On 27/03/2013 08:51, Brian Gaff wrote:
And while we are about it, the fact that RNLI is really not funded by
Government should have been a scandal for years, or are we saying that the
insurance you obviously take out when you go for a walk is going to pay for
you if you go for a sail instead?

The RNLI prefers the independence that comes with being funded entirely
by charitable donations.

Colin Bignell

In article om,
bm wrote:
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are using
far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ? C'mon.
I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal, shirley?

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc - is
a very anti-social act.

--
*He's not dead - he's electroencephalographically challenged

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
Ah - the nonsense of one government body saving money by spending more
tax payer's hard earned in a different way.

Nothing to do with whether there is an overall saving or not so far as I
am concerned. I am only interested in whether what money there is in
the military budget gets spent in a way that best helps the front line
troops.

So get rid of the Red Arrows too?

--
*It's lonely at the top, but you eat better.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 08:01:25 +0000 (GMT), charles wrote:

no, it's not your local council's idea. It came from Westminster and
has to be implemented by the your Council.

Ours hasn't, at least not for 2013/14. IIRC ours gives a 10% discount for
a "second home", it used to be 50% or perhaps even 90%...

Presumably HMG gives an allowable range within which the local councils
can choose what discount to apply.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
Frank Erskine wrote:
Our local authority actually PAYS a couple of FULL TIME trade union
officials at the Civic Centre _and_ provides them with office
facilities...

They likely take on a lot of work that would be otherwise done by a
personnel department, etc.

--
*Income tax service - We‘ve got what it takes to take what you've got.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2013-03-27, Mike Barnes wrote:
bm :
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are
using far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ?
C'mon. I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal,
shirley?

You make the mistake of confusing paying Council Tax with buying
services. It doesn't work like that, never did, and was never intended
to.

As Cyprus has so ably demonstrated, taxes are theft.

You're like a stuck needle. Perhaps you'd inform us all how communal
services are to be paid for without taxes?

--
*In some places, C:\ is the root of all directories *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:09:00 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article om,
bm wrote:
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are using
far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ? C'mon.
I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal, shirley?

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc - is
a very anti-social act.

I agree, in principle, but it can take a long time to sell a house. It
took nearly 2 years to sell my parents house despite it being marketed
at a very realistic price. (Not in the SE, so not an active market.)

in 1215973 20130327 100900 "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article om,
bm wrote:
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are using
far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ? C'mon.
I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal, shirley?

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

You don't use the roads?

Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc - is
a very anti-social act.

Not if it's on the market.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:00:31 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

You don't use the roads?

And would he be happy no police service at all?
And would he be happy no fire service at all?

Might never use either of them directly but there are many indirect
benefits from both.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article o.uk,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:00:31 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

You don't use the roads?

And would he be happy no police service at all?
And would he be happy no fire service at all?

Might never use either of them directly but there are many indirect
benefits from both.

Just pointing out that you don't necessarily have to make use of all
council services. An empty house might well need police and fire services.
And the roads maintained for access, etc.

--
*Men are from Earth, women are from Earth. Deal with it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

in 1216005 20130327 112018 "Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:00:31 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

You don't use the roads?

And would he be happy no police service at all?
And would he be happy no fire service at all?

Might never use either of them directly but there are many indirect
benefits from both.

We are the only species on the planet that needs an infra-structure to survive.
Taxes seems a small price to pay.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:52:44 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

We are the only species on the planet that needs an infra-structure to
survive.

As a species we don't, we can be hunter gatherers as indeed some isolated
tribes still are. Unless you class building a shelter "infrastructure"
but even then they don't *need* it, it just makes life more comfortable
when there aren't any handy caves.

As a civilisation or society we *need* it's associated infrastructure.

As a species I think are here to stay, we can eat almost anything, we can
build our own shelter, we have control of fire, we can tolerate a huge
range of enviroments, we can use make and use tools, we can adapt those
tools to other tasks or improve them, we communicate very effectively.

Civilisations and societies will come and go but as a species we will
remain, we are just so resilient, it would take something pretty
catastrophic to the whole world to wipe us out as a species. I suspect we
would survive even a Yucatan sized meteor impact.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 27/03/13 12:22, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:52:44 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

We are the only species on the planet that needs an infra-structure to
survive.

As a species we don't, we can be hunter gatherers as indeed some isolated
tribes still are. Unless you class building a shelter "infrastructure"
but even then they don't *need* it, it just makes life more comfortable
when there aren't any handy caves.


and of course his statement is ******** anyway. LOTS of species - all
species in fact 'need an infrastructure' and some - beavers and termites
- make it. nearly every other species in some way creates a niche
environments well. Birds their nests, rabbits their burrows, why even
humble fungi will process organic materials and return the nutrients
back to the soil so that more trees will grow etc etc.

