On 10/06/15 18:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Your Union bar was obviously overcharging.

I rarely went in as they didn't allow GURLS in. What's the point of a
bar without GURLS, eh?

'They'd' not allow that these days. Unless UKIP got into power, of course.

Another example of plowpersons final placement syndrome, the utter
irrelevancy ploy.


;-)



--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
And the vast cost of the bail out of the various banks was all down to
Broon too?

If they hadn't been allowed to get into the position they got themselves
into...

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. ;-)

Nothing to do with hindsight, both Canada and Australia worked that out in
advance.

On 10/06/15 20:45, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
What I think is irrelevant.
Couldn't have put it better myself.

He doesn't though. Think. He just parrots leftycrap


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 21:01:34 +0100, bert wrote:

One thing has stood out to me over the last few years.

The government of the day blaming anyone they can regardless when a
promise is broken. But taking all the credit for anything positive.

..."the last few years"...?

Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

chuckle Oh, yes...

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 21:00:13 +0100, bert wrote:

Possibly. But does that explain the woes in much of the rest of Europe,
etc?

The problems of the EU are almost entirely of their own making.

Umm, he was referring to other European countries individually, not the
EU as a whole.

Unless you're blaming the UK's recession on EU membership, and letting
Brown & Balls off the hook?

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , bert
wrote:

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Adrian
wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:02:52 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

I hate the tories stance on university fees.

Trouble is, it's the only one that can possibly work in a country
where 40%+ of school-leavers are going to University. Back in the
days of fully-
paid fees and large enough grants to support a life of beer and
indolence, less than 10% went on to degree-level education.

6% in my day and the grant was nowhere near large enough to support a
life of beer and indolence. Cider, maybe.

And the basic rate of income tax was about 30% to pay for it and went
up every budget.

My grant etc would have been paid for out of the rates, not income tax.

IIRC your tuition fees or cost of your course would be paid for by
central government.
--
bert

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:24:07 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

BTW, not too many people are worried about a diverse population. Many
more might be worried about population density, which is driving up
house prices and making it hard to put in new infrastructure.

Using that as an argument in favour of reducing migration ignores
demographics. It ignores the ageing population, the rapidly-increasing
number of pensioners, and the ever-lengthening average lifespan.

Life expectancy went down this year.

Not with the natives it didn't.

The ageing population is working
longer and also doesn't need immigrants to support it

It does actually because Britain isn't even self replacing
on population if you take out immigration, just like with
every other modern first world country.

as it makes a net
contribution of some 50bn per annum to the economy.

Which it are you talking about there ?

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/06/15 21:31, John Chance wrote:
That is dishonest. Its the UKIP vote that matters.

And it seems to matter very much to plowman.

If UKIP is such a spent force, why does he bother?

He appears to enjoy rubbing your nose in how badly UKIP did MPs wise.

I don't go around pointing out that the liberal democrats committed
electoral and popular suicide. I am content that they have vanished from
the scene.

But we dont have anyone in here claiming that the sun shines out of their
arse.

In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:06:50 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

One thing has stood out to me over the last few years.

The government of the day blaming anyone they can regardless when a
promise is broken. But taking all the credit for anything positive.

..."the last few years"...?
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , bert
wrote:

In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Adrian
wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:02:52 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

I hate the tories stance on university fees.

Trouble is, it's the only one that can possibly work in a country
where 40%+ of school-leavers are going to University. Back in the
days of fully-
paid fees and large enough grants to support a life of beer and
indolence, less than 10% went on to degree-level education.

6% in my day and the grant was nowhere near large enough to support a
life of beer and indolence. Cider, maybe.

And the basic rate of income tax was about 30% to pay for it and went
up every budget.

My grant etc would have been paid for out of the rates, not income tax.

IIRC your tuition fees or cost of your course would be paid for by
central government.

at one point, funding was provided by County Councils, not cental
Governemnt, so "rates" is correct.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , John Chance
wrote:

It does actually because Britain isn't even self replacing
on population if you take out immigration, just like with
every other modern first world country.

