Because it's the only three keys he can play in - would have given it to him
sooner, except he had to learn to play in C

(this is a musicians joke...)

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.

In article , Andy Evans wrote:
Because it's the only three keys he can play in - would have given it to him
sooner, except he had to learn to play in C

(this is a musicians joke...)

Very droll.

Cheers
Dan.

On 31 Dec 2003 12:21:48 GMT, ohawker (Andy
Evans) wrote:

Because it's the only three keys he can play in - would have given it to him
sooner, except he had to learn to play in C

(this is a musicians joke...)

There are a lot of names that I could put forward for the honors list
who would deserve it more than Eric and they a

The sparkies/plumbers/joiners/plasters/ etc.

The great bunch of guys on this ng who have helped us all out in one
way or another in the past and have help changed some of us from
cringing frightened folks into have a go diyers.

Good luck to all not just for the new year but for always.
ATB

Kris

On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

"PoP" wrote in message
...
On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....

That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 19:56:54 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"PoP" wrote in message
.. .
On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....

That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.



I see. So clearly there is no such thing as the Presidential Medal
of Freedom..........


The names mentioned on this site seems to be based on a comparable
cross section to those awarded here.

http://tinyurl.com/2skm8


There seem to be a fairly broad set under the civilian sections at

http://honours.homestead.com/us.html

as well.
---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 19:56:54 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"PoP" wrote in message
.. .
On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the
public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....

That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.

I see. So clearly there is no such thing as the Presidential Medal
of Freedom..........

We give silly title and letters after your name like confetti. A They gave
one to a school bus driving lady who drove the bus for 25 years. She said
she hasn't a clue why she got her gong, as she had done nothing
extraordinary - just drove a bus.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 20:32:45 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 19:56:54 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"PoP" wrote in message
.. .
On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the
public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....

That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.

I see. So clearly there is no such thing as the Presidential Medal
of Freedom..........

We give silly title and letters after your name like confetti. A They gave
one to a school bus driving lady who drove the bus for 25 years. She said
she hasn't a clue why she got her gong, as she had done nothing
extraordinary - just drove a bus.


Obviously somebody appreciated her efforts. At least it represented a
service to her community over a good number of years, unlike those
given to the majority of sports personalities who are 5 minute wonders
in many cases.

Anyway, you've got the letters "IMM" after your full name "Abuse-IMM"
and nobody complains too much about that, do they..?






---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Huge wrote:

Kris writes:

On 31 Dec 2003 12:21:48 GMT, ohawker (Andy
Evans) wrote:


Because it's the only three keys he can play in - would have given it to him
sooner, except he had to learn to play in C

(this is a musicians joke...)

There are a lot of names that I could put forward for the honors list
who would deserve it more than Eric and they a

The sparkies/plumbers/joiners/plasters/ etc.

The great bunch of guys on this ng who have helped us all out in one
way or another in the past and have help changed some of us from
cringing frightened folks into have a go diyers.


So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.




Oh, anything can be SUGGESTED by the public...
Only what is demanded by the public affects the government, and then it
doesn't HAPPEN. They merely promise it, treble tax in order to pay for
the studies and focus groups and implementation of it, before thankfully
geting voted out of office when everyone finally realises they can't
actually deliver it.

IMM wrote:

"PoP" wrote in message
...

On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:


So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....


That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.



The trouble with you IMM is you shold have gone to a snotty Uni where
ypou would have been taught the fundamental truths, one of whaich is teh
greatest crime is getting caught.

The only difference in the USA is that because the judges and half of te
police's bosses also get elected, as long as the cheques are big enough
and far reaching enough, even if caught, you won't get prosecuted...

Why on earth do you think there is all this support from reform of the
law courts, and elected upper ghouse?

So the government can do what it likes and be sure of no opposition.

Its the normal route down which a democracy goes on its way to a fascist
dictatorship.

On an aside, I was just listening to John Prescott on the beeb.

On being asked whether in Tonys absence he had complete control, he
utterd something like:

'of course if the prime minister needs discussing, we will do that'

Now my question is this

was he

(a) inadvertently lettng slip that he is working on a putsch to get rid
of tony?

or
(b) simply using words bigger than he knows how to, to try to appear
smarter than he really is?

