Kevin Carr's Gloves 3392 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 And now apparently they made the whole thing up and it is in fact Oliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9536 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 And now apparently they made the whole thing up and it is in fact Oliver. Didn't they get that stat from respondents of one baby name website? Of course there will be thousands of morons losing their shit over this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 15268 Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/nov/24/-sp-is-saving-newcastle-mission-impossible I'm getting to the stage where I detest the current Labour opposition nearly as much for not destroying the cunts at every opportunity on stuff like that.A sort of companion piece here by Jonathon Freeland. Massive contradictions between Osborne's words and deeds on public spending. Labours front bench should be crucifying the fucker... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/05/george-osborne-wigan-pier-1930s-chancellor-voters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marinasogs Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 Just to be clear, Chasym, it will be implemented as a job not a class. Im sure thats what you meant though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14312 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Charlie's been on the sauce again. Hang on... Charles Kennedy... Kennedy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5011 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Anyone following the oil price issue with respect of Russia? Looks like it might be a US backed move to reduce prices in order to destabilise the Russian economy. It's working, if true (although at some cost, one would imagine). The Rouble has been tanking as a result though, so it looks like a good move. Pretty unfair on Russia of course. A counter for the Sino-Russian oil deal perhaps? Or am I just conspiracy theorising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 I assume the US just asked The Saudis to increase supply enough to tip the price. It's why the US has that relationship with them in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5011 Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Agreed, although obviously it's harming the UK's North Sea interests as well. Which I think we're just taking on the chin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 15268 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Agreed, although obviously it's harming the UK's North Sea interests as well. Which I think we're just taking on the chin. Contractor's fees cut by 10%, employees wages frozen according to the BBC this morning, tax revenues plummeting... Wonder what the Scottish Nationalists make of it all?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3392 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Contractor's fees cut by 10%, employees wages frozen according to the BBC this morning, tax revenues plummeting... Wonder what the Scottish Nationalists make of it all?.... It's a fuck up but hey ho. Opec are doing it for 2 reasons 1. Russia 2. To fuck with fracking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 27450 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I assume the US just asked The Saudis to increase supply enough to tip the price. It's why the US has that relationship with them in any case. It isn't exactly ideal for the US oil industry with their high production costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 31769 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I assume the US just asked The Saudis to increase supply enough to tip the price. It's why the US has that relationship with them in any case. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 37256 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/24/iain-duncan-smith-disabled-ms-parkinsons-dwp It took this week's Bugle to bring this to my attention. People with degenerative illnesses reclassified as "able to work soon", and moved on to lower benefits. Able to work once, you know, they recover from their progressively worsening health conditions. Ian Duncan Smith could do with Ebola for Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 17701 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 I saw yesterday that under EU rules obesity can be classed as a disability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 37256 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Using Outlook on a Google phone is too, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 17701 Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Using Outlook on a Google phone is too, I think. Who does that? I have Google Calender dont you know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 28863 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30747185 So 'hard working taxpayers', (If I hear one more slimy fucking Tory come out with this phrase I swear to God. ) will not be able to strike unless they have 40% votes from ALL eligible voters. They'd also end a ban on agency workers taking their places. Only 15 out 303 Tory politicians secured more than 40% of all eligible votes in their constituencies. (Not sure how many of the eligible voters were hard working, how many were scroungers or how many were lazy workers). So basically, do as we say, not as we do, take what we give you, not we are given ourselves and have even less rights than we've already taken off you through the years. No, just carry on being 'hard working' for your bosses, (Gawd bless 'em) so they get better bonuses and better incentives and don't worry so much about yourselves and your hard working family. Or you still working hard? Good, good. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 37256 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 That's fucking scandalous HMHM. Meant to comment on it the other day. In other news, inflation down to 0.5% and set to fall further in the coming months. Osborne taking the credit, even thought it's almost entirely attributable to the collapse in oil prices. The plus side is that real wages are now growing. The poor are getting richer! Plus interest rates are very unlikely to move this year. Good for the debt ridden, like me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 17701 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Does that mean we are going to specify a minimum turnout for all local and national elections otherwise they are void? Local election turnout on average is 30%. That last by-election was 38%! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 7341 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Party Politics should be dead, with the modern technology and the internet, why do we need someone, who we likely didn't vote for, to vote "on our behalf" by proxy on anything, we could easily vote ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5011 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Party Politics should be dead, with the modern technology and the internet, why do we need someone, who we likely didn't vote for, to vote "on our behalf" by proxy on anything, we could easily vote ourselves. Very true, but I think the rationale is that for most day to day issues, people wouldn't bother. As such, you have someone employed to 'pay attention' and who you trust (supposedly) to represent your interests based on their election pledges. We'd probably have to all be reading up on political decisions quite frequently in order to make it work. On the bigger and more obvious issues mind, there's no reason why such a system couldn't be employed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 27450 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 I can imagine tax and welfare issues might be hard to decide via a popular vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5011 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Also true - we need people to take the tough decisions as your average people are (perhaps justifiably) never going to be well informed enough to make the right calls on a number of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 7341 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Also true - we need people to take the tough decisions as your average people are (perhaps justifiably) never going to be well informed enough to make the right calls on a number of things. Agree to a point, but in the current system the tough decisions are taken down party lines irrespective of how informed every MP is, how often is there a free vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4068 Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 I remember a Doctor Who from probably the Peter Davison era where he visited a planet where the president had to explain his major decisions on TV and the people registered disagreement by pressing a button which gave him an electric shock proportional to the degree of disapproval. It seemed like a good idea at the time - probably because it would have been Thatcher if applied in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now