In article ,
harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 14:55:41 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip

Of course if you're a Mail reader,

I suggest you seek psychiatric help for this obsessive hatred for the
Mail. FFS, the article in the OP was from the Express.

Don't have an obsessive hatred of either. Just pity for those who
believe every word they read in them - and insist on posting their
stupid views everywhere they can.

Lefties hate the truth.

Right. And the pure fantasies you love posting are the truth?

ie that socialism in all it's forms is long outdated and discredited.
I suppose the read the "Beano".
Is it stillpublished?

Don't you ever wonder why it's only those with extreme right wing views
who insist on starting new threads about their latest wank here?

--
*Preserve wildlife - Go pickle a squirrel*

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

On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 16:43:07 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
as I remember it, the lunch allowance (or evening meal) allowance was
not intended to give you a free meal. It was to refund you for the
extra cost you incurred by not having that meal at home or in the
canteen.

That is a little more difficult to do as we found out here when they set
£10 for breakfast allowence Now I don;t have breakfast but the point
was that in cities like London, new york and tokyo you can't get a
breakfast for £10. So I think setting a reasonable level is OK but what
is that level.

Of course you can get what most would consider a full English breakfast
for under a tenner in London. My local cafe charges 6.20 for sausage,
bacon egg and beans. Two slices of toast and coffee. All well cooked.
But you might have to search a bit in the West End.

That's the type of place such conferencies are held fopr whatever reason.
Makes you wonder why MP MEPs don't organise the G summits in peckham.

On 19/08/15 16:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Don't you ever wonder why it's only those with extreme left wing views
who insist on starting new threads about their latest wank here?


--
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 ,
whisky-dave wrote:
as I remember it, the lunch allowance (or evening meal) allowance was
not intended to give you a free meal. It was to refund you for the
extra cost you incurred by not having that meal at home or in the
canteen.

That is a little more difficult to do as we found out here when they set
£10 for breakfast allowence Now I don;t have breakfast but the point
was that in cities like London, new york and tokyo you can't get a
breakfast for £10. So I think setting a reasonable level is OK but what
is that level.

Of course you can get what most would consider a full English breakfast
for under a tenner in London. My local cafe charges 6.20 for sausage,
bacon egg and beans. Two slices of toast and coffee. All well cooked.
But you might have to search a bit in the West End.

WTF? English? Xenophobe! In addition the sausage is probably not halal, the
bacon definitely not. Really need to get in tune with the neighbours.

harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 14:55:41 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip

Of course if you're a Mail reader,

I suggest you seek psychiatric help for this obsessive hatred for the
Mail. FFS, the article in the OP was from the Express.

Don't have an obsessive hatred of either. Just pity for those who believe
every word they read in them - and insist on posting their stupid views
everywhere they can.

Lefties hate the truth.
ie that socialism in all it's forms is long outdated and discredited.
I suppose the read the "Beano".
Is it stillpublished?

If it is, probably has difficulty understanding it.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 10:21:09 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/15 15:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
But, of course, the only important thing is profit.

Well, of course, absent of government interference, profit tends to
accrue to those who
work hard to deliver something that people are actually prepared to pay
for.

The usual nonsense.

Profit actually tends to accrue to those corporations who can manage
to pay the lowest wages - by sourcing manufactures in say China, while
charging a premium on their goods not fully justified by any additional
cost.

Which is why there's so many deaths building the football staduims in
Qatar

Yes.

and how the country can afford to buy so many prime locations in London it
all comes from profit.

Nope, that is because you lot buy so much of the oil they export, stupid.

You can get a lot of profit from slavery too.

In fact much of the profit from slavery disappeared when what
the slaves did was done by the newly invented farm machinery.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 14:55:41 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip

Of course if you're a Mail reader,

I suggest you seek psychiatric help for this obsessive hatred for the
Mail. FFS, the article in the OP was from the Express.

Don't have an obsessive hatred of either. Just pity for those who believe
every word they read in them - and insist on posting their stupid views
everywhere they can.

Lefties hate the truth.
ie that socialism in all it's forms is long outdated and discredited.

Must be why all those countrys have given up on their
government schools, their equivalent of the NHS, no
more cops, legal system, military system, etc etc etc.

I suppose the read the "Beano".
Is it stillpublished?

On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 22:19:50 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 10:21:09 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/15 15:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
But, of course, the only important thing is profit.

Well, of course, absent of government interference, profit tends to
accrue to those who
work hard to deliver something that people are actually prepared to pay
for.

The usual nonsense.

Profit actually tends to accrue to those corporations who can manage
to pay the lowest wages - by sourcing manufactures in say China, while
charging a premium on their goods not fully justified by any additional
cost.

Which is why there's so many deaths building the football staduims in
Qatar

Yes.

and how the country can afford to buy so many prime locations in London it
all comes from profit.

Nope, that is because you lot buy so much of the oil they export, stupid.

That's how they get the money yes, but it's no me that selling the building I wish it was.


You can get a lot of profit from slavery too.

In fact much of the profit from slavery disappeared when what
the slaves did was done by the newly invented farm machinery.

a lot of it disapeared when we banned slavery.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 22:19:50 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 10:21:09 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/15 15:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
But, of course, the only important thing is profit.

Well, of course, absent of government interference, profit tends to
accrue to those who
work hard to deliver something that people are actually prepared to
pay
for.

The usual nonsense.

Profit actually tends to accrue to those corporations who can manage
to pay the lowest wages - by sourcing manufactures in say China, while
charging a premium on their goods not fully justified by any
additional
cost.

Which is why there's so many deaths building the football staduims in
Qatar

Yes.

and how the country can afford to buy so many prime locations in London
it
all comes from profit.

Nope, that is because you lot buy so much of the oil they export, stupid.

That's how they get the money yes, but it's no me that selling the
building I wish it was.


You can get a lot of profit from slavery too.

In fact much of the profit from slavery disappeared when what
the slaves did was done by the newly invented farm machinery.

a lot of it disapeared when we banned slavery.

Nope, the US didn't just click their heels when you lot banned slavery.

On Thursday, 20 August 2015 20:30:50 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 22:19:50 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 19 August 2015 10:21:09 UTC+1, michael adams wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/08/15 15:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
But, of course, the only important thing is profit.

Well, of course, absent of government interference, profit tends to
accrue to those who
work hard to deliver something that people are actually prepared to
pay
for.

The usual nonsense.

Profit actually tends to accrue to those corporations who can manage
to pay the lowest wages - by sourcing manufactures in say China, while
charging a premium on their goods not fully justified by any
additional
cost.

Which is why there's so many deaths building the football staduims in
Qatar

Yes.

and how the country can afford to buy so many prime locations in London
it
all comes from profit.

Nope, that is because you lot buy so much of the oil they export, stupid.

That's how they get the money yes, but it's no me that selling the
building I wish it was.


You can get a lot of profit from slavery too.

In fact much of the profit from slavery disappeared when what
the slaves did was done by the newly invented farm machinery.

a lot of it disapeared when we banned slavery.

Nope, the US didn't just click their heels when you lot banned slavery.

The US isn't us. please note the capitilisation used here.
Because I know they are the same letters but they don't refer the same thing.