We may be the only species that is aware that its doing it, however.
That much I will give you.

As a civilisation or society we *need* it's associated infrastructure.

As a species I think are here to stay, we can eat almost anything, we can
build our own shelter, we have control of fire, we can tolerate a huge
range of enviroments, we can use make and use tools, we can adapt those
tools to other tasks or improve them, we communicate very effectively.

Civilisations and societies will come and go but as a species we will
remain, we are just so resilient, it would take something pretty
catastrophic to the whole world to wipe us out as a species. I suspect we
would survive even a Yucatan sized meteor impact.


well yes, the hunter gatherers are well equipped to survive just about
any global catastrophe far better than the bloke sitting in suburbia
with a couple of solar panels on his roof dependent on imported brown
rice , an I-phone and a bicycle. That is just pure silly affectation.

we are just another species exploiting niches to breed greater numbers.

If and when the niche runs out, we will find a new one or die back. Or
die out.

Our only difference is we are dimly aware of doing it.

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 27/03/2013 10:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2013-03-27, Mike Barnes wrote:
bm :
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are
using far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ?
C'mon. I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal,
shirley?

You make the mistake of confusing paying Council Tax with buying
services. It doesn't work like that, never did, and was never intended
to.

As Cyprus has so ably demonstrated, taxes are theft.

You're like a stuck needle. Perhaps you'd inform us all how communal
services are to be paid for without taxes?



You make them compulsory and charge for them with a discount based on
income or assets or both. ;-)

On 27/03/2013 10:53, Bill Taylor wrote:

I agree, in principle, but it can take a long time to sell a house. It
took nearly 2 years to sell my parents house despite it being marketed
at a very realistic price. (Not in the SE, so not an active market.)


If it doesn't sell its not a realistic price.

There is a housing shortage but some people refuse to sell to those that
can't a££ord inflated prices.
Something to do with the house prices having been inflated over the
years by speculators.

On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 6:01:18 PM UTC, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

Martin Brown wrote:



So to avoid that short term hardware cost and retaining trained SAR

teams we outsource it and get royally ripped off in the longer term

losing most of our military SAR capability too. How very clever



You can justify "royally ripped off" can you, with facts and figures? Or

is it more bluster.

I'd liek to know the reason(s) why they are taking it over first.
Is it really to save us the UK money ?

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:54:03 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 27/03/2013 10:53, Bill Taylor wrote:

I agree, in principle, but it can take a long time to sell a house. It
took nearly 2 years to sell my parents house despite it being marketed
at a very realistic price. (Not in the SE, so not an active market.)


If it doesn't sell its not a realistic price.

It did sell, for just over half of what it had been valued at 5 years
earlier. Part of the delay was caused by buyers who agreed to buy in
July, then pulled out in November.

There is a housing shortage but some people refuse to sell to those that
can't a££ord inflated prices.

There is a shortage of some sorts of property in some areas, notably
properties desired by the middle classes in the SE. There is a
superfluity of some sorts of properties in some areas.

Something to do with the house prices having been inflated over the
years by speculators.

AKA property owners, aided by excessive lending by financial
institutions.

On Mar 27, 8:04*am, Nightjar
wrote:
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:









In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

How many yachtsmen/people on airbeds/people fell down cliffs/lost
hikers/broken down ships/emergency transfers of ill people from ships?

On 27/03/2013 17:17, harry wrote:
On Mar 27, 8:04 am, Nightjar
wrote:
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:









In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

How many yachtsmen/

In this part of the country, that would be dealt with by the RNLI and /
or the Coastguard helicopter.

people on airbeds/

RNLI inshore rescue

people fell down cliffs/

Coastguard cliff rescue

lost hikers/

Police, with or without their helicopter

broken down ships/

Salvage tugs / RNLI possibly standing by

emergency transfers of ill people from ships?

RNLI / Coastguard helicopter.

So, I ask again, how many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

On 27/03/2013 10:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
Ah - the nonsense of one government body saving money by spending more
tax payer's hard earned in a different way.

Nothing to do with whether there is an overall saving or not so far as I
am concerned. I am only interested in whether what money there is in
the military budget gets spent in a way that best helps the front line
troops.

So get rid of the Red Arrows too?

I suspect that will happen once their aircraft need to be replaced.

Colin Bignell

In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

Nos are irrelevant Plots are quite valuable
--
bert

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article om,
bm wrote:
Our local council has come up with a winner - council tax - if you own
an empty house you used to get a rebate of 50%. Not any more, if your
house is now empty for 2 years you now pay 150% council tax. So, you
own the house, it has f-all to do with the council (IMO), you are using
far less services, bin collections etc but it costs you 150% ? C'mon.
I'm wondering which way to go on this, it can't be legal, shirley?