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 09:01:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

IMM wrote:

"PoP" wrote in message
...

On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:


So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....


That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.



The trouble with you IMM is you shold have gone to a snotty Uni where
ypou would have been taught the fundamental truths, one of whaich is teh
greatest crime is getting caught.

The only difference in the USA is that because the judges and half of te
police's bosses also get elected, as long as the cheques are big enough
and far reaching enough, even if caught, you won't get prosecuted...

Why on earth do you think there is all this support from reform of the
law courts, and elected upper ghouse?

So the government can do what it likes and be sure of no opposition.

Its the normal route down which a democracy goes on its way to a fascist
dictatorship.

On an aside, I was just listening to John Prescott on the beeb.

On being asked whether in Tonys absence he had complete control, he
utterd something like:

'of course if the prime minister needs discussing, we will do that'

Now my question is this

was he

(a) inadvertently lettng slip that he is working on a putsch to get rid
of tony?

or
(b) simply using words bigger than he knows how to, to try to appear
smarter than he really is?


Remarkably similar to Napoleon in Animal Farm.......


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

"PoP" wrote in message
...

On 1 Jan 2004 13:45:47 GMT, (Huge) wrote:


So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the
public,
these days.

Enclosing a cheque made out to the Labour Party will no doubt grease
the application.....


That is a certain way of not getting a silly gong, which all should be
banned anyway. The US doesn't have such daftness. They are sensitive
to
these matters after the likes of Bernie Ecclestone.



The trouble with you IMM is you shold have gone to a snotty Uni where
ypou would have been taught the fundamental truths, one of whaich is teh
greatest crime is getting caught.

Sounds snotty uni-ish to me - a bunch of con artists and thieves.

Why on earth do you think there is all this support from reform of the
law courts, and elected upper ghouse?

So the government can do what it likes
and be sure of no opposition.

New Year cheer is still upon you.

Its the normal route down which a democracy goes on its way to a fascist
dictatorship.

Having a stronger democracy? Wow!

On an aside, I was just listening to
John Prescott on the beeb.

Nice man. Great left hook. He is relaxing planning in the countryside, so
we are not all holed up in towns and cities.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Huge wrote:

Kris writes:

On 31 Dec 2003 12:21:48 GMT, ohawker (Andy
Evans) wrote:


Because it's the only three keys he can play in - would have given it
to him
sooner, except he had to learn to play in C

(this is a musicians joke...)

There are a lot of names that I could put forward for the honors list
who would deserve it more than Eric and they a

The sparkies/plumbers/joiners/plasters/ etc.

The great bunch of guys on this ng who have helped us all out in one
way or another in the past and have help changed some of us from
cringing frightened folks into have a go diyers.


So write to No.10 Downing Street. Honours can be suggested by the
public,
these days.

Best to suggest to get rid of it completely.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes

Oh, anything can be SUGGESTED by the public...
Only what is demanded by the public affects the government, and then it
doesn't HAPPEN. They merely promise it, treble tax in order to pay for
the studies and focus groups and implementation of it, before
thankfully geting voted out of office when everyone finally realises
they can't actually deliver it.

Does anyone have one of those Labour pledge cards? The one where they
promised what they would deliver when they came to orifice. It would
make interesting reading
--
geoff

"geoff" wrote in message
...
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes

Oh, anything can be SUGGESTED by the public...
Only what is demanded by the public affects the government, and then it
doesn't HAPPEN. They merely promise it, treble tax in order to pay for
the studies and focus groups and implementation of it, before
thankfully geting voted out of office when everyone finally realises
they can't actually deliver it.

Does anyone have one of those Labour pledge cards? The one where they
promised what they would deliver when they came to orifice. It would
make interesting reading

All points on time, as reported by Newsnight.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 24/12/2003

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 01:17:40 +0000, geoff wrote:

Does anyone have one of those Labour pledge cards? The one where they
promised what they would deliver when they came to orifice. It would
make interesting reading

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/en...00/1321962.stm

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

In article , IMM
wrote:

Does anyone have one of those Labour pledge cards? The one where they
promised what they would deliver when they came to orifice. It would
make interesting reading

All points on time, as reported by Newsnight.

There is only one explanation. You are Mandy and I claim my five pounds.

