|
Prince John posted:I suppose you could picket the new houses when they're completed and on the market. That might cut down on offers if they had to run the gauntlet of placards when viewing the potential new house with an estate agent. At which point the police get called.
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2024 13:26 |
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Knowing Cherie she's probably trying to nick his wallet. When your Christmas photo looks less appealing and loving than Charlie Manson's wedding album, you should maybe think twice before sending it to your friends.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:This is the root of it for me. If it was so obviously a massive loving over by TfL then why are they striking when the employment tribunal would sort it out? Yes. This kind of bullshit is what allowed Thatcher to break the unions in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 10:40
|
|
|
Andre Le Fuckface posted:The tax has been changed to become more sensible and not lead to stepped house prices, it's better for most people who would be buying and is an increase if you are buying for over £1 million. Seems ok to me Not five minutes ago I saw some cretin on Sky saying that a family were going to have to reduce the asking price for their house but now are able to ask for more. This apparently is better for everyone. Evidently "everyone" doesn't include the people buying the house.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Zephro posted:If he's paying rent to a company registered in a tax haven then it's probably a trust that he controls, presumably as a way of avoiding taxes on the house. I mean I doubt Russell Brand is too poor to buy a house if he wants to. Maybe. If he works away a lot it might not be worth his while owning a place. Either way, calling him a hypocrite for saying the rich should be taxed while paying rent to a tax evader is absurd. If Brand doesn't pay his own taxes that's one thing, but he's not his brother's keeper.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Historically that would have been true but in the good old Victorian days a wet nurse would probably give up their illegitimate child in order to become a wet nurse because it was a better life to breastfeed rich women's children than raise your own in poverty. If by "give up" you mean "bury", yes. Most wet nurses had lost their child.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Acaila posted:Looking at those figures, it does seem surprising he's not going for Inverness. He has no chance of winning Inverness, the LDs had 40% of the vote there in 2010 and the SNP were in third. He's also not standing in his home constituency (and previous seat) because the Tories got their biggest swing in Scotland there last time out. Gordon had a big swing to the SNP in 2010, which is why he's going there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Burqa King posted:There are a few mistaken assumptions here which I'm happy to correct. Nice third person self-compliment there. You're the OP and you're the one who closed the thread, so you know exactly why it was done.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
twoot posted:It was £32,000 for a member of the American elite to get a meeting with Kate/Wills. Raising money for charity, how loving lovely of the Royals. String 'em up, I say.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:Well yeah you'd have a point if that's the entirety of what the royals do, but it's not. Wasn't there a big story back in June about them taking £8 mil for a helicopter and £4 mil for renovating a palace, back to back? Maybe, but what twoot said was literally "the Royals charging £32k to meet them at a charity event is no better than them spending £32k on a night out".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:Congrats, BM! Well, it wouldn't do for native immigrants to clog up the roads. Not that we would, because we are unfailingly polite in Britain (unless you happen to be a Bulgamanian, Pakistani, gay, gyppo or Muslim and we happen to vote UKIP).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:The only competent politician that gets British media attention is Salmond and they have absolutely zero qualms about calling him hateful or spiteful or an evil dirty nationalist. That's because he is hateful and spiteful - witness his treatment of Aberdeen City Council ever since they rejected a plan to sell Union Terrace Gardens to a major SNP donor. I'll grant you that calling him a nationalist is a bit much, though. E: On this day in 1931, the Statute of Westminster granted complete legislative freedom to Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the Irish Free State. Jedit fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
General China posted:I maybe the least popular poster in this thread. I don't loving care. "Poor people should not attempt to escape the poverty trap because not all of them will succeed, and the ones who do are cunts" - someone who moved from a deprived area to a country estate
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:The coalition has achieved a great success in industrial relations, reducing the number of employment tribunals by 70% via the simple expedient of making it too expensive for most people to seek redress from their employers: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coalition-row-erupts-as-workers-are-priced-out-of-tribunals-9922569.html And sex discrimination cases are down by 85%. This surely compounds their success, as now women earning less than men in the workplace have even less power to change it! E: December 14th 1937 - the first full day of the Rape of Nanking. Jedit fucked around with this message at 11:19 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 11:17
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:I thought that any sort of torture was ultimately ineffective because unless the subject is some kind of super being capable of ignoring all pain the subject will sign/do/say anything at some point, makes the whole approach kind of pointless really. Torturing people for information is useless, yes. Torturing people for retribution or because you enjoy it seems pretty effective, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:people can't afford current house prices even with government-subsidised loans? best give them another subsidy! The average first time buyer is now 42 years old. So, this will help nobody in the poorer classes who needs to escape the rental trap but provides a nice little discount to the wealthier young who can get a deposit from their parents.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
