for whoever it was that was intersted

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

for whoever it was that was intersted

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html

Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"

With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub.

In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html

Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"

With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub.

OK. And who can blame him? Come on, Grimly old chap!

I have a sneaking suspicion that (as TNP often claims) "wind power" is
grossly over-rated -- just a gut feeling, based largely on the the fact
that a lot of fairly unsavoury people/corporations are getting rich on
our taxes. The whole idea is not so much power-full, as it's
green-looking.

OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."

Which about sums up how informed the general public are, about this
"debate". It's not a debate: it's like a lot of other things these days:
it's a raucous argument between two entrenched parties, one of which
has deeply vested interests (namely: cash), and both of whom employ
lobbyists. Lobbyists don't debate: they shout at each other, while at
the same time seizing the ear of those in power. Unfortunately, money
talks these days louder than it ever did; and who has the money? "a lot
of fairly unsavoury people/corporations"


Also unfortunately I, you, and many of the rest of us here in this
group, will be dead by the time people start referring snortingly to the
fact that "that old wind power scam turned out to be a lot of hot air".
No doubt by then the *same* corporations will be being paid taxpayers'
money to demolish these horrendously expensive monstrosities.

John

In article lalaw44-17877A.22105905042011@surfnet-
nl.ipv4.ptr.145.109.196.x.invalid, says...
OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."


Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

In article , Skipweasel
scribeth thus
In article lalaw44-17877A.22105905042011@surfnet-
nl.ipv4.ptr.145.109.196.x.invalid, says...
OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."


Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

You err .. don't live near one then;?...
--
Tony Sayer

In article , says...
Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

You err .. don't live near one then;?...


No, but I've gone out of my way to admire them, and camped near them on
purpose in France.

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Skipweasel
saying something like:

Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

You err .. don't live near one then;?...


No, but I've gone out of my way to admire them, and camped near them on
purpose in France.

Careful, you might get 'windmill syndrome'.

Skipweasel wrote:
In article lalaw44-17877A.22105905042011@surfnet-
nl.ipv4.ptr.145.109.196.x.invalid, says...
OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."


Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

They are out to sea at 3 miles range.

In the middle of restful pleasant countryside 500 yards from your
bedroom window, they are a crime.

"I will never hear the sound of wind in the trees again".

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Skipweasel
saying something like:

Me, for a start. I find them (windmills) restful and pleasant.

You err .. don't live near one then;?...

No, but I've gone out of my way to admire them, and camped near them on
purpose in France.

Careful, you might get 'windmill syndrome'.
Not in a tent. Doesn't resonate the way a house does.

I think london busses are attractive, but they used to wake me every
morning at 5am by shaking the bed when they stopped just under my Crouch
End Broadway window.

In article ,
says...
No, but I've gone out of my way to admire them, and camped near them on
purpose in France.

Careful, you might get 'windmill syndrome'.


Who do you think I am? Thomas Crown?

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

On Apr 5, 8:46*pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

for whoever it was that was intersted

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html

Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"

With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub.

Exactly right. They never worried about digging up the South Wales
valleys or South Yorkshire for coal. I hope they get them in their
back gardens.

Krauts too, coming over here to knobble off with our UK subsidies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswind

On Apr 5, 10:10*pm, Another John wrote:
In article ,
*Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html

Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"

With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub..

OK. *And who can blame him? *Come on, Grimly old chap!

I have a sneaking suspicion that (as TNP often claims) "wind power" is
grossly over-rated -- just a gut feeling, based largely on the the fact
that a lot of fairly unsavoury people/corporations are getting rich on *
our taxes. * The whole idea is not so much power-full, as it's
green-looking. *

OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."

Which shows what thick tw**ts they are. How do youo suupose they get
the power from where the wind blows to where it's needed? There will
be a lot more pylons...

MBQ

harry wrote:
On Apr 5, 8:46 pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

for whoever it was that was intersted
http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html
Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"

With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub.