Is that why the UK population, at 50 million some 50 years ago, is now
over 60 million?

The effect is more recent than 50 years ago.

On 10/06/2015 21:07, bert wrote:
In article , Nightjar
writes
On 10/06/2015 07:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/06/15 23:06, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:
On 09/06/2015 22:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/06/15 16:18, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar cpb@ insert my surname here.me.uk wrote:
On 09/06/2015 14:00, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
I see your point, but I disagree that a party that got 12% vote
share is
a "minority".

Is there any official definition of minority when it comes to
political
parties?...

Generally, any party that has so little electoral support that it
has no
realistic prospect of forming or being part of a government.

Ah. Thanks. UKIP supporters will be in denial about this.

ITYM greens or liberal democrats or SNP actually. All polled far less
than UKIP.

Not much use if that doesn't translate to seats in Parliament.

In fact apart from Labour and Tory, UKIP is the ONLY other party
likely
to form a national government in the next decade

Going by the demographics of UKIP supporters, a lot of them will have
popped their clogs before then.


Another assertion simply not borne out by the facts.

According to a 2013 YouGov survey, 71% of UKIP supporters are over 50,
compared to the national figure of 46%.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/03/05...s-ukip-voters/

Another survey, from April this year, showed that their greatest
support came from the over 65s.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/laur...ll-voters_b_66
31026.html

Whether you like it or not, the person most likely to support UKIP is
a retired male manual worker, over 65, living in the Eastern counties
(with Yorkshire and Humberside or the Midlands other likely areas),
who never got a higher qualification than GCSE.

The average life expectancy at age 65 for those areas is 18-19 years,
but you can knock two years off that for manual workers, giving a life
expectancy of 16-17 years. As there will be a spread of ages in that
group, I don't think it unreasonable to suggest that a lot of them
will be dead within the next ten years.

Well UGOV was spectacularly wrong on the polls

Everybody was wrong on the polls.

and you quote a 2013
survey.

You think UKIP has become the party of youth in the meanwhile?

As for the Huffington post - well that's hardly an unbiased
publication.

They did the same exercise for everybody.

--
Colin Bignell

In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
What I think is irrelevant.
Couldn't have put it better myself.

Good that you've learned how to snip.

Any chance you do it sensibly on all your other posts now?

--
*If all is not lost, where the hell is it?

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

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is curious is why you desperately *want* it to be true when anyone
with half a brain can check the facts themselves.

Most here will remember your 'facts' on how well UKIP would do before the
election...

--
*I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard to pronounce

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

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I lost count of how many times Cameron blamed all of the country's
economic woes on the previous government. Without qualification.

Well at leats it made a change from 'XXX years of tory misrule'

And of course you can't see the difference between generalization and
specifics.

I am at a total loss to see WTF you are on about.

Can you please change your name to The National Idiot, then?

--
*Microsoft broke Volkswagen's record: They only made 21.4 million bugs.

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

In article ,
charles wrote:
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government decimated Scottish
industry.

--
*On the seventh day He brewed beer *

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
charles wrote

Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming
all our ills on Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her
government decimated Scottish industry.

Like hell it did. That was happening world wide, so couldn’t have been due
to Thatcher.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government decimated Scottish
industry.

I think "decimated" (killed one tenth) is a very generous word in this case.

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On 10/06/2015 21:42, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
"cpb"@ wrote:

On 10/06/2015 18:02, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
"cpb"@ wrote:

On 10/06/2015 10:33, Tim Streater wrote:
...
6% in my day and the grant was nowhere near large enough to support a
life of beer and indolence. Cider, maybe.

Your Union bar was obviously overcharging.

I rarely went in as they didn't allow GURLS in. What's the point of a
bar without GURLS, eh?


You paid pub prices? No wonder you couldn't afford beer.