--
AJL Electronics (G6FGO) Ltd : Satellite and TV aerial systems
http://www.classicmicrocars.co.uk : http://www.ajlelectronics.co.uk

Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics) wrote:

In article , IMM
wrote:


Does anyone have one of those Labour pledge cards? The one where they
promised what they would deliver when they came to orifice. It would
make interesting reading

All points on time, as reported by Newsnight.


There is only one explanation. You are Mandy and I claim my five pounds.



Actually I thnk he is Gordon Brown. Its the only explanation for the
incoherent babbling.

Huge wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/en...00/1321962.stm

"The pledges are to keep mortgages and inflation as low as possible;
to have 10,000 extra teachers; 20,000 extra nurses; 6,000 extra police
officers and the minimum wage increased to £4.20 an hour."

I fear all these may actually have been achieved. What a depressing
thought.

Yes - let's get back to the good old days of high unemployment and pay rises
every few months (even though the cash didn't seem to buy as much as it did
last month), eh Huge? At least it would keep the number of cars on the road
down, wouldn't it.

Humph.

John.

Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:
Huge wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/en...00/1321962.stm

"The pledges are to keep mortgages and inflation as low as possible;
to have 10,000 extra teachers; 20,000 extra nurses; 6,000 extra
police officers and the minimum wage increased to £4.20 an hour."

I fear all these may actually have been achieved. What a depressing
thought.

Yes - let's get back to the good old days of high unemployment and
pay rises every few months (even though the cash didn't seem to buy
as much as it did last month), eh Huge? At least it would keep the
number of cars on the road down, wouldn't it.

I've no idea what you're on about. And I suspect that you don't,
either.

You seemed to be saying that you found extra teachers, nurses and police
officers and an improved minimum wage a depressing thought. Seems to me that
these things would improve employment and generally improve the wealth of
those on the minimum wage.

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier response.

John.

"Mr E" wrote in message
...
Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:
Huge wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/en...00/1321962.stm

"The pledges are to keep mortgages and inflation as low as possible;
to have 10,000 extra teachers; 20,000 extra nurses; 6,000 extra
police officers and the minimum wage increased to £4.20 an hour."

I fear all these may actually have been achieved. What a depressing
thought.

Yes - let's get back to the good old days of high unemployment and
pay rises every few months (even though the cash didn't seem to buy
as much as it did last month), eh Huge? At least it would keep the
number of cars on the road down, wouldn't it.

I've no idea what you're on about. And I suspect that you don't,
either.

You seemed to be saying that you found extra teachers, nurses and police
officers and an improved minimum wage a depressing thought. Seems to me
that
these things would improve employment and generally improve the wealth of
those on the minimum wage.

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier response.

You are assuming he can think.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 14:23:25 -0000, "Mr E"
wrote:

Yes - let's get back to the good old days of high unemployment and pay rises
every few months (even though the cash didn't seem to buy as much as it did
last month), eh Huge? At least it would keep the number of cars on the road
down, wouldn't it.

Speaking as someone who has had fairly recent experience (18 months
ago) of Gordon Browns New Deal, I can say with absolute certainty that
it is a sham to keep the unemployment figures low. We know politicians
like to lie and cheat, but they have excelled themselves with
unemployment.

Over 50? Not eligible - you get the dole but aren't considered to be
unemployed. Claiming for more than 26 weeks? You lose your automatic
entitlement for the dole and are required to go onto means tested
benefit - if you pass the means-tested then you will still be counted
as unemployed (but that's much easier said than done!).

If the job centre offer you some back-to-work type training (even one
days worth) you are required to accept it, otherwise it terminates
your entitlement. And if you do accept the training then (from what I
recall) it removes you from the jobless figures because of some reason
I can't recall.

I was queued up waiting my turn at the bi-weekly grilling session and
got talking to an older chap next to me, and he filled me in on some
of the above. He was 55 and had been unemployed for quite a while. He
said he was no longer counted as unemployed for the above reasons.

I enquired what his trade was - turned out he was a hod carrier (he
apparently worked out in the gym 3 times a week and he certainly
looked fit enough!). And the training he was offered? Computer
operator. Go figure.