Exactly right. They never worried about digging up the South Wales
valleys or South Yorkshire for coal. I hope they get them in their
back gardens.

'They' which 'they'?

The suburbanites like you who never have a harvester go past their
bedroom at 2 a.m, or will ever have a motorway thrown across their
local heath,, or a coal mine dug in their land or a windmill put up to
ruin their view and make sure they never sleep without medication again?

They are YOU.

Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will be,
and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Apr 5, 10:10 pm, Another John wrote:
In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

http://www.stopheydonwindfarm.com/html/Index.html
Hahahahaha. Rumbled.
"It is likely that the value of our houses will plummet and become
difficult to sell"
With all the other reasons, some valid, some spurious, there is the rub.
OK. And who can blame him? Come on, Grimly old chap!

I have a sneaking suspicion that (as TNP often claims) "wind power" is
grossly over-rated -- just a gut feeling, based largely on the the fact
that a lot of fairly unsavoury people/corporations are getting rich on
our taxes. The whole idea is not so much power-full, as it's
green-looking.

OTOH, I know several people who say "Well actually I quite like the look
of them... better than those horrible pylons..."

Which shows what thick tw**ts they are. How do youo suupose they get
the power from where the wind blows to where it's needed? There will
be a lot more pylons...

MBQ

Exactly. Wit a peak to mean ratio of 3.5:1 you need treble the size of
grid for exactly the same amount of overall grid capacity.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will be,
and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..

The country folk soon complain when townies stop buying their produce and
stop being "parasites".
Why don't you go back to subsistence living if that's the way you feel.
With no money you won't have power or internet so that will be an end to
your drivel.

dennis@home wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will
be, and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..

The country folk soon complain when townies stop buying their produce
and stop being "parasites".
Why don't you go back to subsistence living if that's the way you feel.
With no money you won't have power or internet so that will be an end to
your drivel.


guess where the power is generated.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where al the roads that transport your goods are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess what land the cables and radio links over which the internet runs
are located.


Not in your precious towns.

On Apr 6, 3:30*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will
be, and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..

The country folk soon complain when townies stop buying their produce
and stop being "parasites".
Why don't you go back to subsistence living if that's the way you feel.
With no money you won't have power or internet so that will be an end to
your drivel.

guess where the power is generated.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where al the roads that transport your goods are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess what land the cables *and radio links over which the internet runs
are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where the shops and banks are .Guess where the manufacturing
capacity is for tools, fuels and transport.
New depths of drivel from you today.

harry wrote:
On Apr 6, 3:30 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will
be, and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..
The country folk soon complain when townies stop buying their produce
and stop being "parasites".
Why don't you go back to subsistence living if that's the way you feel.
With no money you won't have power or internet so that will be an end to
your drivel.
guess where the power is generated.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where al the roads that transport your goods are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess what land the cables and radio links over which the internet runs
are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where the shops and banks are

They are right here, in teh village

..Guess where the manufacturing
capacity is for tools, fuels and transport.

Not anywhere near you, harry.

In fact, they are in china, so you can be all pofaced then criticise
the Chinese for burning coal to make em for you.


No one sites a factory in a UK town these days,. There isn't anyone
capable of working in a factory in any UK town any more.

Less than 10% of the WORKFORCE let alone the population is involved in
manufacturing in the UK.

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

New depths of drivel from you today.

Keep staring in that mirror, Harry, and talking to yourself.

No one else will be, shortly.

In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

That's around half as many as Thaggie put out of work in half the time !
Party politics has little to contribute to economic policy ...

Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010)
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

In this case, no, I don't think they did.

On Apr 6, 8:57*pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

It was B-liar and Brown f***d up the economy. As the labour party
always does.
And still in denial about it too.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Apr 6, 8:57 pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

It was B-liar and Brown f***d up the economy. As the labour party
always does.
And still in denial about it too.

