|
DesperateDan posted:Didn't they already rabble rouse about dropping the minimum wage in the tabloids about it (standard water testing device) a few times before quietly dropping it? A bit of googling indicates that Dominic Raab floated the idea of dropping it for under 21s but that went nowhere.
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:35 |
|
|
# ? May 24, 2024 18:19 |
|
I can see no problem whatsoever with privatizing the organization that has the final say over the ownership of all land in the country.
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:36 |
|
Sorry Sir; I think you find that you don't own the land that your house is on: Land Registry Services Ltd (a Tesco company) found that we own it and can build a supermarket on it. Now get off my land, or we'll charge you with trespassing!
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:39 |
|
I can't remember but did the Major government have a going out of government sale, everything must go! bout of privatisations when the writing was on the wall? I know that they had just presided over a devaluation of the pound, the popping of a property bubble, a monumental amount of sleaze and had privatised BR, but did they try and rush through anything else before the election in May '97?
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:44 |
|
LemonDrizzle posted:I can see no problem whatsoever with privatizing the organization that has the final say over the ownership of all land in the country. The power of enclosing land and owning property was brought into the creation by your ancestors by the sword; which first did murder their fellow creatures, men, and after plunder or steal away their land, and left this land successively to you, their children. And therefore, though you did not kill or thieve, yet you hold that cursed thing in your hand by the power of the sword; and so you justify the wicked deeds of your fathers, and that sin of your fathers shall be visited upon the head of you and your children to the third and fourth generation, and longer too, till your bloody and thieving power be rooted out of the land.
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:46 |
|
General China posted:The price of pharmaceuticals and drugs continues to amaze me. Take for example paracetamol. Cheapest are tablets you swallow, next most expensive is intravenous paracetamol ( in a large glass vial with a handy doo-dad you can use to hang it from a drip stand ) and the most expensive form of paracetamol is suppositories. What is economy of scale? Alex.
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:47 |
|
General China posted:The price of pharmaceuticals and drugs continues to amaze me. Take for example paracetamol. Cheapest are tablets you swallow, next most expensive is intravenous paracetamol ( in a large glass vial with a handy doo-dad you can use to hang it from a drip stand ) and the most expensive form of paracetamol is suppositories. Economies of scale. The cost is in setting up the manufacturing, how often do people take paracetamol via the rectum?
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:48 |
|
General China posted:The power of enclosing land and owning property was brought into the creation by your ancestors by the sword; which first did murder their fellow creatures, men, and after plunder or steal away their land, and left this land successively to you, their children. And therefore, though you did not kill or thieve, yet you hold that cursed thing in your hand by the power of the sword; and so you justify the wicked deeds of your fathers, and that sin of your fathers shall be visited upon the head of you and your children to the third and fourth generation, and longer too, till your bloody and thieving power be rooted out of the land. What's that from? (Unless you wrote it, in which case bravo sir)
|
# ? May 5, 2014 23:57 |
|
ThomasPaine posted:What's that from? Gerrard Winstanley. "That we must neither buy nor sell. Money must not any longer (after our work of the Earths Community is advanced) be the great god that hedges in some and hedges out others, for money is but part of the Earth; for after our work of the Earthly Community is advanced, we must make use of gold and silver as we do of other metals but not to buy or sell."
|
# ? May 6, 2014 00:01 |
|
ThomasPaine posted:What's that from? God wrote it. (It's paraphrasing the bit in Exodus where God forms the covenant with Moses to return the Holy Land to the Hebrews) e: ^^That makes sense^^
|
# ? May 6, 2014 00:03 |
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:God wrote it. (It's paraphrasing the bit in Exodus where God forms the covenant with Moses to return the Holy Land to the Hebrews) All radical thought at that time was in relation to religion. Its the only reference point that people had, and I prefer to read in the social context rather than anything theological. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEv3LpXNX8U&list=RDOA4FTIz2Zrw For anybody interested, this is the best book to read about the English Revolution; http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-World-Turned-Upside-Down/dp/0140137327 General China fucked around with this message at 00:34 on May 6, 2014 |
# ? May 6, 2014 00:12 |
|
Anyone talking about how Royal Mail aren't allowed to send faeces to UKIP clearly hasn't been watching Love for Sale.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 01:05 |
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:God wrote it. (It's paraphrasing the bit in Exodus where God forms the covenant with Moses to return the Holy Land to the Hebrews) It's the same difference, when you're talking about General China.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 01:16 |
TinTower posted:Anyone talking about how Royal Mail aren't allowed to send faeces to UKIP clearly hasn't been watching Love for Sale. Because Postmen clearly don't want to be carrying around boxes of badly sealed poo poo?
