Discussion:
Election
Add Reply
Sid Nuncius
2017-06-09 06:47:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Blimey!

I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?

pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Anne B
2017-06-09 06:53:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
Blimey indeed.

Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times". You could
re-punctuate that to say, "May, you live in interesting times" - and "it
is entirely your own fault".

Anne B
Kate B
2017-06-09 09:16:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
Blimey indeed.
Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times". You could
re-punctuate that to say, "May, you live in interesting times" - and "it
is entirely your own fault".
Anne B
Bravo both of you. And da yoof too.

I am I think relieved that Corbyn is unlikely to end up as PM, as I am
worried that his financial plans don't all stack up, but also worried
that May will resign and leave us to the tender mercies of BoJo or some
other Brexiteering oaf. Is there anyone in the Conservative Party that
can actually cope?
--
Kate B
London
Vicky
2017-06-09 10:20:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 9 June 2017
Post by Kate B
Post by Anne B
Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times". You could
re-punctuate that to say, "May, you live in interesting times" - and "it
is entirely your own fault".
Anne B
Bravo both of you. And da yoof too.
I am I think relieved that Corbyn is unlikely to end up as PM, as I am
worried that his financial plans don't all stack up, but also worried
that May will resign and leave us to the tender mercies of BoJo or some
other Brexiteering oaf. Is there anyone in the Conservative Party that
can actually cope?
I feel better today than I expected to feel. I think I'd like to see
Corbyn as PM and trying to implement his manifesto with support from
all parties who want to serve the majority rather than the rich and
powerful. The commentators have been saying Corbyn could field a good
negotiating team to Europe. Or maybe if enough MPs are brave enough
Brexit can be scrapped.
--
Vicky
Sam Plusnet
2017-06-09 21:28:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kate B
Post by Anne B
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
Blimey indeed.
Old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times". You could
re-punctuate that to say, "May, you live in interesting times" - and
"it is entirely your own fault".
Anne B
Bravo both of you. And da yoof too.
I am I think relieved that Corbyn is unlikely to end up as PM, as I am
worried that his financial plans don't all stack up, but also worried
that May will resign and leave us to the tender mercies of BoJo or some
other Brexiteering oaf. Is there anyone in the Conservative Party that
can actually cope?
Ruth Davidson - but that won't happen.
--
Sam
krw
2017-06-09 07:17:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
I hope the new Government of whichever party will honour the proposal to
get rid of student debt and fees. We need to educate our youth and
burdening them with debt is the wrong way to do it. That one factor can
be the only explanation for Conservatives losing Canterbury. Well that
and the triple lock and the complete mess over dementia.

If May wants to lead the Conservative party she needs to remind herself
what those principles are by spending time with her constituents.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 07:47:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result.
Indeed good news.
Post by krw
I hope the new Government of whichever party will honour the proposal to
get rid of student debt and fees. We need to educate our youth and
burdening them with debt is the wrong way to do it.
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't afford
so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Post by krw
If May wants to lead the Conservative party she needs to remind herself
what those principles are by spending time with her constituents.
Agreed. She needs to dump Nick Timothy (author of the awful dementia
tax) and Fiona May too.
krw
2017-06-09 09:28:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't afford
so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There are
ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is simply bad.

Ben Gummer should also go as he wrote the manifesto - oh he did.

Why are we trying to educate people like Freddie - it does not make sense?
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 09:38:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't afford
so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There are
ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is simply bad.
I agree, but how do you fund it ? The Labour ideas for funding might
have worked for a year or two, but over-taxed corporations and the top
5% have choices and will exercise them longer term.
krw
2017-06-09 09:47:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't
afford so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There
are ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is
simply bad.
I agree, but how do you fund it ? The Labour ideas for funding might
have worked for a year or two, but over-taxed corporations and the top
5% have choices and will exercise them longer term.
At the moment the Government is paying and creating an artificial debt.
We all will have to accept higher taxes over a period of time - and some
of those reliefs which some get will have to be reduced - we could do
with a few more Alan Sugar's contributing their tax rather than the
comedians who have been dodging it with strange film companies!
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 09:56:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't
afford so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There
are ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is
simply bad.
I agree, but how do you fund it ? The Labour ideas for funding might
have worked for a year or two, but over-taxed corporations and the top
5% have choices and will exercise them longer term.
At the moment the Government is paying and creating an artificial debt.
We all will have to accept higher taxes over a period of time - and some
of those reliefs which some get will have to be reduced - we could do
with a few more Alan Sugar's contributing their tax rather than the
comedians who have been dodging it with strange film companies!
I agree on the last point, and also the first, but Corbyn was wanting to
ADD to that burden. The numbers simply don't compute.
krw
2017-06-09 09:50:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't
afford so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There
are ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is
simply bad.
I agree, but how do you fund it ? The Labour ideas for funding might
have worked for a year or two, but over-taxed corporations and the top
5% have choices and will exercise them longer term.
Also in me limited experience HMRC almost roll over and die when
paperwork is presented in a particular situation - if they had taken a
stronger line then UK profits would have been marginally higher and UK
tax take marginally higher. Some of the reported Amazon / Google /
Vodaphone tax bills might be slightly higher without their businesses
changing - most of them have moved trading to Ireland and the like and
are not paying fair taxes.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 09:58:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't
afford so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Of course we can afford to do it - starting with the nurses. There
are ways of funding these things and putting debt on children is
simply bad.
I agree, but how do you fund it ? The Labour ideas for funding might
have worked for a year or two, but over-taxed corporations and the top
5% have choices and will exercise them longer term.
Also in me limited experience HMRC almost roll over and die when
paperwork is presented in a particular situation - if they had taken a
stronger line then UK profits would have been marginally higher and UK
tax take marginally higher. Some of the reported Amazon / Google /
Vodaphone tax bills might be slightly higher without their businesses
changing - most of them have moved trading to Ireland and the like and
are not paying fair taxes.
Also agreed, but legally they can do it because the EU allows it. After
Brexit maybe not so much :)

But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly heard
it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
krw
2017-06-09 10:29:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Also agreed, but legally they can do it because the EU allows it. After
Brexit maybe not so much :)
But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly heard
it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
Not covered by EU legislation - so not relevant. Very small increase in
the real rates of tax which those large corporations "divert" under
Transfer Pricing arrangements would amount to a lot of cash at the end
of the day. Not a magic money tree - but my experience is that HMRC
simply do not try.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 10:59:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Also agreed, but legally they can do it because the EU allows it.
After Brexit maybe not so much :)
But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly
heard it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
Not covered by EU legislation - so not relevant.
Not my understanding - why do you think Luxembourg (under Juncker)
became so rich ?!?

<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-ecofin-taxation-idUSKBN1601DF?il=0>

"The new rules, due to go into effect in 2020, should help the EU recoup
revenues from companies that cut their tax bills by declaring profits in
countries with low or no taxation.

Tax-saving schemes used by Apple, Amazon, Google, Starbucks and other
companies - all legal under current laws - have raised public pressure
for EU-wide rules to close these loopholes.
"

Very small increase in
Post by krw
the real rates of tax which those large corporations "divert" under
Transfer Pricing arrangements would amount to a lot of cash at the end
of the day.
I'd like to see some numbers on that because if it was that easy to do
without frightening off the big multinationals, I'm sure someone would
have already done it.
BrritSki
2017-06-09 11:06:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Also agreed, but legally they can do it because the EU allows it.
After Brexit maybe not so much :)
But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly
heard it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
Not covered by EU legislation - so not relevant.
Not my understanding - why do you think Luxembourg (under Juncker)
became so rich ?!?
<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-ecofin-taxation-idUSKBN1601DF?il=0>
and
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/01/jean-claude-juncker-blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show>
krw
2017-06-09 12:22:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Not my understanding - why do you think Luxembourg (under Juncker)
became so rich ?!?
The EU merely implement this:
Regulations, rulings, guidelines
UK legislation on transfer pricing incorporates the
OECD model treaty, including the arm’s length
principle as set out in Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax
Convention, and the OECD’s Transfer Pricing Guidelines
for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations.
With effect for accounting periods beginning on or
after April 1, 2011, this is the 2010 version of the
transfer pricing guidelines, as clarified by Actions 8-10
of the October 2015 G20/OECD BEPS reports.

