the producer actually makes a profit unlike the chain stores that don't pay even what it costs to produce and thus have forced many dairy farmers out of business in the UK?


Big Supermarkets in this country supply us with rubbish meat and rubbish fruit and vegetables with no flavour and we stupidly buy them.


Give me a French supermarket anytime.

I don't know but it is probably organic milk. Don't we all subsidise french agriculture by the EU and not our own dairy farmers?

I always buy british pork products though as we rear our pigs outdoors whereas other european countries do not- especially Denmark.

The French did get farming subsidies but we get subsidies too and European development money and so. It's just the French place an importance on the quality of the food they produce whereas we don't.


The big supermarkets force farmers to grow hardy (but flavourless) varieties of crops - so they can be shipped around the world for packaging and then back to us. Strawberries are a very good example of that.


Chicken is also something that has been meesed up. We used to grow a breed that takes six months to grow. It actually had a different shape but the important thing is that it was higher in protein content than fat. Now we rear a breed that takes only 12 weeks and is more fat than protein, and then is further injected with water and colourant. It's cheaper to produce and thefore sell, but is poor quality and nutritionally not very good for you.


Supermarkets are an industry and everything about how they produce and sell food is industrial. They exist to dominate the market and make money, not to provide us with good nutrition and quality food (whilst bullying producers into non-profitability - as with milk). Bakeries, butchers, fishmongers, and markets have always been guaranteed ways of getting truly fresh food - but most have been forced out of business.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Andy is an absolute star. Have used him for years and he’s become a hugely trusted and valued friend as well as handyman. Always willing to go the extra mile and doesn’t cut corners, but great on pricing. Can’t recommend enough.
    • Surely you are still covered under these circumstances even if you don't have the physical licence? I can't believe you would be prevented from driving? That would be a ridiculous system. I don't recall any delays   when mine was renewed. Why would their medical department be involved if you have no medical issues? Could someone have made some admin mistake somewhere along the line?
    • Does anyone have the same problem.  I am 79 and have sent my licence renewal form to the DVLA on the 21st October 20 which they have received. I have just received a letter from them them dated 22 December 2025 today saying my licence is with their Drivers Medal Department and will be processed as soon as possible. This follows my telephone call to them after three weeks  from the October date as I had not received my licence back as per their time frame. I also followed this up mid December after finally getting through but did not get any confirmation as to what the situation was. Is this normal practice? On the 7 January 2026 I will be unable to drive as my licence has not been sent back. I have no medical issues and meet all the requirements with no problem as per previous renewals in fact nothing has changed health wise.Their the letter states if they need any more details from me, they will contact me directly. Why has it taken 2 and a half months get get this far? Is this some sort of ploy to get older drivers to finally give up their driving by making life difficult as possible.  Has anyone else experienced this. Read Medical not Medal.
    • You're being a little disingenuous here. It is simply not true that "the area should remain suburban 2/3 storeys maximum" because: -> the area the development is in isn't 2/3 storeys maximum today - as evidenced by the school on the lot adjoining the development to the south, as well as the similarly-sized buildings to the north and east.  -> the SPG doesn't preclude this type of development anyway. This "genie in a bottle" stuff is desperate barrel-scraping. Now you're raising the spectre of a 9 storey building on the Gibbs & Dandy site (the chance would be a fine thing) but also arguing Southwark is too slow to approve things and opposed to development more than 2-3 storeys!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...