On 26/02/2020 17:48, Andrew wrote:
On 26/02/2020 15:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/02/2020 15:34, Andrew wrote:

I have no pension at all

Just savings


Earning between 0.001 % and 1.2% (tops) in a deposit account ?.
Â*Â*Earning between 7% and 15% in the best funds I can find..



Not possible. You would only get a return like that by
putting your capital severely at risk.

Think what you like. That's what I get at the moment.

As far as risk goes, its all relative.


Either that or you are selling units to convert growth
into income, or you bought gilts in 1991 when they were
yielding that amount.

Gilts? Don't make me laugh.


--
€œIdeas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 25/02/2020 13:58, Martyn Barclay wrote:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 13:33:09 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/02/2020 10:53, Pancho wrote:
On 25/02/2020 10:25, alan_m wrote:
On 25/02/2020 09:51, Pancho wrote:

My votes in the UK have almost always had no effect, I have lived in
safe seats.

No such thing as a safe seat as the last general election and many
council elections have shown. If a UK Government (or main opposition)
or council make a complete mess of their policies things WILL change.


erm yes, the seats I have lived in have always returned the same party
throughout my lifetime. Some seats always Conservative, some always
Labour. Seems pretty safe to me.


In the case of the EU the UK voters could replace very single MEP and
nothing would change as a result!


And in the Last UK GE London voted approximately twice as many Labour
MPs as Conservative and yet we have a conservative Government.

Should London leave the UK?

If only. Then it would have to survive without being subsidised by the
rural parts of Britain.
Also a wall would perhaps have to be built round it, with customs &
excise
ports in it. After all, London would no longer be part of Britain, would
it.

Excellent. All for it.


Of course it would need a new airport perhaps in the Thames estuary?
--
bert

In article , Richard
writes
On 25/02/2020 06:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 21:48:18 +0000, alan_m wrote:

On 24/02/2020 20:53, Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 16:37:28 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I suspect they will fudge the labelling so you get no choice.

Oh dear. All food in a supermarket is labelled with country of origin
Remainers remain thick

How long will that regulation last?



It my depend on us as consumers. These days supermarkets chain
management are very aware of how customer resistance and possible
boycotts could effect their bottom line. I'm sure that if Tesco,
Sainsbury etc. started selling dodgy USA meat social media would ensure
that would be well publicised.
Except we have legislation in place that could make any attempt to
disseminate that information illegal.
Look how it's now impossible to boycott Israeli goods.

Oh dear. You are being forced to purchase Israeli goods? You must be
very gullible, or a moron.


It's not possible to distinguish between Israeli and Palestinian.
Furthermore the number of union flags and red tractors seen on food
packaging suggests that "local" produced has a marketing value and UK
food producers would probably always want keep these marketing tools
irrespective of regulation.
But the extra value such things allow distributors to charge makes
them a
prime target for "clarification".



--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
John_j wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
Seems 1 in 6 will get food poisoning in the US each year. In the UK, it
is
1 in 66.

Not the figures I've seen/ Care to give a citation - and for Germany
also.

OK, then. Give the 'true' figures.

Not even possible given the different measures used and no formal
reporting of all food poisoning incidents with most not even bothering
to see a doctor about food poisoning.

Right. So government figures are wrong since that suits your agenda, but
you have no way of finding out the true ones?

You still haven't told us where you got your figures from.
I'll say again. I'd say it more likely anyone in the UK would go to a
doctor than in the US. Which would sway the results the other way.


--
bert

In article , John_j
writes


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article , John_j
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John_j wrote:
Right. So government figures are wrong

Never said that. I actually said that those govt figures
can't be compared between those two countries, because
those govt figures are completely different measures
in the two countries.

OK, then. So a margin of error.

Not a margin of error, apples and oranges.
The US govt figure was an ESTIMATE of all
food poisoning events, not a count of actual
events recorded somewhere. The UK was
actual doctor visits When most don€št bother
to see a doctor when they get some food
poisoning even when the doctors visit is free,
the two govt figures arent even remotely
comparable.

But that high?

Yes, when one is an estimate of all food poising
events and the other is a count of doctors visits.

So the two numbers are not even remotely comparable, measuring as they
do different things. Attempts to compare them to make a point are
therefore at best just wrong and at worst dishonest.

Yes, tho in this case it appears the original individual
on the radio program didnt realise that the two govt
stats were apples and oranges.

Ah experts again.
-- The EU Parliament. The only parliament in the world that can
neither initiate
nor repeal legislation.

Robert Kimbell


--
bert

In article ,
bert wrote:
Right. So government figures are wrong since that suits your agenda, but
you have no way of finding out the true ones?

You still haven't told us where you got your figures from.

Dear bert. Unable to read a thread title...

--
*I brake for no apparent reason.

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