So the EU legislation merely reflects a wider international agreement -
so being in or out of the EU does not affect what we do.

Cannot have the EU take the blame where it is not responsible - we are
not the Daily Mail!
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 12:47:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by BrritSki
Not my understanding - why do you think Luxembourg (under Juncker)
became so rich ?!?
Regulations, rulings, guidelines
UK legislation on transfer pricing incorporates the
OECD model treaty, including the arm’s length
principle as set out in Article 9 of the OECD Model Tax
Convention, and the OECD’s Transfer Pricing Guidelines
for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations.
With effect for accounting periods beginning on or
after April 1, 2011, this is the 2010 version of the
transfer pricing guidelines, as clarified by Actions 8-10
of the October 2015 G20/OECD BEPS reports.
So the EU legislation merely reflects a wider international agreement -
so being in or out of the EU does not affect what we do.
Good point, well made. A lot of EU regulations are in fact edicts by
even larger world organisations.
Post by krw
Cannot have the EU take the blame where it is not responsible - we are
not the Daily Mail!
Heaven forfend ! ;)
Clive Arthur
2017-06-09 12:03:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 09/06/2017 10:58, BrritSki wrote:

<snip>
Post by BrritSki
But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly heard
it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
I'm no economist, but surely a magic money tree is a good thing? I
mean, Theresa May has an imaginary friend who can do magic.

Cheers
--
Clive
Btms
2017-06-09 12:09:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
<snip>
Post by BrritSki
But again, the amount involved would not fund the huge increases in
expenditure promised by Labour. This is another point that the Tories
should have been hammering home during the campaign but you hardly heard
it apart from "the magic money tree" towards the end.
I'm no economist, but surely a magic money tree is a good thing? I
mean, Theresa May has an imaginary friend who can do magic.
Cheers
I had expected more joined up thinking from Mrs May.

I don't understand why advisers seem to make policy. I thought this is
what Ministers do. Hey ho, here we go.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Penny
2017-06-09 14:05:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 12:09:36 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Btms
I don't understand why advisers seem to make policy. I thought this is
what Ministers do. Hey ho, here we go.
Did you not watch 'Yes, Minister'?
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Btms
2017-06-09 14:46:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Btms
I don't understand why advisers seem to make policy. I thought this is
what Ministers do. Hey ho, here we go.
Did you not watch 'Yes, Minister'?
It is called irony m'dear.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
BrritSki
2017-06-09 09:45:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Ben Gummer should also go as he wrote the manifesto...
I don't think the manifesto per se was that bad, but the way it was
presented was awful. e.g.
1. the triple-lock on pensions will not be a problem if inflation is
running at over 2% which it looks like it will do for some time.
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the right
thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a taxable benefit
rather than means-testing it.
3. The free school breakfast should have been sold as being TWO free
meals a day for the poorest rather than the removal of lunches for all
4. the dementia tax could have been sold much better as an increase in
the floor from £23K to £100K, but should also have included a cap as
well as a floor, and then to u-turn on it and then pretend nothing had
changed was a nonsense.
krw
2017-06-09 10:31:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.

It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
BrritSki
2017-06-09 11:01:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
:)
Post by krw
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
Totally. Made "strong and stable" risible.
Anne B
2017-06-09 18:04:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.

There would of course need to be some sort of sliding scale at the
margi, of course, but I can't believe that it's beyond anyone's
ingenuity to come up with a sensible scheme.

It is totally ludicrous that better-off pensioners should be enitled to
travel the length and breadth of their respective countries free, gratis
and for nothing, and it's equally ludicrous to talk about means testing
because means testing is very expensive, whereas doing it through the
tax system would be much, much cheaper.

Anne B
n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-06-10 05:08:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
*Date:* Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:04:09 +0100
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making
changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new
pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes.
Then the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them
and those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
I totally agree: using the tax system to claw back these benefits makes
sense (to us but not to politicians it seems :-) perhaps there isn't as
much spin for their personal cudos). The tax system already has mechanisms
for taxable benefits in work (company cars, free lunches etc.) so
extending it to pensioner benefits is an almost cost free solution. The
only problem is that _having_ a bus pass isn't a benefit but _using_ it
is, which would make the system very complicated.
There would of course need to be some sort of sliding scale at the
margi, of course, but I can't believe that it's beyond anyone's
ingenuity to come up with a sensible scheme.
It is totally ludicrous that better-off pensioners should be
enitled to travel the length and breadth of their respective
countries free, gratis and for nothing, and it's equally ludicrous
to talk about means testing because means testing is very
expensive, whereas doing it through the tax system would be much,
much cheaper.
I wouldn't get too hung up on free travel for wealthy pensioners, _they_
don't use busses. And, whilst it's theoretically possible to travel from
John O-Groats to Land's End using a bus pass, they're valid on local
routes only and the schedules are such that it would take a few days to
achieve it (not something most people would relish).

Steph.
BrritSki
2017-06-10 07:11:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/06/2017 07:08,
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
I wouldn't get too hung up on free travel for wealthy pensioners,
It's not so much the cost as the message it sends to the less wealthy.

We are wealthy by some people's estimate - but not by wealthy people's
estimate :) - and we certainly used our bus passes, particularly in
London which saved us oodles.

It also meant that when we flew in to visit, we were encouraged to use
trains (booked well in advance for very cheap fares) and then busses. I
find bus tickets ridiculously expensive for the length of journey.
Anne B
2017-06-10 09:02:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10/06/2017 06:08,
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
*Date:* Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:04:09 +0100
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making
changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new
pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes.
Then the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them
and those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
I totally agree: using the tax system to claw back these benefits makes
sense (to us but not to politicians it seems :-) perhaps there isn't as
much spin for their personal cudos). The tax system already has mechanisms
for taxable benefits in work (company cars, free lunches etc.) so
extending it to pensioner benefits is an almost cost free solution. The
only problem is that _having_ a bus pass isn't a benefit but _using_ it
is, which would make the system very complicated.
There would of course need to be some sort of sliding scale at the
margi, of course, but I can't believe that it's beyond anyone's
ingenuity to come up with a sensible scheme.
It is totally ludicrous that better-off pensioners should be
enitled to travel the length and breadth of their respective
countries free, gratis and for nothing, and it's equally ludicrous
to talk about means testing because means testing is very
expensive, whereas doing it through the tax system would be much,
much cheaper.
I wouldn't get too hung up on free travel for wealthy pensioners, _they_
don't use busses. And, whilst it's theoretically possible to travel from
John O-Groats to Land's End using a bus pass, they're valid on local
routes only and the schedules are such that it would take a few days to
achieve it (not something most people would relish).
Steph.
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.

And I carefully said 'better-off' rather than 'wealthy' for that very
reason.