I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Council tax is just an idle way of arbitrarily collecting taxes to fund
local services. The expenditure on those services is largely property
independent if you look at the breakdown provided by your council round
this time of year.
Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc - is
a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.
--
bert

In message om,
"dennis@home" writes
On 27/03/2013 10:53, Bill Taylor wrote:

I agree, in principle, but it can take a long time to sell a house. It
took nearly 2 years to sell my parents house despite it being marketed
at a very realistic price. (Not in the SE, so not an active market.)


If it doesn't sell its not a realistic price.

There is a housing shortage but some people refuse to sell to those
that can't a££ord inflated prices.
Why should they if they don't need to? Market forces will eventually
bring about a re-adjustment.
Something to do with the house prices having been inflated over the
years by speculators.
Simply supply and demand.
--
bert

In message , Bill Taylor
writes
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 13:54:03 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 27/03/2013 10:53, Bill Taylor wrote:

I agree, in principle, but it can take a long time to sell a house. It
took nearly 2 years to sell my parents house despite it being marketed
at a very realistic price. (Not in the SE, so not an active market.)


If it doesn't sell its not a realistic price.

It did sell, for just over half of what it had been valued at 5 years
earlier. Part of the delay was caused by buyers who agreed to buy in
July, then pulled out in November.

There is a housing shortage but some people refuse to sell to those that
can't a££ord inflated prices.

There is a shortage of some sorts of property in some areas, notably
properties desired by the middle classes in the SE. There is a
superfluity of some sorts of properties in some areas.

Something to do with the house prices having been inflated over the
years by speculators.

AKA property owners, aided by excessive lending by financial
institutions.
All these people complain they can't get on the property ladder because
of high prices. And why do they want to be on the property ladder?
Because they believe that prices will then go up and they wrongly equate
that to making a profit.
--
bert

In message , Huge
writes
On 2013-03-27, Bill Taylor wrote:

There is a shortage of some sorts of property in some areas, notably
properties desired by the middle classes in the SE.

Tell me about it. We are presently selling my M-I-L's house in North
London, and I wish we'd asked more money for it. The punters are
fighting one another to get to it ...


Then put the price up. Why should you hand over a capital gain to them ?
--
bert

In message , Tim
Streater writes
In article ,
Huge wrote:

On 2013-03-27, Bill Taylor wrote:

There is a shortage of some sorts of property in some areas,
notably
properties desired by the middle classes in the SE.
Tell me about it. We are presently selling my M-I-L's house in North
London, and I wish we'd asked more money for it. The punters are
fighting one another to get to it ...

Have you agreed a price with one of them? If not they can bid it up.

Even if you have you can still put up the price until contracts are
exchanged.
--
bert

On 27/03/2013 18:50, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will
oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

Nos are irrelevant Plots are quite valuable

They are very relevant if, as claimed, the main purpose is the recovery
of RAF pilots.

Colin Bignell

In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 18:50, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will
oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

Nos are irrelevant Plots are quite valuable

They are very relevant if, as claimed, the main purpose is the recovery
of RAF pilots.

Colin Bignell
That is it's raison d'être. The civilian stuff has grown out of that.
--
bert

On 27/03/2013 20:59, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 18:50, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 27/03/2013 00:12, bert wrote:
In message , Nightjar
writes
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will
oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money
there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we
need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a
military operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and
the Police helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell
Mountain rescue helicopters are run by RAF. Their main purpose is
recovery of RAF pilots

How many downed RAF pilots needed to be rescued last year?

Colin Bignell

.

Nos are irrelevant Plots are quite valuable

They are very relevant if, as claimed, the main purpose is the
recovery of RAF pilots.

Colin Bignell
That is it's raison d'être. The civilian stuff has grown out of that.

As it is primarily civilian stuff these days, why not have civilian
operators? Bristow have already saved more than 7,000 lives in the UK in
over 15,000 missions.

Colin Bignell

In article ,
bert ] wrote:
I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Council tax is just an idle way of arbitrarily collecting taxes to fund
local services. The expenditure on those services is largely property
independent if you look at the breakdown provided by your council round
this time of year.

I've never seen such a breakdown.

Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc -
is a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.

I have a car bought and paid for - but still have to pay the appropriate
taxes on it. Even if I don't use it.

--
*Remember: First you pillage, then you burn.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
bert ] wrote:
Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc -
is a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.

And you'd be happy living next door to a permanently empty house?

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:42:41 +0000 (UTC), Tim+
wrote:

Nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2013 17:12, Tim+ wrote:
Nightjar wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:41, harry wrote:
On Mar 26, 4:37 pm, Nightjar
wrote:
On 26/03/2013 16:21, harry wrote:

Latest thing to be sold off, search and rescue.
Sign the e-petition here about this matter.

https://submissions.epetitions.direc...etitions/45283

HM Coastguard runs the ones around here and AIUI, they will oversee the
new service in much the same way. Personally, in times when the
Services' budget is being cut, I would rather see what money there is
going to equip the troops on the front lines. It is not as if we need to
get a lot of downed pilots out of The Channel these days.