The question of whether I could afford beer is neither here nor there,
since I didn't drink it; I drank, and still drink, cider.

Something I only drank mixed with Guinness :-)

I went to Glasgow, so the men's union bar was a place for serious
drinking.

Drinking 12 pints of an evening was never something that attracted me.

I don't recall ever drinking more than eight in one night - eight
blokes, one round each. I'm not sure how I managed that much TBH.


--
Colin Bignell

On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 00:57:01 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government got blamed for
commercial reality decimating Scottish industry.

FTFY

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government decimated Scottish
industry.

I think "decimated" (killed one tenth) is a very generous word in this
case.

Yes, but it wasn’t any of Thatcher's policies that
did that, it happened world wide at that time.

On 11/06/15 10:12, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
"cpb"@ wrote:

On 10/06/2015 21:42, Tim Streater wrote:

Drinking 12 pints of an evening was never something that attracted me.

I don't recall ever drinking more than eight in one night - eight
blokes, one round each. I'm not sure how I managed that much TBH.

Which is why I don't do rounds.

There were students in my day who managed 12 on their 21st birthdays.


11 pints of Guinness in one evening did not do me any favours on one
occasion. Most I managed at the end of exams was 26 shots of Southern
Comfort. Sat up all night talking with Smelly Jeff and playing arcade
games and drinking a lot of water.

Come about 4am, it all switched off so I went to bed. Woke up the next
morning feeling excellent.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
I can understand that given just how her
government decimated Scottish industry.

Like hell it did. That was happening world wide, so couldn’t have been
due to Thatcher.

Right. Didn't realise things like ships and steel were no longer needed.
You learn something new every day.

--
*Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter since nobody listens*

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

On Thursday, 11 June 2015 07:53:19 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
On 10/06/2015 21:42, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
"cpb"@ wrote:

On 10/06/2015 18:02, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
"cpb"@ wrote:

On 10/06/2015 10:33, Tim Streater wrote:
...
6% in my day and the grant was nowhere near large enough to support a
life of beer and indolence. Cider, maybe.

Your Union bar was obviously overcharging.

I rarely went in as they didn't allow GURLS in. What's the point of a
bar without GURLS, eh?


You paid pub prices? No wonder you couldn't afford beer.

The question of whether I could afford beer is neither here nor there,
since I didn't drink it; I drank, and still drink, cider.

Something I only drank mixed with Guinness :-)

Black and tan was it.
I could could only drink cider (other than merrydown) with lager and black,
otherwise called a snakebite and black.

I went to Glasgow, so the men's union bar was a place for serious
drinking.

Drinking 12 pints of an evening was never something that attracted me.

I don't recall ever drinking more than eight in one night - eight
blokes, one round each. I'm not sure how I managed that much TBH.

I managed 7 pints of bitter once, my highest ever in a session.
Won't be doing it again though, just made me feel too rough.
since then I've never been in a round with more than 4 people.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
I can understand that given just how her
government decimated Scottish industry.

Like hell it did. That was happening world wide, so couldnt have been
due to Thatcher.

Right. Didn't realise things like ships and steel were no longer needed.
You learn something new every day.

AFAIR '80's government stopped supporting loss making industry.

35 years on, shouldn't they have got over it?




--
Tim Lamb

On 11/06/2015 08:29, John Chance wrote:


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government decimated Scottish
industry.

I think "decimated" (killed one tenth) is a very generous word in this
case.

Yes, but it wasn’t any of Thatcher's policies that
did that, it happened world wide at that time.

Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was down to there
being no point in investing in manufacturing while the unions are going
to demand more to operate it.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 11/06/2015 08:29, John Chance wrote:


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Just remind me which political wing keeps blaming all our ills on
Margaret Thatcher, even now.

the SNP for one

I can understand that given just how her government decimated Scottish
industry.

I think "decimated" (killed one tenth) is a very generous word in this
case.

Yes, but it wasn’t any of Thatcher's policies that
did that, it happened world wide at that time.

Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was down to there
being no point in investing in manufacturing while the unions are going to
demand more to operate it.

The real problem was that heavy industry had moved to Japan and South
Korea and the entire world was over supplied with steel making etc.

Scotland did fine in the oil and gas industry.

In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was down to there
being no point in investing in manufacturing while the unions are going
to demand more to operate it.

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was closure.

--
*Gargling is a good way to see if your throat leaks.

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
dennis@home wrote

Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was
down to there being no point in investing in manufacturing
while the unions are going to demand more to operate it.

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend.

That isn't going to happen without any investment.

Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was closure.

Didn’t happen with the oil and gas industry.

On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:18:00 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was
closure.

And - if that happened - it was the Gov't that did it, was it?

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
dennis@home wrote

Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was
down to there being no point in investing in manufacturing
while the unions are going to demand more to operate it.

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend.

That isn't going to happen without any investment.

You've missed the point as usual.

Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was closure.

Didn’t happen with the oil and gas industry.

A new industry. Can't be started without investment. Unlike an existing
one which can be starved of it.

--
*I'm pretty sure that sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it.

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

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 00:18:00 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was
closure.

And - if that happened - it was the Gov't that did it, was it?

It didn't help.

You have to ask yourself why other high wage economies managed to retain
heavy industry that was deemed not viable in the UK.

--
*IF YOU TRY TO FAIL, AND SUCCEED, WHICH HAVE YOU DONE?

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

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was down to there
being no point in investing in manufacturing while the unions are going
to demand more to operate it.

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was closure.

believe it or not, shareholders are also concerned about getting their
investment back. So cloing down is unlikely to be in their interests.

--
Please note new email address:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
dennis@home wrote

Most of the trouble was poor productivity.. and that was
down to there being no point in investing in manufacturing
while the unions are going to demand more to operate it.

No need to invest at all. Just make sure
the shareholders got a good dividend.

That isn't going to happen without any investment.

You've missed the point as usual.

You never had a point except for the one on your head.

Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was closure.

Didn't happen with the oil and gas industry.

A new industry. Can't be started without investment.

Bull****. Most obviously with the personal computer.

Unlike an existing one which can be starved of it.

That isn't what happened with Scotland.

The industrys that made sense to invest in got that investment.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Adrian wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote

No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was
closure.

And - if that happened - it was the Gov't that did it, was it?

It didn't help.

Its never about govt with industry.

You have to ask yourself why other high wage economies managed
to retain heavy industry that was deemed not viable in the UK.

Have fun listing any that did with the industry that Scotland lost.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Didn't happen with the oil and gas industry.

A new industry. Can't be started without investment.

Bull****. Most obviously with the personal computer.

Didn't realise they were mined from the North Sea.

Does Bill Gates know this?

--
*What happens when none of your bees wax? *

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

In article ,
charles wrote:
No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was
closure.

believe it or not, shareholders are also concerned about getting their
investment back. So cloing down is unlikely to be in their interests.

Depends on how much they've had in the way of dividends.

--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

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

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
You have to ask yourself why other high wage economies managed
to retain heavy industry that was deemed not viable in the UK.

Have fun listing any that did with the industry that Scotland lost.

Thanks for proving you know less about Scotland than most things. Quite an
achievement for you.

--
*A dog's not just for Christmas, it's alright on a Friday night too*

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Didn't happen with the oil and gas industry.

A new industry. Can't be started without investment.

Bull****. Most obviously with the personal computer.

Didn't realise they were mined from the North Sea.

Does Bill Gates know this?

Wozniak does.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
charles wrote:
No need to invest at all. Just make sure the shareholders got a good
dividend. Until everything was so clapped out the only answer was
closure.

believe it or not, shareholders are also concerned about getting their
investment back. So cloing down is unlikely to be in their interests.

Depends on how much they've had in the way of dividends.

They don’t get any dividends when the operation is clapped out.