Anne B
Btms
2017-06-10 09:13:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
On 10/06/2017 06:08,
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
*Date:* Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:04:09 +0100
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making
changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new
pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes.
Then the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them
and those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
I totally agree: using the tax system to claw back these benefits makes
sense (to us but not to politicians it seems :-) perhaps there isn't as
much spin for their personal cudos). The tax system already has mechanisms
for taxable benefits in work (company cars, free lunches etc.) so
extending it to pensioner benefits is an almost cost free solution. The
only problem is that _having_ a bus pass isn't a benefit but _using_ it
is, which would make the system very complicated.
There would of course need to be some sort of sliding scale at the
margi, of course, but I can't believe that it's beyond anyone's
ingenuity to come up with a sensible scheme.
It is totally ludicrous that better-off pensioners should be
enitled to travel the length and breadth of their respective
countries free, gratis and for nothing, and it's equally ludicrous
to talk about means testing because means testing is very
expensive, whereas doing it through the tax system would be much,
much cheaper.
I wouldn't get too hung up on free travel for wealthy pensioners, _they_
don't use busses. And, whilst it's theoretically possible to travel from
John O-Groats to Land's End using a bus pass, they're valid on local
routes only and the schedules are such that it would take a few days to
achieve it (not something most people would relish).
Steph.
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
And I carefully said 'better-off' rather than 'wealthy' for that very
reason.
Anne B
These travellers ay be avoiding loneliness, depression etc by undertaking
journeys that they would not engage with if they were paying. This will
benefit society and the NHS. Of course they could do it and pay but they
just wouldn't and the result may be more negative to Society overall.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
the Omrud
2017-06-10 11:21:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
On 10/06/2017 06:08,
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
I wouldn't get too hung up on free travel for wealthy pensioners, _they_
don't use busses. And, whilst it's theoretically possible to travel from
John O-Groats to Land's End using a bus pass, they're valid on local
routes only and the schedules are such that it would take a few days to
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
I assumed he meant "local bus" services, i.e. not long-distance coach
services, but the "local bus" service in every part of the nation, not
just those located near the pass holder. That's true in Enland and in
Wales as well.
--
David
Penny
2017-06-10 15:04:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 12:21:48 +0100, the Omrud <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Anne B
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
I assumed he meant "local bus" services, i.e. not long-distance coach
services, but the "local bus" service in every part of the nation, not
just those located near the pass holder. That's true in Enland and in
Wales as well.
I think if it were "Great Britain" or "England & Wales" rather than each
separately, I might be more inclined to get one.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
the Omrud
2017-06-10 15:06:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Anne B
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
I assumed he meant "local bus" services, i.e. not long-distance coach
services, but the "local bus" service in every part of the nation, not
just those located near the pass holder. That's true in Enland and in
Wales as well.
I think if it were "Great Britain" or "England & Wales" rather than each
separately, I might be more inclined to get one.
Depends where you live, I suppose. Those in Essex or Cornwall might not
be inconvenienced, but my parents in Ludlow found it annoying that the
pass doesn't extend to Wales (other than for journeys which start or
finish in England).
--
David
Penny
2017-06-10 15:22:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:06:14 +0100, the Omrud <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Anne B
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
I assumed he meant "local bus" services, i.e. not long-distance coach
services, but the "local bus" service in every part of the nation, not
just those located near the pass holder. That's true in Enland and in
Wales as well.
I think if it were "Great Britain" or "England & Wales" rather than each
separately, I might be more inclined to get one.
Depends where you live, I suppose. Those in Essex or Cornwall might not
be inconvenienced, but my parents in Ludlow found it annoying that the
pass doesn't extend to Wales (other than for journeys which start or
finish in England).
Well that is precisely my problem from just the other side of the border
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).

It could be handy having a bus pass in Kent or Yorkshire when visiting
family - far more useful than at home.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 15:40:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by the Omrud
Post by Anne B
If you have a Scottish bus pas you can use all buses in Scotland, not
only local ones. I have met (on buses while using my bus pass) people
who spend their days just getting on and off buses because it's free.
I assumed he meant "local bus" services, i.e. not long-distance coach
services, but the "local bus" service in every part of the nation, not
just those located near the pass holder. That's true in Enland and in
Wales as well.
I think if it were "Great Britain" or "England & Wales" rather than each
separately, I might be more inclined to get one.
Depends where you live, I suppose. Those in Essex or Cornwall might not
be inconvenienced, but my parents in Ludlow found it annoying that the
pass doesn't extend to Wales (other than for journeys which start or
finish in England).
Well that is precisely my problem from just the other side of the border
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
It could be handy having a bus pass in Kent or Yorkshire when visiting
family - far more useful than at home.
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Penny
2017-06-10 17:09:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).

But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 18:06:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Sid Nuncius
2017-06-11 08:04:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
Well if you ever plan to travel north
Look at the map before you venture forth
Take your time on the A49
Well it winds from Ludlow to Shewsbury
More than 31 miles all the way
Take your time on the A49
Well goes from Winstantow up to Condover
Those Shropshire hills gonna give you the chills
You'll see Acton Scott and Upper Affcott
Fine All Stretton and don't forget Church Stretton
Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that Shropshire trip
Take your time on the A49...

Sorry. I've not been sleeping well, you know...
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Sally Thompson
2017-06-11 08:22:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
Well if you ever plan to travel north
Look at the map before you venture forth
Take your time on the A49
Well it winds from Ludlow to Shewsbury
More than 31 miles all the way
Take your time on the A49
Well goes from Winstantow up to Condover
Those Shropshire hills gonna give you the chills
You'll see Acton Scott and Upper Affcott
Fine All Stretton and don't forget Church Stretton
Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that Shropshire trip
Take your time on the A49...
Sorry. I've not been sleeping well, you know...
Lol. Thanks for that Sid. It is a great trip!
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Penny
2017-06-11 12:27:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:04:31 +0100, Sid Nuncius <***@tesco.net>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
Well if you ever plan to travel north
Look at the map before you venture forth
Take your time on the A49
Well it winds from Ludlow to Shewsbury
More than 31 miles all the way
Take your time on the A49
Well goes from Winstantow up to Condover
Those Shropshire hills gonna give you the chills
You'll see Acton Scott and Upper Affcott
Fine All Stretton and don't forget Church Stretton
Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that Shropshire trip
Take your time on the A49...
Sorry. I've not been sleeping well, you know...
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Mike
2017-06-11 13:23:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
Well if you ever plan to travel north
Look at the map before you venture forth
Take your time on the A49
Well it winds from Ludlow to Shewsbury
More than 31 miles all the way
Take your time on the A49
Well goes from Winstantow up to Condover
Those Shropshire hills gonna give you the chills
You'll see Acton Scott and Upper Affcott
Fine All Stretton and don't forget Church Stretton
Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that Shropshire trip
Take your time on the A49...
Sorry. I've not been sleeping well, you know...
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
--
Toodle Pip
BrritSki
2017-06-11 13:26:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Penny
(thinks: can I get to Ludlow on the bus and if so how long does it take?).
Well if you figure it out we could meet for a mini-umratic coffee!
It's 34 miles and Mr Google (quite rightly) says it takes about an hour by
car (tractors/cattle/sheep permitting) but knows of no bus routes. He
suggests 1hr 39mins by train via Shrewsbury which seems a bit pointless. If
I want a browsing shopping trip to an old town I might as well stop in
Shrewsbury... (and could take the bus).
But yes, we could certainly meet up for a cuppa, although I don't drink
coffee and struggle a bit in places which smell strongly of it.
I can get a bus from Ludlow to Shrewsbury...
Well if you ever plan to travel north
Look at the map before you venture forth
Take your time on the A49
Well it winds from Ludlow to Shewsbury
More than 31 miles all the way
Take your time on the A49
Well goes from Winstantow up to Condover
Those Shropshire hills gonna give you the chills
You'll see Acton Scott and Upper Affcott
Fine All Stretton and don't forget Church Stretton
Would you get hip to this kindly tip
And go take that Shropshire trip
Take your time on the A49...
Sorry. I've not been sleeping well, you know...
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
Mike
2017-06-11 13:31:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
That is taking the lacey way out.
--
Toodle Pip
BrritSki
2017-06-11 14:27:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
That is taking the lacey way out.
Only way when the country is on its uppers and cannot last...
Mike
2017-06-11 16:16:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
That is taking the lacey way out.
Only way when the country is on its uppers and cannot last...
Can anyone heel that?
--
Toodle Pip
BrritSki
2017-06-11 16:52:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
That is taking the lacey way out.
Only way when the country is on its uppers and cannot last...
Can anyone heel that?
Indupitably.
Mike
2017-06-11 17:28:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 15:40:00 GMT, Sally Thompson
Bravo!
Particularly for the local spelling/pronunciation of Shewsbury ;)
Is that where the real sole is?
Hold your tongue...
That is taking the lacey way out.
Only way when the country is on its uppers and cannot last...
Can anyone heel that?
Indupitably.
A 2 step programme perhaps?
--
Toodle Pip
Btms
2017-06-10 21:46:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Depends where you live, I suppose. Those in Essex or Cornwall might not
be inconvenienced, but my parents in Ludlow found it annoying that the
pass doesn't extend to Wales (other than for journeys which start or
finish in England).
The bus services in Devon and Cornwall already, on account of their being
rather thin on the ground.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Penny
2017-06-10 09:36:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 00:08:55 -0500,
no-spam-for-***@cix.compulink.co.uk scrawled
in the dust...
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
The
only problem is that _having_ a bus pass isn't a benefit but _using_ it
is,
From the other end of the problem, I think (BCBM) the subsidies to the bus
companies are based upon the number of bus passes issued regardless of
whether they are used. I still haven't applied - largely because I don't
live on a bus route and would have to negotiate a very steep hill to get to
a stop.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
BrritSki
2017-06-10 09:44:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 00:08:55 -0500,
in the dust...
Post by n***@cix.compulink.co.uk
The
only problem is that _having_ a bus pass isn't a benefit but _using_ it
is,
From the other end of the problem, I think (BCBM) the subsidies to the bus
companies are based upon the number of bus passes issued regardless of
whether they are used. I still haven't applied - largely because I don't
live on a bus route and would have to negotiate a very steep hill to get to
a stop.
So you'd come to a stop before you came to a stop ?
BrritSki
2017-06-10 07:06:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Btms
2017-06-10 07:46:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Adjusting the tax code would be simplest. I fear other options would cost
more to collect than would be gained. Not sure bus passes are worth
bothering about. These must be used more by the less well off folk and so
why not as it must be a great help to so e.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 12:26:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Btms
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Adjusting the tax code would be simplest. I fear other options would cost
more to collect than would be gained. Not sure bus passes are worth
bothering about. These must be used more by the less well off folk and so
why not as it must be a great help to so e.
I don't count myself as "less well off" but use the bus as often as
possible (and therefore bus pass) for environmental reasons. I know I'm not
alone in this.
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
LFS
2017-06-10 14:12:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Btms
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Adjusting the tax code would be simplest. I fear other options would cost
more to collect than would be gained. Not sure bus passes are worth
bothering about. These must be used more by the less well off folk and so
why not as it must be a great help to so e.
I don't count myself as "less well off" but use the bus as often as
possible (and therefore bus pass) for environmental reasons. I know I'm not
alone in this.
Likewise. Parking in Oxford is both difficult and very expensive, the
bus is much simpler. And in London, when I have time, I would much
rather be on a bus than the tube. I would be very sad to lose my bus
pass and wouldn't mind paying towards it.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Penny
2017-06-10 15:15:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 15:12:52 +0100, LFS <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by LFS
Likewise. Parking in Oxford is both difficult and very expensive, the
bus is much simpler. And in London, when I have time, I would much
rather be on a bus than the tube. I would be very sad to lose my bus
pass and wouldn't mind paying towards it.
One of my sisters in law, a caravaner, spent much of the last years of her
husband's life out and about with him, touring with the caravan and ending
up with him being admitted to the local hospital. For her daily visits,
when in England, she would park (free) in the park and ride and use her bus
pass to get to the hospital.