|
|
# ? May 6, 2014 07:30 |
|
Fluo posted:Because Postmen clearly don't want to be carrying around boxes of badly sealed poo poo? You clearly haven't been watching Love for Sale.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 08:19 |
|
Fluo posted:Because Postmen clearly don't want to be carrying around boxes of badly sealed poo poo? Plz dont kink shame
|
# ? May 6, 2014 08:22 |
|
TinTower posted:You clearly haven't been watching Love for Sale. I've heard of mail order brides, but that's ridiculous.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 08:46 |
|
Could anyone expand on Britain First being literal blackshirts? A few people on my Facebook occasionally like their stuff and I'd like to be able to point out that they're literally liking Nazi propaganda, since they're honestly a bit too thick/indoctrinated to respond to evidence and argument, but being told the people they agree with are actual Nazis might just work. Thanks
|
# ? May 6, 2014 09:32 |
|
Maybe have a flick though here http://www.britainfirst.org/publications-library/ and see what jumps out at you.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 09:51 |
|
It certainly all jumps out as horrible shite but I can't see anything explicitly Nazi, as would be recognised by your average pub racist. Thanks anyway though, I should probably be doing my own research anyway. It's incredibly depressing how popular that Facebook page is. Went on a date with a guy the other day and then saw he'd liked one of their things.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:12 |
|
So Civitas is now saying we derive no trade advantage from being in the EU. They fiddling the numbers, or is thi legit? Because it seems to fly in the face of our current understanding of European trade.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:19 |
|
Their whole thing is ooga booga muslims "othering" them, a crusade to "Take Back Britain" (from whom?) and bring back hanging for people we don't like (i.e. anyone who isn't christian).
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:21 |
|
Also, Britain First is a BNP splinter group. Everyone's aware the BNP are Nazis, right?
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:26 |
|
Privatising the land registry. Aka one of the few government agencies to make a consistent profit. LOL. LOOOOOOOOOL.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:30 |
|
Lord Twisted posted:Privatising the land registry. Aka one of the few government agencies to make a consistent profit. Well it's a nice change from selling the unprofitable parts to yourself for the purpose of stripping and flipping. This way the private companies might keep it intact for five minutes and take some profit home before the firesale!
|
# ? May 6, 2014 10:43 |
|
Spangly A posted:"A British court somehow found someone not guilty of Libel for once, but now that they're not in a position to respond because of extraneous legal matters I will make defamatory remarks and insinuate their guilt out of spite"
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:09 |
|
Zephro posted:That article does suggest the whole thing was a clusterfuck of rarely-seen proportions, though. Is it even legal for a judge to preside over a case when she's friends with the participants? I have no idea but it absolutely shouldn't be. Yeah, it was a clusterfuck. He's mad that the jury had to be sent home because they were loving idiots and he was desperately banking on them getting him off through sheer incompetence, though. That was his only hope. As it was the judge simply said "gently caress this, none of you are fit to ever do jury service, gently caress off" and decided against trial by jury. He's now trying to make this out to be a big deal but statistically speaking, jury trials are primarily used by guilty people hoping that a lack of legal knowledge will help their case. They're a waste of time. The talk of conspiracy is bollocks, there's no evidence that it was a malicious WOMANPLOT against him.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:15 |
|
Briscoe wasn't presiding though, was she? Just a witness for Vicky Pryce?
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:18 |
|
Zephro posted:That article does suggest the whole thing was a clusterfuck of rarely-seen proportions, though. Is it even legal for a judge to preside over a case when she's friends with the participants? As I remember it, yes, it's perfectly legal, a judge can recuse him/herself if they feel they have a conflict of interest, and either side could file an appeal based on their feeling that there was a conflict of interest, it would then be up to another judge to decide if there was, or was not, and whether that is sufficient to consider the judge's verdict compromised. But there's no inherent illegality of any bias by the judge.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:19 |
|
SybilVimes posted:As I remember it, yes, it's perfectly legal, a judge can recuse him/herself if they feel they have a conflict of interest, and either side could file an appeal based on their feeling that there was a conflict of interest, it would then be up to another judge to decide if there was, or was not, and whether that is sufficient to consider the judge's verdict compromised. But there's no inherent illegality of any bias by the judge.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:25 |
|
Zephro posted:That's interesting. Feels like a much more lax standard than you'd get in many other professional occupations, though I don't know that for sure.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:34 |
|
Zephro posted:That's interesting. Feels like a much more lax standard than you'd get in many other professional occupations, though I don't know that for sure. Usually a judge will raise the fact that they're acquainted with anyone involved in the case pre-trial, it's only if the parties have any objections that they'd recuse themselves
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:34 |
|
Oh look, Grayling is being reprehensible again.quote:Before 2001, the US did not have a problem with rape and sexual assault inside its prisons. That was not because nobody was raped, of course. It was because there had never been a research study large enough and dependable enough to produce any measure of the nature and size of the problem. Federal and state authorities could, therefore, simply avert their gaze and insist there was no need for action.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:41 |
|
Just putting some washing out, and the Queen is in town today. I could hear them at the Cathederal belting out God Save the Queen. Gawd bless ah, Makes you prahd, etc.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:51 |
|
Here's an interesting article from the Guardian by George Monbiot which raises a few interesting points regarding one of our favourites, G4S:quote:
I was going through it trying to find choice quotes to highlight in bold but realised I would have ended up bolding the entire article. It's pretty much summed up in the last sentence though; impunity for the rich; misery for the poor. So...when does the revolution start?
|
# ? May 6, 2014 11:58 |
|
The Donut posted:So...when does the revolution start?
|
# ? May 6, 2014 12:09 |
|
The Donut posted:So...when does the revolution start? We've been devoiced and disarmed, and you think there will ever be a revolution?
|
# ? May 6, 2014 12:11 |
|
General China is moving out already
|
# ? May 6, 2014 12:52 |
|
Anyone who can do so, jump ship now.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 12:56 |
|
|
# ? May 24, 2024 18:19 |
|
quote:"We don't want to make inroads into the core of the estate," he said. I won't bother making a bet that whoever buys the place will do exactly that in order to turn a quick profit; nobody here would take it.
|
# ? May 6, 2014 13:03 |