It's a good job that I don't have a convenient pile of house bricks in
my living room. I lose my cool very rapidly when yet another smarmy
git comes on and claims low unemployment. Like low inflation - don't
measure the things that real people have to pay for, just measure
those things that hardly ever change anyway.

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

PoP wrote:
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 14:23:25 -0000, "Mr E"
wrote:

Yes - let's get back to the good old days of high unemployment and
pay rises every few months (even though the cash didn't seem to buy
as much as it did last month), eh Huge? At least it would keep the
number of cars on the road down, wouldn't it.

Speaking as someone who has had fairly recent experience (18 months
ago) of Gordon Browns New Deal, I can say with absolute certainty that
it is a sham to keep the unemployment figures low. We know politicians
like to lie and cheat, but they have excelled themselves with
unemployment.

Over 50? Not eligible - you get the dole but aren't considered to be
unemployed. Claiming for more than 26 weeks? You lose your automatic
entitlement for the dole and are required to go onto means tested
benefit - if you pass the means-tested then you will still be counted
as unemployed (but that's much easier said than done!).

If the job centre offer you some back-to-work type training (even one
days worth) you are required to accept it, otherwise it terminates
your entitlement. And if you do accept the training then (from what I
recall) it removes you from the jobless figures because of some reason
I can't recall.

I was queued up waiting my turn at the bi-weekly grilling session and
got talking to an older chap next to me, and he filled me in on some
of the above. He was 55 and had been unemployed for quite a while. He
said he was no longer counted as unemployed for the above reasons.

I enquired what his trade was - turned out he was a hod carrier (he
apparently worked out in the gym 3 times a week and he certainly
looked fit enough!). And the training he was offered? Computer
operator. Go figure.

It's a good job that I don't have a convenient pile of house bricks in
my living room. I lose my cool very rapidly when yet another smarmy
git comes on and claims low unemployment. Like low inflation - don't
measure the things that real people have to pay for, just measure
those things that hardly ever change anyway.

PoP

I have some sympathy with your comments, but dislike being referred to as a
"smarmy git" by someone who has no knowledge of me other than a post to
someone else. Such comments tend to render your other remarks as probably
not worth replying to. However I will do you the credit of assuming that the
last bit was said in frustration.

As it happens I have had three members of my family unemployed in the last
three years. Most recently my wife who is over 50. Incidentally she found a
job within two months of being made redundant. In spite of that individual
success, I am aware of the inadequacies of the current system. Your
assumption of lies by the government means that any pronouncement by them,
true or false will be rejected. However, there is a simpler measure of
unemployment (or at least wealth) which can be adopted by anyone. As I
implied in my earlier post, the number of cars on the road is a good
indicator of wealth. I can remember driving around in the 1980s with much
less traffic on the roads than currently. Stories of individual hardship (or
incompetence) are not helpful - because they are not necessarily typical.

John.

Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any good
will which they inherited when they came to office.

John.

"Mr E" wrote in message
...
Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any good
will which they inherited when they came to office.

I can't believe the crap I read on here. The economy is booming, the pound
is almighty strong, unemployment is the lowest for 25 years, no more
cardbord cities of homeless people, great anti-social laws, the world went
into recession the UK never, etc, etc.

Are you actually in the UK?



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Mr E" wrote in message
...

However, there is a simpler measure of
unemployment (or at least wealth) which can be adopted by anyone. As I
implied in my earlier post, the number of cars on the road is a good
indicator of wealth.

Not only that, the age of them too. Far, far more newer cars around, and
more expensive models too, these days than when the wicked witch was in
charge.

I can remember driving around in the 1980s with much
less traffic on the roads than currently. Stories of individual hardship
(or
incompetence) are not helpful - because they are not necessarily typical.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

IMM wrote:

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any
good will which they inherited when they came to office.

I can't believe the crap I read on here. The economy is booming, the
pound is almighty strong, unemployment is the lowest for 25 years, no
more cardbord cities of homeless people, great anti-social laws, the
world went into recession the UK never, etc, etc.

And you think that the Government enjoys the same good will that they
inherited when they came to office?


Are you actually in the UK?

Yes.

John.

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 17:00:16 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Mr E" wrote in message
...
Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any good
will which they inherited when they came to office.

I can't believe the crap I read on here.

In a number of areas you write a fair bit of it though......