On my rare visits to London I tend to use the tube because it is familiar
and I can't get lost. Buses scare me because I don't know where they go,
where I should get off or, these days, how they work. When Ray was in St
Thomas' I walked there from Victoria, rather than get a bus.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 15:44:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by LFS
Likewise. Parking in Oxford is both difficult and very expensive, the
bus is much simpler. And in London, when I have time, I would much
rather be on a bus than the tube. I would be very sad to lose my bus
pass and wouldn't mind paying towards it.
One of my sisters in law, a caravaner, spent much of the last years of her
husband's life out and about with him, touring with the caravan and ending
up with him being admitted to the local hospital. For her daily visits,
when in England, she would park (free) in the park and ride and use her bus
pass to get to the hospital.
On my rare visits to London I tend to use the tube because it is familiar
and I can't get lost. Buses scare me because I don't know where they go,
where I should get off or, these days, how they work. When Ray was in St
Thomas' I walked there from Victoria, rather than get a bus.
I recommend Citymapper for planning bus trips because it includes every
possible combination. These days luckily buses always have a sign with the
name of the stop, and the stops are identified with a code letter. I love
bus trips in London because there is always so much going on. I never use
the tube except in dire emergency!
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
LFS
2017-06-10 17:18:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by LFS
Likewise. Parking in Oxford is both difficult and very expensive, the
bus is much simpler. And in London, when I have time, I would much
rather be on a bus than the tube. I would be very sad to lose my bus
pass and wouldn't mind paying towards it.
One of my sisters in law, a caravaner, spent much of the last years of her
husband's life out and about with him, touring with the caravan and ending
up with him being admitted to the local hospital. For her daily visits,
when in England, she would park (free) in the park and ride and use her bus
pass to get to the hospital.
On my rare visits to London I tend to use the tube because it is familiar
and I can't get lost. Buses scare me because I don't know where they go,
where I should get off or, these days, how they work. When Ray was in St
Thomas' I walked there from Victoria, rather than get a bus.
You could have used the wonderfully frequent 507 which runs between
Waterloo and Victoria, it stops right outside St Thomas'.

The Transport for London web site is excellent for planning journeys,
showing exactly where the bus stops are. Most buses now have digital
displays and announcements for each stop. On the 507 the display even
shows you the time between the stops and the upcoming train departures
from Waterloo/Victoria. There are horrendous roadworks around Waterloo
at the moment and the drivers warn passengers and offer to let them off
if they're in a hurry.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Penny
2017-06-10 17:33:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:18:06 +0100, LFS <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by LFS
The Transport for London web site is excellent for planning journeys,
showing exactly where the bus stops are. Most buses now have digital
displays and announcements for each stop. On the 507 the display even
shows you the time between the stops and the upcoming train departures
from Waterloo/Victoria. There are horrendous roadworks around Waterloo
at the moment and the drivers warn passengers and offer to let them off
if they're in a hurry.
All well and good if you have a clever phone or spend an hour or so
figuring it all out before you go. There are tube maps everywhere in that
system and you can carry a tube map in your pocket. In fact I used to carry
the central London pages ripped from an A-Z in my pocket when my visits
were relatively frequent - this after the day I realised I'd just spent
half an hour on the tube getting to a station 5 minutes walk from where I
started.

If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
krw
2017-06-10 18:25:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
Wave and pay with your debit card or credit card. Or even your phone -
but the time I tried that it did not work.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 19:30:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by Penny
If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
Wave and pay with your debit card or credit card. Or even your phone -
but the time I tried that it did not work.
Or use your bus pass:-)
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Penny
2017-06-10 21:30:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10 Jun 2017 19:30:19 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by krw
Post by Penny
If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
Wave and pay with your debit card or credit card. Or even your phone -
but the time I tried that it did not work.
Or use your bus pass:-)
Not if you live in Wales.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sally Thompson
2017-06-10 21:48:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 19:30:19 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by krw
Post by Penny
If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
Wave and pay with your debit card or credit card. Or even your phone -
but the time I tried that it did not work.
Or use your bus pass:-)
Not if you live in Wales.
Ah.

o diar.
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Anne B
2017-06-11 08:29:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On 10 Jun 2017 19:30:19 GMT, Sally Thompson
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by krw
Post by Penny
If the bus stops ever get clever enough to display all the routes info and
tell you precisely what sort of card you need to buy and where from I might
consider it.
Wave and pay with your debit card or credit card. Or even your phone -
but the time I tried that it did not work.
Or use your bus pass:-)
Not if you live in Wales.
Or if you live in Scotland.
krw
2017-06-10 18:24:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
how they work.
Well diesel engines mainly - but some are electric.