History shows that Labour always screws the economy.
At no time has the economy been in a better state when they left than when
they were elected.
They always concentrate on short term bribes to try and get re-elected.

On Apr 6, 6:24*pm, harry wrote:
On Apr 6, 3:30*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:



dennis@home wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Towns are parasites on the countryside, always were and always will
be, and never more so than in a consumer sopciety..

The country folk soon complain when townies stop buying their produce
and stop being "parasites".
Why don't you go back to subsistence living if that's the way you feel.
With no money you won't have power or internet so that will be an end to
your drivel.

guess where the power is generated.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where al the roads that transport your goods are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess what land the cables *and radio links over which the internet runs
are located.

Not in your precious towns.

Guess where the shops and banks are .Guess where the manufacturing
capacity is for tools, fuels and transport.

Mostly "out of town" these days. Just look at the number of empty
shops in any town centre.

MBQ

On Apr 6, 8:57*pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

Tory B Liar *WAS* a tory in all but party membership.

MBQ

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

In this case, no, I don't think they did.

Looked awfully to me as if the NL shower were just carrying on the same
dreadful policies as had gone before. There was a certain inevitability
about Britain losing manufacturing jobs to the developing world, but I
honestly thought some proper leadership and job-retention initiative
would be shown; and I can't believe, in retrospect, I actually cheered
when the NL shower of ******s were elected in 1997.

"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

In this case, no, I don't think they did.

Looked awfully to me as if the NL shower were just carrying on the same
dreadful policies as had gone before. There was a certain inevitability
about Britain losing manufacturing jobs to the developing world, but I
honestly thought some proper leadership and job-retention initiative
would be shown; and I can't believe, in retrospect, I actually cheered
when the NL shower of ******s were elected in 1997.

So it was your fault.

On Apr 7, 11:06*pm, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came into
power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.

And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

In this case, no, I don't think they did.

Looked awfully to me as if the NL shower were just carrying on the same
dreadful policies as had gone before. There was a certain inevitability
about Britain losing manufacturing jobs to the developing world, but I
honestly thought some proper leadership and job-retention initiative
would be shown; and I can't believe, in retrospect, I actually cheered
when the NL shower of ******s were elected in 1997.

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.
We never have politicians these days that have had a proper job.

On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

We never have politicians these days that have had a proper job.

Or have had to bring up a family on minimum wage. The current lot
(all sides) are so far out of touch it beggers belief.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

We never have politicians these days that have had a proper job.

Or have had to bring up a family on minimum wage. The current lot
(all sides) are so far out of touch it beggers belief.

I wouldnt say that the latter is much of a qualification for being able
to DO anything about the problems, though it might be indicative of
understanding what it feels like.

But really, sympathy is NOT what I want from a politician: I want
positive action towards pragmatic solutions.


Quite frankly, no politician at the moment appears to have a clue which
way to go.

Tim Streater wrote:

I can't believe that it wasn't quite clear that Blair was a charlatan
even back then.


It was. If you had half a brain.

Huge wrote:
On 2011-04-08, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:

On 2011-04-08, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.
Only suspicions?
That joke about how you can tell a politician is lying? (His mouth is
moving).

It isn't a joke.
Unfortunately this is an expected trend. Back when, politicians were
self-supporting and more trustworthy. Yes, yes, I know they were toffs
but so what, eh? They had a public service ethic. This was also true on
the Labour side (they weren't toffs but they were still trustworthy and
gentlemen).

Then along comes that nice Mr Wilson, and in the chase after
"trendiness", as aped later by Blair, he decides that he'll make Labour
appear modern and forward thinking (as opposed to those fuddy duddy old
tories) by having politicians become professional and properly paid.

Professionals is now what we've got, and our present-day attitude to
them follows as night follows day.

I beg to differ. Politicians are just the modern day equivalent of robber
barons. They were never "trustworthy gentlemen" - it's just that the
common people were deluded into thinking that.


ARE deluded.
Not Were.