The economy is booming, the pound
is almighty strong,

This is not necessarily helpful.

unemployment is the lowest for 25 years,

easily achievable when you adjust the methods of measurement. It's
ironic that the current administration, who lambasted its predecessors
so vehemently on statistical methods associated with unemployment
measurement now plays the same game.

no more
cardbord cities of homeless people,

Have you visited any of the London main line stations lately?

great anti-social laws,

Which?

the world went
into recession the UK never, etc, etc.

Are you actually in the UK?



---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 17:04:48 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Mr E" wrote in message
...

However, there is a simpler measure of
unemployment (or at least wealth) which can be adopted by anyone. As I
implied in my earlier post, the number of cars on the road is a good
indicator of wealth.

Not only that, the age of them too. Far, far more newer cars around, and
more expensive models too, these days than when the wicked witch was in
charge.

Oh come on. You shouldn't speak that scathingly of Barbara
Castle.....



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 16:51:52 -0000, "Mr E"
wrote:

I have some sympathy with your comments, but dislike being referred to as a
"smarmy git"

That's fair enough - I was not actually referring to you, but to
various politicians and city pundits who come on breakfast time TV and
make sweeping statements about how wonderful it is to have low
employment. Stated by people who have never had to suffer the
indignity of unemployment. I don't think that applies to you as you
have commented that others within your family have been through this.

I remember the days when I had a nice comfy 9-5 job with a major
employer, never having had the experience I refer to. In those days I
was a "smarmy git" who thought that those nasty unemployed people
ought to get off their backside and find work. Little did I know what
the system they were working with offered!

So when I first got made redundant (1995) I automatically believed
that I just had to go down the job centre and sign on, and everything
would be okay. I learnt very quickly that unemployment benefit and
being treated sympathetically were not part of the unemployment scene,
instead it was assumed by the job centre that I was unemployed because
I wanted to be, and that it was all my fault that I was asking for
money to which I had previously believed I was entitled to. My fault
entirely I suppose - I honestly didn't realise that the money I
thought I could expect actually came out of the personal accounts of
job centre staff.

I don't have sympathy for those within the system that know how to
bleed it dry and who live off the system. But I do have sympathy for
those who find themselves out of work through no reasonable fault of
their own. They are treated very harshly by the job centre, at a time
when their world is turned upside down trying to cope with financial
demands they can no longer meet.

PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

PoP wrote:

I don't have sympathy for those within the system that know how to
bleed it dry and who live off the system. But I do have sympathy for
those who find themselves out of work through no reasonable fault of
their own. They are treated very harshly by the job centre, at a time
when their world is turned upside down trying to cope with financial
demands they can no longer meet.


I suppose that the hard-nosed decision by those in power is that they should
make it difficult to get unemployment benefit, because they assume that this
will put off those who plan to 'sponge' off the system. However it isn't
quite that simple, and I guess that those who are determined to make a
living off others will be able to find a way to do that; while those who are
genuinely in need are likely to be damaged by the experience of asking for
help, and are likely to give up.

John.

PoP wrote:


It's a good job that I don't have a convenient pile of house bricks in
my living room. I lose my cool very rapidly when yet another smarmy
git comes on and claims low unemployment. Like low inflation - don't
measure the things that real people have to pay for, just measure
those things that hardly ever change anyway.


Indeed. One is reminded of the punk flm 'jubilee' where the crime rate
was reduced to zero by repealing all the laws...

IMM wrote:

"Mr E" wrote in message
...

Huge wrote:

"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]


Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any good
will which they inherited when they came to office.


I can't believe the crap I read on here. The economy is booming,


It isn't.

the pound
is almighty strong,



Falling against the Euro, tho teh dollar is falling faster.

unemployment is the lowest for 25 years,


As defined by convenient figures that don't take into account the true
state of affairs. And teh fact that many people are employed in
make-work, because they went to a 'new university' and now have degrees
in politics, museum management and media studies, instead of
plumbing...so the real work doesn't get done..

no more
cardbord cities of homeless people,


Huh? must be jooking.

great anti-social laws, the world went
into recession the UK never, etc, etc.


That had precious little to do with Gordon Brown, and the UK did in fact
go into recession.

I agree we have great anti-social laws tho. Thanks Laber.



Are you actually in the UK?