They don't take cash if that helps.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
Fenny
2017-06-10 21:59:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On my rare visits to London I tend to use the tube because it is familiar
and I can't get lost. Buses scare me because I don't know where they go,
where I should get off or, these days, how they work. When Ray was in St
Thomas' I walked there from Victoria, rather than get a bus.
These days there are all kinds of very useful apps for TfL buses. I
load them on my phone when I need them and remove them when done.
--
Fenny
Penny
2017-06-10 22:18:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 22:59:13 +0100, Fenny <***@removethis.onetel.net>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Fenny
Post by Penny
On my rare visits to London I tend to use the tube because it is familiar
and I can't get lost. Buses scare me because I don't know where they go,
where I should get off or, these days, how they work. When Ray was in St
Thomas' I walked there from Victoria, rather than get a bus.
These days there are all kinds of very useful apps for TfL buses. I
load them on my phone when I need them and remove them when done.
One day I suppose I may get a clever phone and figure out how to use it but
as I have little use for a mobile, even as a phone, I can't see it
happening any time soon. My current hand-me-up is probably capable of all
sorts of things but mostly sits on my desk and reminds me when to take
meds. I do sometimes use the radio when running power tools in the garden.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Anne B
2017-06-10 16:50:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by Btms
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and those
who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Adjusting the tax code would be simplest. I fear other options would cost
more to collect than would be gained. Not sure bus passes are worth
bothering about. These must be used more by the less well off folk and so
why not as it must be a great help to so e.
I don't count myself as "less well off" but use the bus as often as
possible (and therefore bus pass) for environmental reasons. I know I'm not
alone in this.
I use the excellent bus service when in Edinburgh, though occasionally
the prospect of a slog up a hill in pouring rain from the bus stop
induces me take a taxi.

Actually, you need to be pretty desperate to contemplate taking a car
into Edinburgh city centre during the day. It's difficult to move, even
more difficult to stop, and very expensive to park if you do succeed in
finding a space.

Anne B
krw
2017-06-10 18:26:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
I use the excellent bus service when in Edinburgh, though occasionally
the prospect of a slog up a hill in pouring rain from the bus stop
induces me take a taxi.
On our last holiday in that fair city we used the buses a lot. Drivers
drive them like maniacs but apart from that they work well.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
tiny.cc/KRWpics
Fenny
2017-06-10 22:01:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 17:50:48 +0100, Anne B
Post by Anne B
Actually, you need to be pretty desperate to contemplate taking a car
into Edinburgh city centre during the day. It's difficult to move, even
more difficult to stop, and very expensive to park if you do succeed in
finding a space.
Which is why I shall be taking the train when I go up in August. Must
actually get it booked, now that I've found a reasonably priced hotel.
--
Fenny
the Omrud
2017-06-10 08:49:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and
those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Where does "wealthy" start? Even those who are on higher-rate tax (£45k
or so) don't have to fill in a tax form these days if their income is
all taxed at source. Only about 2% of pensioners have this level of income.

If you start "wealthy" from the upper rate (£150k) then it's a pointless
exercise as a) they don't use buses and b) the numbers are vanishingly
small.
--
David
Mike
2017-06-10 12:23:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by the Omrud
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and
those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Where does "wealthy" start? Even those who are on higher-rate tax (£45k
or so) don't have to fill in a tax form these days if their income is
all taxed at source. Only about 2% of pensioners have this level of income.
If you start "wealthy" from the upper rate (£150k) then it's a pointless
exercise as a) they don't use buses and b) the numbers are vanishingly
small.
'Wealthy' is always at least £10K pa than one's own income😉
--
Toodle Pip
Sam Plusnet
2017-06-10 20:37:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Post by the Omrud
Post by BrritSki
Post by Anne B
Post by krw
but the way it was presented was awful.
Ah if we worked together we could have got the increased majority.
It was far more to do with presentation and also not making changes
overnight - say the winter payment does not apply to new pensioners, or
that the reduction will be phased in over a period and so on.
I simply cannot understand why they can't claw back things like the
winter fuel allowance and free bus passes by adjusting tax codes. Then
the pensioners who can afford these things would pay for them and
those who need them would continue to enjoy them.
Do you have to adjust tax codes ? Just make them a declarable taxable
benefit like I suggested up-thread - "wealthy" pensioners who have to
make a tax-return would then pay tax on them with no change to their
tax-code.
Where does "wealthy" start? Even those who are on higher-rate tax (£45k
or so) don't have to fill in a tax form these days if their income is
all taxed at source. Only about 2% of pensioners have this level of income.
If you start "wealthy" from the upper rate (£150k) then it's a pointless
exercise as a) they don't use buses and b) the numbers are vanishingly
small.
'Wealthy' is always at least £10K pa than one's own income😉
Not even that.
You could have a quite high gross income, but if you're paying a huuge
mortgage (or rent), running two cars, & have all the expenses arising
from working for a living, your real disposable income could be pretty
small.
--
Sam
Peter Percival
2017-06-09 11:57:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Ben Gummer should also go as he wrote the manifesto...
I don't think the manifesto per se was that bad, but the way it was
presented was awful. e.g.
1. the triple-lock on pensions will not be a problem if inflation is
running at over 2% which it looks like it will do for some time.
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the right
thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a taxable benefit
rather than means-testing it.
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age pension
should be enough to live on.
Post by BrritSki
3. The free school breakfast should have been sold as being TWO free
meals a day for the poorest rather than the removal of lunches for all
4. the dementia tax could have been sold much better as an increase in
the floor from £23K to £100K, but should also have included a cap as
well as a floor, and then to u-turn on it and then pretend nothing had
changed was a nonsense.
--
Do, as a concession to my poor wits, Lord Darlington, just explain
to me what you really mean.
I think I had better not, Duchess. Nowadays to be intelligible is
to be found out. -- Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 10:32:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
Ben Gummer should also go as he wrote the manifesto...
I don't think the manifesto per se was that bad, but the way it was
presented was awful. e.g.
1. the triple-lock on pensions will not be a problem if inflation is
running at over 2% which it looks like it will do for some time.
I presume the third element - "or 2½%" - was introduced to account for
the fact that the pension was (then) significantly below the
average/minimum/whatever wage. They could safely (IMO) modify it by
making the third element "or 2½% in any year when the pension is less
than ...". (I am ashamed to admit that I don't know how the current
pension compares to either the average or the minimum wage now, but I
presume it's somewhat closer than when the third element was
introduced.)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the right
thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a taxable benefit
rather than means-testing it.
Sounds good.
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without resolution
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
3. The free school breakfast should have been sold as being TWO free
meals a day for the poorest rather than the removal of lunches for all
Interesting thought.
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
4. the dementia tax could have been sold much better as an increase in
the floor from £23K to £100K, but should also have included a cap as
well as a floor, and then to u-turn on it and then pretend nothing had
changed was a nonsense.
No, it _isn't_ just a change in the floor. It's vicious: the main change
_isn't_ the change in the floor from 23k to 100k, it's the now inclusion
of the home value where it wasn't before - a huge step change. It means
someone who owns their own home, but had very little or no savings (the
case for many, especially elderly), goes from getting free care to
having to pay for it (and it's expensive). If this change does have to
be implemented - and, maybe, it does, with the rising cost of care etc.
- it should have been done gradually (say by including 10% of home value
the first year, 20% the next, and so on - though even those steps would
IMO be too big). What proportion of homes are worth less than 100k (or
77k)?

I'm surprised this aspect of that particular change hasn't had more
coverage; OK, it's _slightly_ complicated, but surely not beyond the
ability of even most people (even journalists) to comprehend.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