notaspy posted:got a source for that? Best I can find says 30 The 2011 census, as I recall. Someone did bring that up as the age for second time buyers, so it's possible I got a crossed wire. The age of second time buyers is still significant, though, as the first place you buy is more likely to be a small flat for yourself while the second is more likely to be a family home. If the average second time buyer is 42, that's a lot of kids being raised in one bedroom flats. Also congratulations to Bape Culture for accumulating more than 80% of the annual median wage in savings over the course of six months while still being able to pay rent and keep himself. If only we were all on £50k+ a year, hey?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:No it wasn't, and just because you disagree with what hes saying doesnt make him a troll. He's literally just claimed to have a six figure income and doesn't know why everyone else can't do likewise. Horatio Alger is dead, my friend.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:Don't halve a cow, man. UKMT poster lacks the wisdom of Solomon, thousands unsurprised.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:What're you, twelve? If I ignored every clueless arsehole in this thread there'd be a lot more than twelve of them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
Lord Twisted posted:Not that I want to find myself agreeing with IDS of all of people, but I'm a little incredulous at the idea that you should be able to have as many children as you like and then the state will just give more money ad infinitum. However you shouldn't retroactively cut amounts. Just a reminder to you that the people who support child benefit cuts are also the people who oppose abortion.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:It kind of ignores the obvious exceptions to the rule, Northern Ireland and Scotland haven't seen the rise of UKIP in the way England and Wales have. The most obvious difference to me is the attitude toward Britain as a state, NI's always been disconnected from that idea and Scotland has had a huge campaign based around sticking it to Britain and going off on their own (don't think this is a partisan issue on the referendum, most unionists weren't simply pretending that campaign didn't exist). It's a large contrast to the much more widespread Britannia über alles sentiment that UKIP thrives on in England and Wales. I don't think that baby boomers are unrelated to UKIP's rise, but it doesn't seem that they are the primary reason. NI and Scotland have baby boomers too, after all. As Aduck said, on this rare occasion being right: UKIP are English - to be more exact, British - nationalists. And as you imply and I have said before, if you're in Scotland and want independence from a larger political entity it's usually the UK so you vote SNP. And yet, despite these factors preventing UKIP gaining traction in Scotland, they still managed to get 10.6% of the vote in the European elections this year - almost 37% of the SNP's own tally. That is a huge rise with very significant consequences, not least of which was depriving the SNP of a third MEP. I saw Alex Salmond after the count that day. You'd think he would have been happy as a pig in poo poo after drubbing Labour and the Tories, but he looked like his wife had died. I think he knew after that result that the Independence Referendum was going to fail, because even if the Scottish kippers were only voting the EU issue and weren't pro-Union, any sane plan he could put forward for independence demanded that Scotland join the EU.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Chocolate Teapot posted:Dear Santa, Santa was a Catholic bishop, so good luck on getting any of that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:
The Union Jack can't be upside down when it's not attached to a staff, only back to front.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Lord Lucan is on one of Colombia's banknotes. It's an exchange scheme for all of Colombia's finest export product on our banknotes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:It's like all of the parties are trying to visit the wizard of Oz. Ed Milliband needs brain, Dave needs a heart, Clegg needs some courage and...Nigel just wants to find his way home I think you'll find Nigel Farage wants lots of other people to find their way home.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Whats pissflaps got to do with this? Perhaps he said it in one of the posts that Spooky Hyena doesn't read?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Alan Moore is a prophet and I fully expect that the events of V for Vendetta will play out. So long as I get to be the one who shoots him five times in the chest.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 12:44
|
|
|
KazigluBey posted:Yeah but doesn't he then choke you out while quipping an inspirational line about ideas being kevlar or something? Only in the movie. In the book I just get naked, take some drugs and think about how much I preferred Britain when there were black people and Pakistanis here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Seabrooks are still pretty nice though, chunky and flavorful. Seabrooks are made with the cheapest possible ingredients and are absolutely vile.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Pretty sure fruit doesn't come in prawn cocktail flavor. That's what GM is for. Strawberries with the taste of cream built in, literal beefsteak tomatoes and Brussels sprouts that eat themselves so we don't have to.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 23, 2024 13:26 |
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:There's also the story about how Thatcher had to be sat down for an hour and have it explained to her how anal sex works, but she refused to believe it was real. I've heard that story before, but it was Queen Victoria who needed the explanation. I suspect it's apocryphal on all counts.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 14:26
|
|