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

IMM wrote:

"Mr E" wrote in message
...


However, there is a simpler measure of
unemployment (or at least wealth) which can be adopted by anyone. As I
implied in my earlier post, the number of cars on the road is a good
indicator of wealth.


Not only that, the age of them too. Far, far more newer cars around, and
more expensive models too, these days than when the wicked witch was in
charge.



Yup, because by holding interest rates down its easy to borrow ten times
your annual salary. However its a precarious thing. Maggie used norh sea
oil to fnd a consumer boom, Gordon brown is using consumer credit. Both
are finite resources. Bust is on teh way. Its just a matter of time, as
north sea oil and credit are BOTH running out...

PoP wrote:


I don't have sympathy for those within the system that know how to
bleed it dry and who live off the system. But I do have sympathy for
those who find themselves out of work through no reasonable fault of
their own. They are treated very harshly by the job centre, at a time
when their world is turned upside down trying to cope with financial
demands they can no longer meet.


Indeed. It as at that point that I decided never ever again to touch or
trust teh state system for pesnion, unemploymemnt or anything. In fact I
left teh country for a while.

The ONLY way to get money off the dole is by lying cheating and thieving.

Case 1. Ran into girl I used to know years ago, split up from husband
(he was a commie, she was as wurking clarrss as they come). Baby left at
home while she was whoring around. Asked why she married him 'only fing
on offer mate, and wiv a bayby I get a karncil hars dunni?'

Great.

Case 2. As a potential emplyer of IT staff, I recieve letters answering
job adverts. We are in cambridge, letter from North wales, near Bangor.
Gent styles himself IT professional, and says is looking for top dollar
job, lots of experience, but won't relocate. Obviously on the dole and
intends to stay there as no IT jobs within 50 miles of Bangor.
Presumably we are only applied to so he can say he is 'looking for work'
to the soshal.


Case 3. I cpme back from a trip abroad, sign on, get no money, stay with
frriends, phone up agencuies, eventiually get job, after 6 weeks, First
dole payment (one week only) comes through 6 weeks later. First
potential job offer comes through three months later. Its crap, the pay
is lousy and its obviously a sweatshop. I pay taxes for THAT?

I could go on, about NHS dentists who ruined my teeth to make a kliving,
till I stoped going, about teh amount of overtimne I never got paid
because I never was in a Union, about the amount of tax I have paid when
I never used any facilities, not schools, not anything. My taxes have
paid for your kids to go to school, your kids to have their runny noses
wipoed by the local GP, your bloody maternity leave. Whilst you all got
taxe reductions for adding yet more brats to the world, I was working
top rate taxes on crap wages trying to make Britsih Industry do something.
e
And what happens? You guessed it, Thatcher screws industry into the
ground, and teh Unions price themselves out of a job, whilst whinging
gits clutter up the roads in ford mondeos selling yet more useless
garbage to yet more reatil outlets, all on teh backs of MY taxes.

There comes a point where you simply realise that there is no one more
selfish than a true blue socialist. And most socialism as politics.. is
simply greed and envy and one set of useless blokes trying to take money
off another lot, who are somehwat less useless, but not by much.

t which point I saifd **** the lot of them, and payed the sytem, made a
few mill and sat back and said '**** you, I 'm allright Jack'

Because frankly, the system ****ed me completely.

"Put not your trust in princes"

Anyone who has any faith in politicians should read Jeremey Paxmans book
'the political animal'










PoP

Replying to the email address given by my news reader
will result in your own email address being instantly
added to my anti-spam database! If you really want to
contact me try changing the prefix in the given email
address to my newsgroup posting name.....

Mr E wrote:

PoP wrote:

I don't have sympathy for those within the system that know how to
bleed it dry and who live off the system. But I do have sympathy for
those who find themselves out of work through no reasonable fault of
their own. They are treated very harshly by the job centre, at a time
when their world is turned upside down trying to cope with financial
demands they can no longer meet.



I suppose that the hard-nosed decision by those in power is that they should
make it difficult to get unemployment benefit, because they assume that this
will put off those who plan to 'sponge' off the system. However it isn't
quite that simple, and I guess that those who are determined to make a
living off others will be able to find a way to do that; while those who are
genuinely in need are likely to be damaged by the experience of asking for
help, and are likely to give up.