What has happened since 1979, I suspect, is that the spotting of mistakes has
become entirely associated with mean-spiritedness, snobbishness and
judgementalism. But...can be...funny and interesting.
Lynn Truss, RT 2015/2/21-27
Peter Percival
2017-06-10 13:35:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the
right thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a
taxable benefit rather than means-testing it.
Sounds good.
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without
resolution
Let them. Included among "living" should be keeping ones house warm in
winter. Also (this an afterthought) I would not give a State pension to
well-off people.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
3. The free school breakfast should have been sold as being TWO
free meals a day for the poorest rather than the removal of
lunches for all
Interesting thought.
I agree.
--
Do, as a concession to my poor wits, Lord Darlington, just explain
to me what you really mean.
I think I had better not, Duchess. Nowadays to be intelligible is
to be found out. -- Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 16:07:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Percival
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the
right thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a
taxable benefit rather than means-testing it.
Sounds good.
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without
resolution
It's an unending debate. Which of the following should be considered a
necessity: car? TV? meat (if so how often)? mobile 'phone (including
cost of actually using it)? ordinary 'phone? internet? alcohol? tobacco?
garden? holiday (UK or foreign? how often?) New clothing (designer or?)?
Post by Peter Percival
Let them. Included among "living" should be keeping ones house warm in
Define "warm" and "house" - 18? 20? 25? Every room at all times?
Post by Peter Percival
winter. Also (this an afterthought) I would not give a State pension
to well-off people.
By well-off, do you mean with an income (either from employment or
non-state pension) over a certain amount, or with over £x in the bank?
If the latter, you're on _very_ dangerous ground: some of those with
savings think they've spent their life being prudent, and shouldn't be
punished for that. (And, if there's even any _hint_ of such a move, at
least some people will go on a mad spending spree in their fifties and
early sixties to make sure they qualify when the time comes. (Or are you
thinking of punishing them too.)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
3. The free school breakfast should have been sold as being TWO
free meals a day for the poorest rather than the removal of
lunches for all
Interesting thought.
I agree.
Do you think the introduction of the breakfast was in itself a good
idea? (I don't _think_ I have any strong feelings either way; in
principle I think it's not a bad idea, but probably hadn't been costed
properly - extra staff [supervision, catering, security] hours, and so
on.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

By most scientific estimates sustained, useful fusion is ten years in
the future - and will be ten years in the future for the next fifty
years or more. - "Hamadryad", ~2016-4-4
Anne B
2017-06-10 17:05:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the
right thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a
taxable benefit rather than means-testing it.
Sounds good.
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without resolution
It's an unending debate. Which of the following should be considered a
necessity: car? TV? meat (if so how often)? mobile 'phone (including
cost of actually using it)? ordinary 'phone? internet? alcohol? tobacco?
garden? holiday (UK or foreign? how often?) New clothing (designer or?)?
Well, since it is possible to do without any of those, none of them can
be considered absolutely essential.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Let them. Included among "living" should be keeping ones house warm in
Define "warm" and "house" - 18? 20? 25? Every room at all times?
Post by Peter Percival
winter. Also (this an afterthought) I would not give a State pension
to well-off people.
By well-off, do you mean with an income (either from employment or
non-state pension) over a certain amount, or with over £x in the bank?
If the latter, you're on _very_ dangerous ground: some of those with
savings think they've spent their life being prudent, and shouldn't be
punished for that. (And, if there's even any _hint_ of such a move, at
least some people will go on a mad spending spree in their fifties and
early sixties to make sure they qualify when the time comes. (Or are you
thinking of punishing them too.)
Correct. And those who have been prudent and do have over £x in the bank
are capable of moving themselves and their £x to somewhere else where
they won't be threatened with being forced to give their accumulated
savings away to others who have not been prudent.

Anne B
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 17:56:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[]
Post by Anne B
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without resolution
It's an unending debate. Which of the following should be considered a
necessity: car? TV? meat (if so how often)? mobile 'phone (including
cost of actually using it)? ordinary 'phone? internet? alcohol? tobacco?
garden? holiday (UK or foreign? how often?) New clothing (designer or?)?
Well, since it is possible to do without any of those, none of them can
be considered absolutely essential.
Well. "Living" or "existing"? A life without meat, TV, 'phone of any
sort (let alone internet), or the occasional new clothes sounds a bit -
well, to me, one would wonder why it's worth going on. There's also
personal preference - I'd happily do without any new clothes; others I
know would give up some things for their meat or baccy or pint or TV. If
we consider ourselves a civilised society, I think most of the list -
with the possible exception of car [already a necessity in most rural
areas] and foreign holidays - should be considered basics. (And, these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.) If you eliminate
choice, you're not that many steps away from a state-standard issue of
many of the above.

I think we're in agreement really!
Post by Anne B
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Let them. Included among "living" should be keeping ones house warm in
Define "warm" and "house" - 18? 20? 25? Every room at all times?
Post by Peter Percival
winter. Also (this an afterthought) I would not give a State pension
to well-off people.
By well-off, do you mean with an income (either from employment or
non-state pension) over a certain amount, or with over £x in the bank?
If the latter, you're on _very_ dangerous ground: some of those with
savings think they've spent their life being prudent, and shouldn't be
punished for that. (And, if there's even any _hint_ of such a move, at
least some people will go on a mad spending spree in their fifties and
early sixties to make sure they qualify when the time comes. (Or are you
thinking of punishing them too.)
Correct. And those who have been prudent and do have over £x in the
bank are capable of moving themselves and their £x to somewhere else
where they won't be threatened with being forced to give their
accumulated savings away to others who have not been prudent.
Anne B
The eternal dilemma! There are always roughly three sorts of people
(among those after working age, let's say): 1. Those who have
successfully made provision; 2. those who have been unable to make
provision, for various reasons - genuinely unable to find work for long
periods, disability; 3. those who just never saved, but lived high on
the hog. I think we're probably agreed that 2. should be looked after -
it's 3. who are the thorniest question. In practice, they've got to be
looked after too - otherwise what's to become of them, have them dying
in the streets?

And as (I thought it was you but can't see it above) said, 1. includes
those who think they've made provision on the assumption that they
_would_ get the pension.

I think the increasing cost of pensions _will_ cause great trouble at
some point, possibly well within my lifetime (I'm 57) - but at present,
no party has even whispered anything - look at the discussion of the
triple lock.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

How do you govern a country that seems to have decided that facts are the work
of the devil? - Andy Hamilton on HIGNFY, 2010
Penny
2017-06-10 22:07:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:56:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> scrawled in the dust...

Much snippage all over the place.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.
It's the one thing which concerns me most. We now have generations who have
never been without it and we all (or very nearly all) rely upon it far too
much.

To the extent that
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I think the increasing cost of pensions _will_ cause great trouble at
some point, possibly well within my lifetime (I'm 57) - but at present,
no party has even whispered anything - look at the discussion of the
triple lock.
may not be a problem at all.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
BrritSki
2017-06-11 08:11:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:56:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Much snippage all over the place.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.
It's the one thing which concerns me most. We now have generations who have
never been without it and we all (or very nearly all) rely upon it far too
much.
I'm sure they said much the same with the introduction of Napier's Bones.
Sally Thompson
2017-06-11 08:27:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:56:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Much snippage all over the place.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.
It's the one thing which concerns me most. We now have generations who have
never been without it and we all (or very nearly all) rely upon it far too
much.
I'm sure they said much the same with the introduction of Napier's Bones.
Thank you Google:-)
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
the Omrud
2017-06-11 10:34:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:56:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Much snippage all over the place.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.
It's the one thing which concerns me most. We now have generations who
have never been without it and we all (or very nearly all) rely upon it far
too much.
I'm sure they said much the same with the introduction of Napier's Bones.
FWIW, I've been to Napier's grave which is in the centre of Edinburgh.
--
David
Penny
2017-06-11 12:33:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:11:54 +0200, BrritSki <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by BrritSki
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:56:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Much snippage all over the place.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
these
days, internet is increasingly becoming a necessity, by default if
nothing else: I'm not happy about that, either.
It's the one thing which concerns me most. We now have generations who have
never been without it and we all (or very nearly all) rely upon it far too
much.
I'm sure they said much the same with the introduction of Napier's Bones.
Possibly, but I think they still teach long division in schools (although
d#2 - who was reported as 'good at maths' in school - has always used
serial addition/subtraction rather than multiplication/division).
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Penny
2017-06-10 17:16:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 17:07:03 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Do you think the introduction of the breakfast was in itself a good
idea? (I don't _think_ I have any strong feelings either way; in
principle I think it's not a bad idea, but probably hadn't been costed
properly - extra staff [supervision, catering, security] hours, and so
on.)
No, not in principle (certainly not in place of lunch) but 7pence worth
would be altogether insufficient. Jamie Oliver demonstrated his take on a
7p breakfast on TV last night. He claimed (apart from the freerange egg) it
was all 'value' range stuff:
12 baked beans
or
1/4 of an egg
or
1/4 of an apple
or
5/8 of a weetabix (no milk)
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 17:57:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 17:07:03 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Do you think the introduction of the breakfast was in itself a good
idea? (I don't _think_ I have any strong feelings either way; in
principle I think it's not a bad idea, but probably hadn't been costed
properly - extra staff [supervision, catering, security] hours, and so
on.)
No, not in principle (certainly not in place of lunch) but 7pence worth
would be altogether insufficient. Jamie Oliver demonstrated his take on a
[]
I wasn't aware of the 7p aspect. That's totally laughable.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Wisdom is the ability to cope. - the late (AB of C) Michael Ramsey,
quoted by Stephen Fry (RT 24-30 August 2013)
Vicky
2017-06-10 21:17:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Do you think the introduction of the breakfast was in itself a good
idea? (I don't _think_ I have any strong feelings either way; in
principle I think it's not a bad idea, but probably hadn't been costed
properly - extra staff [supervision, catering, security] hours, and so
on.)
No, not in principle (certainly not in place of lunch) but 7pence worth
would be altogether insufficient. Jamie Oliver demonstrated his take on a
7p breakfast on TV last night. He claimed (apart from the freerange egg) it
12 baked beans
or
1/4 of an egg
or
1/4 of an apple
or
5/8 of a weetabix (no milk)
--
It is £2.64 for 48 own brand weetabix from Morrisons. That is 5p per
biscuit. Let's assume the schools get a better deal and that milk is
cheap too, they could just have a single one and milk for the 7p. Or
maybe 2? But yes, sugar, premises, heating, staff etc would make it
cost more.