Colin Bignell

Tch. The service is for ANYONE in trouble on land or sea.
They fly in all weathers,sea rescue, mountain rescue civilians
military etc.

Exactly, so what particular reason is there for the SAR to be a military
operation? As I said, the Coastguard do it around here and the Police
helicopter also does searches.

Colin Bignell

Because the military will fly in conditions that would make any civilian
pilot's hair curl.

Where do you think the Police and Coastguard hire their pilots?

Colin Bignell

Do they fly under the same H&S regs? I strongly suspect military pilots
have more leeway.

Or are considered expendable in some circumstances...

On 28/03/13 00:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bert ] wrote:
I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Council tax is just an idle way of arbitrarily collecting taxes to fund
local services. The expenditure on those services is largely property
independent if you look at the breakdown provided by your council round
this time of year.

I've never seen such a breakdown.

Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc -
is a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.

I have a car bought and paid for - but still have to pay the appropriate
taxes on it. Even if I don't use it.

indeed. Another totally unfair system, since if its sitting in your
drive its costing no one anything.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 28/03/13 00:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bert ] wrote:
Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc -
is a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.

And you'd be happy living next door to a permanently empty house?

better that than full of people who have it handed to them on a plate
and spend the next ten years destroying it.

As my niece remarked before she emigrated 'you can tell whose on social
housing: curtains drawn till midday, three Sky dishes on the walls,
garden has 4 ft high grass cot its never mown, and there are plastic
toys and old washing machines in it all year round' The people who have
had to work for years to actually OWN their houses have some respect for
them.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Mar 28, 7:25*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On 28/03/13 00:15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article ,
* * bert ] wrote:
Leaving a house empty - other than for a short while when moving etc -
is a very anti-social act.

Real socialist thinking that one. It's my house, bought and paid for.

And you'd be happy living next door to a permanently empty house?

better that than full of people who have it handed to them on a plate
and spend the next ten years destroying it.

As my niece remarked before she emigrated 'you can tell whose on social
housing: curtains drawn till midday, three Sky dishes on the walls,
garden has 4 ft high grass cot its never mown, and there are plastic
toys and old washing machines in it all year round'


All true these days. Filled with idle scum.

Q:
What is the grey box behind a satellite dish?
A:
A council house.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
As my niece remarked before she emigrated 'you can tell whose on social
housing: curtains drawn till midday, three Sky dishes on the walls,
garden has 4 ft high grass cot its never mown, and there are plastic
toys and old washing machines in it all year round' The people who have
had to work for years to actually OWN their houses have some respect for
them.

She needs to move to a less pikey area. There's a 'social' housing estate
close to here - joint partnership between a housing association and the
council - and it's as well cared for as any private estate.
The worst kept houses in this street are privately rented to students,
etc. Massive hedge on one which is an eyesore. The only housing
association one I know of is very well maintained.

--
*If only you'd use your powers for good instead of evil.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 28/03/2013 00:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I have a car bought and paid for - but still have to pay the appropriate
taxes on it. Even if I don't use it.


If you don't use it there are no taxes.

On 28/03/2013 11:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 28/03/2013 00:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I have a car bought and paid for - but still have to pay the appropriate
taxes on it. Even if I don't use it.


If you don't use it there are no taxes.

If on private property and appropriately SORNed, then maybe not. But Mr
P did NOT say that it was on private property. Nor that he had applied
for SORN - merely that he doesn't use it. Perhaps he wishes to retain
the option of using it without going through the de-SORN rigmarole?
Perhaps he wishes or has to keep it not on private property.

--
Rod

On 3/28/2013 6:56 AM, Tim Streater wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
bert ] wrote:
I don't have kids, don't use the fire service or police or really any
council services other than bin collection, but still pay full council
tax. This can't be legal, can it?

Council tax is just an idle way of arbitrarily collecting taxes to
fund local services. The expenditure on those services is largely
property independent if you look at the breakdown provided by your
council round this time of year.

I've never seen such a breakdown.

Really? South Cambs and also Canterbury used to provide a leaflet with
the annual COuncil Tax notice detailing what was spent where. I think
they've scrapped the paper copy now but the info will be on their
website. Try looking on yours.

Highland Council also provide this information - "Net Revenue
Expenditure Allocated by Service" (on page 4 of the Council Tax Booklet).

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:12:37 +0000, Nightjar
wrote:

Bristow have already saved more than 7,000 lives in the UK in
over 15,000 missions.

That's a shocking indictment of their taxi service.