I the olden days, you knew that's what they were. BUT they were also
mindful of not pushing it too far. Don't want trouble at t'mill etc.

Today, they don't have a mill. Politicians have nothing to lose but the
next election. AND if they have stitched up a cosy job on the board of
Subsidy Rapists Incorporated, they don't care if that happens either.

OK it wasn't a Golden Age, but the interests of the common man and the
employing capitalist, or the land owning classes, were not that far
apart, after all. In fact a lot of so called 'socialist' developments of
the latter part of the 19th century are simply enlightened self
interest. Public health, affects all. Education, as the need for skilled
workers arose. Etc.

That plus a general military background - nothing is easier than an
accidental discharge as the unloved ossifer leads you into battle..meant
that the so called ruling classes had a generally good background in man
management, looking after the troops, and general nous when it came to
planning stuff and getting it done..

...None of which is in evidence today in these so called egalitarian times.

Tim Streater wrote:
Remember Brown's "People's Peers", none of whom ever
turned up to do any work?

We can at least be grateful for that..

On Apr 8, 10:45*am, Huge wrote:
On 2011-04-08, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

That joke about how you can tell a politician is lying? (His mouth is
moving).

It isn't a joke.

--
Today is Pungenday, the 25th day of Discord in the YOLD 3177
* Science flies people to the moon; Religion flies people into skyscrapers.

Good point I suppose.

On Apr 8, 11:06*am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

*Huge wrote:
On 2011-04-08, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

That joke about how you can tell a politician is lying? (His mouth is
moving).

It isn't a joke.

Unfortunately this is an expected trend. Back when, politicians were
self-supporting and more trustworthy. Yes, yes, I know they were toffs
but so what, eh? They had a public service ethic. This was also true on
the Labour side (they weren't toffs but they were still trustworthy and
gentlemen).

Then along comes that nice Mr Wilson, and in the chase after
"trendiness", as aped later by Blair, he decides that he'll make Labour
appear modern and forward thinking (as opposed to those fuddy duddy old
tories) by having politicians become professional and properly paid.

Professionals is now what we've got, and our present-day attitude to
them follows as night follows day.

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" *-- *Bill of Rights 1689

They have forgotten that not everybody works for money.
Though I suppose there are fewer now than previously.

harry wrote:


They have forgotten that not everybody works for money.

No right thinking Marxist would work for anythng else.

Work is the exchnge of Labour for Money.


Though I suppose there are fewer now than previously.

None in the Left.

On Apr 8, 11:06*am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

*Huge wrote:
On 2011-04-08, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

That joke about how you can tell a politician is lying? (His mouth is
moving).

It isn't a joke.

Unfortunately this is an expected trend. Back when, politicians were
self-supporting and more trustworthy. Yes, yes, I know they were toffs
but so what, eh? They had a public service ethic. This was also true on
the Labour side (they weren't toffs

Not a few of them were. grammar school educated and then pulled the
drawbridge closed after themselves.

MBQ

On Apr 8, 11:35*am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,



*Huge wrote:
On 2011-04-08, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
*Huge wrote:

On 2011-04-08, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?

That joke about how you can tell a politician is lying? (His mouth is
moving).

It isn't a joke.

Unfortunately this is an expected trend. Back when, politicians were
self-supporting and more trustworthy. Yes, yes, I know they were toffs
but so what, eh? They had a public service ethic. This was also true on
the Labour side (they weren't toffs but they were still trustworthy and
gentlemen).

Then along comes that nice Mr Wilson, and in the chase after
"trendiness", as aped later by Blair, he decides that he'll make Labour
appear modern and forward thinking (as opposed to those fuddy duddy old
tories) by having politicians become professional and properly paid.

Professionals is now what we've got, and our present-day attitude to
them follows as night follows day.

I beg to differ. Politicians are just the modern day equivalent of robber
barons. They were never "trustworthy gentlemen" - it's just that the
common people were deluded into thinking that.