Grandson has to go to breakfast club at his school some days as mum
has to be at work and he can choose what to have and mostly has toast
and butter and hot chocolate.

Swerve: he told me today that they spent all day yesterday cooking in
school. They mixed things to make a dip in the morning and cut up
vegetables to dip into it and in the afternoon made ramen and mixed
various things to make a sauce. Everyone had a small portion to try
and it was apparently good.

I asked what the educational value was; did they have to copy out the
recipe(writing) and calculate quantities(maths) and he said no, it was
food skills. Chopping and cutting and peeling. And it is required in
the national curriculum. I was impressed at them learning practical
cooking skills.
--
Vicky
Anne B
2017-06-10 16:56:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Percival
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
2. removing the winter-fuel allowance from richer pensions is the
right thing to do, but it should have been done by making it a
taxable benefit rather than means-testing it.
Sounds good.
Post by Peter Percival
There should be no winter fuel allowance for anyone, the old-age
pension should be enough to live on.
True in theory, but a whole bucket of worms to implement - you get
arguments over what "live" means, that go on for ever without
resolution
Let them. Included among "living" should be keeping ones house warm in
winter. Also (this an afterthought) I would not give a State pension to
well-off people.
That's slightly chicken-and-egg. Some people probably rely on the state
pension to convert themselves from 'struggling' to 'comfortably off'.

Also some of us have actually paid for our state pensions while we were
in employment.

Any change like that would have to be introduced gradually so that those
of us who have planned retirement with a state pension don't suddenly
find ourselves without an important element of our retirement income.

Anne B
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 18:02:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <ohh84g$qld$***@dont-email.me>, Anne B
<***@btinternet.com> writes:
[]
Post by Anne B
Also some of us have actually paid for our state pensions while we were
in employment.
Some would say "more fool us".
Post by Anne B
Any change like that would have to be introduced gradually so that
those of us who have planned retirement with a state pension don't
suddenly find ourselves without an important element of our retirement
income.
Anne B
Difficult: if you introduce it gradually but applying to everybody, you
get people (most of us here, I suspect) who would start off OK, but
gradually get poorer as it is reduced. If you fix it for existing
pensioners but gradually reduce it for each new "intake", such that what
any given person gets remains the same (presumably at least
inflation-linked even if not triple-locked) as long as they live, you
get even more resentment of the old by the young (which is IMO already
bubbling under).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Wisdom is the ability to cope. - the late (AB of C) Michael Ramsey,
quoted by Stephen Fry (RT 24-30 August 2013)
Chris J Dixon
2017-06-10 18:54:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anne B
Also some of us have actually paid for our state pensions while we were
in employment.
Any change like that would have to be introduced gradually so that those
of us who have planned retirement with a state pension don't suddenly
find ourselves without an important element of our retirement income.
The discussions about the Triple Lock don't often mention that it
doesn't apply to all components of the state pension.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk
Plant amazing Acers.
Peter Percival
2017-06-09 11:58:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by krw
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result.
Indeed good news.
Post by krw
I hope the new Government of whichever party will honour the proposal
to get rid of student debt and fees. We need to educate our youth and
burdening them with debt is the wrong way to do it.
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't afford
so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
Post by krw
If May wants to lead the Conservative party she needs to remind
herself what those principles are by spending time with her constituents.
Agreed. She needs to dump Nick Timothy (author of the awful dementia
tax
There is no such thing, just as there is no bedroom tax.
Post by BrritSki
) and Fiona May too.
--
Do, as a concession to my poor wits, Lord Darlington, just explain
to me what you really mean.
I think I had better not, Duchess. Nowadays to be intelligible is
to be found out. -- Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 10:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[]
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
Indeed good news.
Post by krw
I hope the new Government of whichever party will honour the proposal
to get rid of student debt and fees. We need to educate our youth and
burdening them with debt is the wrong way to do it.
The "debt" in question is in practice in many cases never paid off:
1. It's written off after 30 years anyway;
2. You only pay it if your salary exceeds a certain amount;
3. even when your salary does exceed that amount, the repayment is only
9% (I think) of that part of your salary that does exceed that amount.
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
You can only have free tertiary education if you reduce the numbers
drastically. We simply cannot afford to do it, like we couldn't afford
If you reduce the numbers (i. e. not "for all"), it then becomes a
question of how you decide who gets it. While I personally _do_ feel
there should be some such limit/reduction, I'd hate to be involved in
the decisions involved (and being of the generation that _did_ get it,
would feel [even more] guilty). There are at least three ways of doing
the selection:

1. Entrance exam.s, in one form or another. Disadvantage (or one of
them): favours the rich (to _some_ extent), as they can go to better
schools and thus do better in those exam.s.
2. Perceived need: we need doctors, engineers, etc. more than [insert
current hate-category here - media studies, Eng. Lit., ...]. Many
disadvantages: A. difficult to predict needs 3 (or more) years ahead. B.
we might block the next Milton, Shakespeare, or whatever. (I don't
accept this one.) C. Some of the hate-categories actually _do_
contribute significantly to the national economy - media for example.
(Whether those producing productively in the media actually have
media-studies degrees, I don't know.)
3. Better alternatives - trade apprenticeships, and the like.
Disadvantages: A. to do properly, should cost similar to university
anyway (and never will be because it _is_ seen as a lower-cost
alternative). B. Has always been (and I suspect will always been) seen
as inferior.
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
so many of the Labour policies, attractive as they are.
I think the above is party- (and philosophy-)neutral, given the
economics of the country.
[]
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
Agreed. She needs to dump Nick Timothy (author of the awful dementia
tax
See previous post.
Post by Peter Percival
There is no such thing, just as there is no bedroom tax.
Well, not as such, but that was a very clever name for it by the
opposition. What they either didn't realise, or if you're cynical didn't
care about, was that there isn't a sufficient supply of alternative
one-less-bedroom accommodation: ideally it (reduction of benefit where
more accommodation was being paid for than is needed, which is what it
really is) should only apply where such alternative _is_ available, but
it is quite possible that the costs of administering that - keeping
registers of such accommodation [though one would have _thought_ they'd
be doing that anyway?], let alone the countless appeals - might exceed
any saving.
Post by Peter Percival
Post by BrritSki
) and Fiona May too.
[I don't really know her.*]
* In fact, apart from Boris (and the PM), I don't think I could name
_any_ of the cabinet at the moment.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

What has happened since 1979, I suspect, is that the spotting of mistakes has
become entirely associated with mean-spiritedness, snobbishness and
judgementalism. But...can be...funny and interesting.
Lynn Truss, RT 2015/2/21-27
Chris J Dixon
2017-06-10 19:00:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
1. Entrance exams, in one form or another.
There was an interesting dialogue about university entrance
requirements in my time there. Requirements were less rigorous
than many, but there was also quite a high first year failure
rate. This was justified as allowing students the chance to prove
themselves.