Precisely. The system is, and mostly always has been, broken.

If you aree interested in something a bit more radical try reading
'Instead of the dole' by Hermione Parker. She is/was an academic who
proposed that the most efficient way to organise social security was
simjply to give every man woman and child who are genuine residents a
'citizens income' ..not *quite* enough to live on, but almost. Then any
income is simply taxes at - say - the 40% rate above that. The total tax
take doesn't alter, but the poverty traps are eliminated, as are all
means tests. It also can subsidise low paid work so there is no need of
a minimum wage either. It also entirely dispenses with a huge
bureaucracy that is engaged in working out whether or not someone is
entitled to payments or not, thereby reducing the cost still
further..bit of course it will throw loads of social security staff out
of work but heck, its a crap job and they can always do plumbing. Or
live off their citizens income.

Like the idea of also giving people copons for PRIVATE education and
health, and thereby eliminating aother huge bureacracy that adds nothing
to education or health care, and actually gibves people a real choice as
consumers, it is of course anathema to both parties, since it
essentially decreases their power base, and the size of what they
manage. And gives power - in teh form of cash and coupons - back to teh
people.

And that is the last thing they want, isn't it? To give up power.



John.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 17:00:16 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Mr E" wrote in message
...
Huge wrote:
"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]

Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any
good
will which they inherited when they came to office.

I can't believe the crap I read on here.

In a number of areas you write a fair bit of it though......

Wisdom my boy. You wouldn't know it if it slapped you in the face.

The economy is booming, the pound
is almighty strong,

This is not necessarily helpful.

I suppose poverty and deprivation is. What world do you live in?




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message ...
IMM wrote:

"Mr E" wrote in message
...

Huge wrote:

"Mr E" writes:

[19 lines snipped]


Maybe you hadn't thought carefully enough about your earlier
response.

I find it a depressing thought because it may mean that might have to
put up with more of that smirking lying **** Bliar and his oleaginous
thieving Chancellor and the whole lying, deceitful, nauseating bunch
of yes-men they are surrounded with.

Fair enough. It is fairly clear that 'New Labour' has exhausted any good
will which they inherited when they came to office.


I can't believe the crap I read on here. The economy is booming,

It isn't.

It is. Remember Thatcher?

the pound
is almighty strong,

Falling against the Euro, tho teh dollar is falling faster.

unemployment is the lowest for 25 years,

As defined by convenient figures

Thatcher manipulated unemployment figures over 20 times in the disgusting
reign.

no more
cardbord cities of homeless people,

Huh? must be jooking.

Are there some by you?

great anti-social laws, the world went
into recession the UK never, etc, etc.

That had precious little to do with
Gordon Brown,

The government passed them.

and the UK did in fact
go into recession.

It did not.

I agree we have great anti-social laws tho. Thanks Laber.

I agree too. Now for Tory biased Police forces to implement them properly,
which many ignore.



---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 17:04:48 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Mr E" wrote in message
...

However, there is a simpler measure of
unemployment (or at least wealth) which can be adopted by anyone. As I
implied in my earlier post, the number of cars on the road is a good
indicator of wealth.

Not only that, the age of them too. Far, far more newer cars around, and
more expensive models too, these days than when the wicked witch was in
charge.

Oh come on. You shouldn't speak that scathingly of Barbara
Castle.....

LOL. must be New Year cheer.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003

Huge wrote:

The Natural Philosopher writes:

[48 lines snipped]


And that is the last thing they want, isn't it? To give up power.


Hear, hear.




Jeremy Paxmans book is really fascinatiing. Do you know, teh majority of
pliticians - those who pontficate and pronounce on all weighty matters,
have done nothing more exciting than being school teachers or sochul
wurkahs? Even teh labour party has almost zero members from trades or
manual work, and even the conservatives have almost zero members from
top industrial management? They are all career politicians, and, a
Jeremy points out the majoriy *arte earning more as MP's than they have,
in any other job they have held*.

In short, its not about selecteing teh best and most skilled and lettng
them have a crack at making sane descision, its a normal huerarchy of
brown nosing career people, each greedy to get to the top and get their
noises in the trough.

Its not the Lords that wants reforming, its the Commons.