They may be now. Back then they were paid less than production line
workers. These days you have much more reason to question their
motivations, which is what has led to so much public cynicism,
especially with now three former Labour MPs going to the slammer (I
wonder what Drivel makes of that).

And now the Blair/Brown "reforms" have ****ed up the HoL too. It used to
do a great job as a revising chamber that inspected proposed legislation
and did a lot of work to ensure it was workable - all boring but
necessary stuff. Remember Brown's "People's Peers", none of whom ever
turned up to do any work?

We should have MP service as well as Jury service. Randomly selected,
four years with a guarantee of getting your old job back at the end.

MBQ

On 08/04/11 13:26, harry wrote:
On Apr 8, 11:06 am, Tim Streater wrote:

Then along comes that nice Mr Wilson, and in the chase after
"trendiness", as aped later by Blair, he decides that he'll make Labour
appear modern and forward thinking (as opposed to those fuddy duddy old
tories) by having politicians become professional and properly paid.

Professionals is now what we've got, and our present-day attitude to
them follows as night follows day.

They have forgotten that not everybody works for money.
Though I suppose there are fewer now than previously.


Which is why none of them ever resign on principle, or even when caught
with their hands in the till. They are now employees with no other source
of income, so they can't afford to rock the boat or walk out of the day job.


--
djc

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article ,
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember The Natural Philosopher
saying something like:

Three million manufacturing jobs have been lost since Labour came
into power in 1997, averaging 300 a day.
And the Tories had nothing to do with it, of course.

In this case, no, I don't think they did.
Looked awfully to me as if the NL shower were just carrying on the
same
dreadful policies as had gone before. There was a certain inevitability
about Britain losing manufacturing jobs to the developing world, but I
honestly thought some proper leadership and job-retention initiative
would be shown; and I can't believe, in retrospect, I actually cheered
when the NL shower of ******s were elected in 1997.

I can't believe that it wasn't quite clear that Blair was a charlatan
even back then.

That prolly wasn't the point.

The tories had got to the point where anything was a welcome relief from
the endemic corruption and sleaze

The words of the song just didn't say things can only get worse


--
geoff

In message o.uk, Dave
Liquorice writes
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 23:05:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

I always knew Bliar was a liar. I'm begining to have a few suspicions
about Cameron.

Only suspicions?
If politicians tell it like it is no-one will vote for them. None of the
three parties would admit to how bad the finances really were before the
last election. The conservatives tried it briefly and the feedback they
got from focus groups was so bad they adopted the same line as
ZaNuLiebour, i.e. talk a lot but give away nothing. Will Self said it
most accurately on the 'Question Time' program before the election when
he looked straight at the audience and told them to ignore all the
politicians because they (the voters) had no idea how bad it was going
to be *whoever* won the election. Channel 4 had an alternative 'meet the
three chancellors' and it was obvious that the audience still thought
that making a few 'efficiency' savings was going to wipe out an *annual*
deficit of £156 BILLION. Thanks a lot Gord. I know where I would start
cutting - the NHS gargantuan annual budget of £110 BILLION - half a
million more staff since 1997 (nearly all from overseas), huge pay rises
(which leads on to even huger gold-plated pensions), hospitals built
with PFI that will end up costing us £5 billion per hospital (eg The
London Hosp Whitechapel).

We never have politicians these days that have had a proper job.

Or have had to bring up a family on minimum wage. The current lot
(all sides) are so far out of touch it beggers belief.

The world owes no-one a living. If you can't afford kids why assume you
have a right to sponge off the rest of society ?. We live in a
capitalist society - either get used to it or emigrate. I hear that Cuba
and North Korea have well developed socialist command economies.

Wait till all those hordes of unemployed muslims from Egypt, Tunisia,
Jordan etc arrive in the EU expecting to find gold plates on the
pavements. There are an awful lot of them, 80 million in Egypt alone and
a very high percentage under 25, all desperate for work (and 'free'
handouts).
--
AD