I have no information if there was any correlation between
entrance qualifications and course completion.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk
Plant amazing Acers.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-10 22:33:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Chris J Dixon
1. Entrance exams, in one form or another.
There was an interesting dialogue about university entrance
requirements in my time there. Requirements were less rigorous
than many, but there was also quite a high first year failure
rate. This was justified as allowing students the chance to prove
themselves.
I have no information if there was any correlation between
entrance qualifications and course completion.
Chris
Exams (or other _rigorous_ assessment) after one year (or possibly 6 or
9 months) would to some extent get round the argument against entrance
exams, that they discriminate against those unfortunate enough not to
have had advantages in secondary education. Allowing, indeed, the
students to "prove themselves", i. e. show they're capable of buckling
down given the right environment.

It could be seen as _more_ cruel than an entrance exam., but if we're
going to find _some_ way of checking who's likely to complete a course
productively, I'd say it was a good idea. (Maybe _as well as_ an exam.
at the start - those who fail that being allowed to continue for a year
or whatever _if they wish_, or maybe those who got a certain minimum
grade in the initial exam; the setting of the initial exam ideally
assessing the ability to learn rather than just the knowledge of the
target subject, though that'd be very hard to assess. (Maybe the initial
exam. after one month or something, rather than right at the start.))

Of course, rejection after one year (or whatever) means we'd still have
paid (or "lent" the money) for that period; however, to avoid - or at
least reduce (you'll never get rid of completely) - the accusation of
discrimination in favour of "good schools", I'd accept that cost.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm a gay man in a woman's body - and I love it! - Sheridan Smith (actress),
in Radio Times, 3-9 April 2010
Penny
2017-06-11 12:41:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 23:33:33 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Chris J Dixon
1. Entrance exams, in one form or another.
There was an interesting dialogue about university entrance
requirements in my time there. Requirements were less rigorous
than many, but there was also quite a high first year failure
rate. This was justified as allowing students the chance to prove
themselves.
I have no information if there was any correlation between
entrance qualifications and course completion.
Chris
Exams (or other _rigorous_ assessment) after one year (or possibly 6 or
9 months) would to some extent get round the argument against entrance
exams, that they discriminate against those unfortunate enough not to
have had advantages in secondary education. Allowing, indeed, the
students to "prove themselves", i. e. show they're capable of buckling
down given the right environment.
It could be seen as _more_ cruel than an entrance exam., but if we're
going to find _some_ way of checking who's likely to complete a course
productively, I'd say it was a good idea. (Maybe _as well as_ an exam.
at the start - those who fail that being allowed to continue for a year
or whatever _if they wish_, or maybe those who got a certain minimum
grade in the initial exam; the setting of the initial exam ideally
assessing the ability to learn rather than just the knowledge of the
target subject, though that'd be very hard to assess. (Maybe the initial
exam. after one month or something, rather than right at the start.))
Of course, rejection after one year (or whatever) means we'd still have
paid (or "lent" the money) for that period; however, to avoid - or at
least reduce (you'll never get rid of completely) - the accusation of
discrimination in favour of "good schools", I'd accept that cost.
I believe the universities themselves are reluctant to chuck students out
once enrolled because it puts their budgets at risk. It's not just the
students being funded here.

One of my nephews (who went to a grammar school), having failed to achieve
the necessary results at A level, did a 4 year course at Portsmouth, the
first year of which was effectively remedial maths. But that was back in
the early '90s, before the students paid the fees. He's been doing well
since.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2017-06-11 14:10:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <***@4ax.com>, Penny
<***@labyrinth.freeuk.com> writes:
[]
Post by Penny
I believe the universities themselves are reluctant to chuck students out
once enrolled because it puts their budgets at risk. It's not just the
students being funded here.
Oh, indeed; but if the total sum allocated is going to be limited
anyway, they're going to suffer financially somehow. (I guess it depends
whether continued existence or academic reputation is more important;
obviously for most people existence is, but it becomes a downward spiral
if one gets a reputation as a "sink university".) If the sum _isn't_
Post by Penny
One of my nephews (who went to a grammar school), having failed to achieve
the necessary results at A level, did a 4 year course at Portsmouth, the
first year of which was effectively remedial maths. But that was back in
the early '90s, before the students paid the fees. He's been doing well
since.
What was the (rest of the) course in - maths itself, or some science or
engineering discipline? Glad he's doing well.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Radio 4 is the civilising influence in this country ... I think it is the most
important institution in this country. - John Humphrys, Radio Times
7-13/06/2003
Penny
2017-06-11 15:32:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 15:10:59 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Penny
One of my nephews (who went to a grammar school), having failed to achieve
the necessary results at A level, did a 4 year course at Portsmouth, the
first year of which was effectively remedial maths. But that was back in
the early '90s, before the students paid the fees. He's been doing well
since.
What was the (rest of the) course in - maths itself, or some science or
engineering discipline? Glad he's doing well.
I'm not sure - I think I'd stopped talking to his father by that point. He
works for a scientific instrument manufacturer (mostly very specialised
microscopes I think) with the job title (from the website) of Technical
Director.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Penny
2017-06-09 09:22:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 08:17:41 +0100, krw <***@whitnet.uk> scrawled in the
dust...
Post by krw
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
I hope the new Government of whichever party will honour the proposal to
get rid of student debt and fees. We need to educate our youth and
burdening them with debt is the wrong way to do it. That one factor can
be the only explanation for Conservatives losing Canterbury.
And Clegg losing Hallam.

As D#1 lives in Hallam and D#2 in Canterbury they are both a little cheered
today. D#1 said yesterday she was suffering from Pre May Tension.
Post by krw
Well that
and the triple lock and the complete mess over dementia.
If May wants to lead the Conservative party she needs to remind herself
what those principles are by spending time with her constituents.
Don't hold your breath.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sid Nuncius
2017-06-09 09:56:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
I've only just noticed that Election Spy, written by Andy Hamilton and
Guy Jenkin, has been on every night last week and this (except
yesterday). 5-minutes per episode, written and recorded on the day in
question. Last episode tonight on BBC2 at 10.30pm, but all 8 episodes
so far are available on iPlayer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08sxpkp/election-spy-series-1-episode-1#

I thought I'd see what the first one was like and have just watched all
8 on the trot. They made me laugh. I thought umrats might like to know.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Vicky
2017-06-09 10:37:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:56:30 +0100, Sid Nuncius
Post by Sid Nuncius
I've only just noticed that Election Spy, written by Andy Hamilton and
Guy Jenkin, has been on every night last week and this (except
yesterday). 5-minutes per episode, written and recorded on the day in
question. Last episode tonight on BBC2 at 10.30pm, but all 8 episodes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08sxpkp/election-spy-series-1-episode-1#
I thought I'd see what the first one was like and have just watched all
8 on the trot. They made me laugh. I thought umrats might like to know.
Just watched one. I love Sanjeev.
--
Vicky
Peter Percival
2017-06-10 13:55:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Blimey!
I didn't stay up, but the traditional 2am pee, a quick listen to the
radio...and I was awake thereafter. It seems that da yoof *did* stop
photographing their food for long enough to vote, which is excellent
news, never mind the result. No sleep till dawn when youth and politics
meet, eh?
pigeon pigeon pigeon
pigeon cat pigeon
pigeon pigeon pigeon
Something that puzzled me about the election campaign was the splendid
Mr Corbyn being taken to task for being an IRA sympathizer. During John
Major's Premiership (from '93? I forget) the UK Government talked to the
IRA and before too long (under Blair) former terrorists were in the
Government of NI.

(I call Mr Corbyn "splendid" not for his views on the IRA but for his
pacifism and opposition to nuclear weapons. Does that opposition
persist? I shall ask him when we meet.)
--
Do, as a concession to my poor wits, Lord Darlington, just explain
to me what you really mean.
I think I had better not, Duchess. Nowadays to be intelligible is
to be found out. -- Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan
Loading...