This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Farjo
26
« on: 10 May 2015, 12:47:33 pm »
No I think that is why they lost. When all the undecideds and barely-interesteds went to the polls, what would they have had in mind? The 'fact' that Ed was a loser geek, who couldn't eat a bacon sandwich, who was week and would get overrun by the SNP, that the crash happened because of Labour borrowing, that Ed has a funny nose and a funny voice, etc etc etc etc.
You can get away with a bad press with a small electorate - Ken Livingstone had unrelentingly bad press and still became London Mayor, and as an independent candidate at that!
But on a national level people don't care enough to look past what they read in the paper.
Any leader has people bitching about them. What makes you think that it was any worse under Ed? Did you read it in the papers?
27
« on: 09 May 2015, 11:07:12 pm »
Why Labour lost:
Ed stood up to the press over phone hacking. They don't forgive you for that sort of thing.
28
« on: 09 May 2015, 11:05:09 pm »
The debt:
went up about 60% under Labour pre-crash
So using these figures the best period was when Brown was chancellor as during those 10 years the debt only increased by 60% 
ONLY increased by those 10 years were the boom time there should of been zero borrowing
Aye. It's doubly disappointing because they started off by paying off the debt, but after 2002 it started rising again. Incidentally he started off saying "No more Tory boom and bust" because in the 80s and 90s there were a few of them (small by present standards). But after a few years he dropped the word "Tory" and had to borrow to keep the economy from contracting and thereby making him wrong 
29
« on: 09 May 2015, 10:56:50 pm »
Who was chancellor when they tied us to the ERM, markets made a fortune
Norman Lamont. 
30
« on: 09 May 2015, 10:52:20 pm »
Electoral PR: Perhaps the Greater London Assembly is a good example. We get 2 votes, one for a local candidate, who is elected using traditional first-past-the-post for that constituency. There are 14 constituencies and therefore 14 Assembly Members elected that way. The other vote is for the party and is London-wide. 11 more Assembly Members are allocated this way. They are allocated so that the overall number of seats for each party is in proportion with the London-wide vote. It's much simpler than I've explained it!!! In practice the current assembly's *constituency* members are Labour and Conservative, whereas the *London-wide* members are Lab, Con, LibDem and Green. The next election is 2016 and presumably we'll get some UKIP members from the London-wide ballot. It is easy to understand ( when explained properly) and it is useful to be able to vote in this way i.e. pragmatically in the constituency vote and from the heart in the London-wide one. If this were adopted for Westminster elections we would have perhaps 400 constituencies, then the remaining 250 MPs would be allocated using a UK-wide party ballot. I guess England & Wales would elect Con and Lab constituent MPs, Scotland's ~35 would be SNP and NI would have ~11 seats. But then the UK-wide vote would have allocated 24 to the Greens, 51 to the LibDems and 82 to UKIP. The calculations are based on turnout so there are no unallocated seats. The parties would draw up an ordered list of UK-wide candidates. If 24 seats are allocated to a party from the UK ballot then the top 24 names would become MPs.
31
« on: 09 May 2015, 09:10:33 pm »
The debt: Increased by 75% under Thatcher, more than doubled under Major, went up about 60% under Labour pre-crash then another 50% post-crash to 2010. Under Cameron it's gone up 79% and is now £1.36tn. So using these figures the best period was when Brown was chancellor as during those 10 years the debt only increased by 60%
32
« on: 03 May 2015, 07:47:37 pm »
Not a very common sight, but saw these three on my travels. I think that they are all 150cc engines. Generally they have the title "Midship" and are faired, the non-fared being of the FZ name.  | Fazer1 |
 | Fazer 2 |
I guess this one's been street fightered:  | Fazer 3 |
33
« on: 02 May 2015, 05:27:37 pm »
I'm going to duck out. It won't be the same without Robin and I hope that it can be rescheduled. ps Tim:  VvVvVvVvVvV 
35
« on: 01 May 2015, 07:27:23 pm »
36
« on: 01 May 2015, 06:03:22 pm »
Three simple things to remember:
Hmmmm not convinced that all that calorie counting works. Of course the fact is that if calories in > calories out then your body will store what's left over as fat, it's just that if someone craves more food than they burn off then it's difficult short term / impossible long term not to eat more. If it were that easy then there would be nobody struggling with diets. I imagine the trick is to get your body to want less calories, and perhaps that has happened by not eating processed sugars. Perhaps what's needed is a calories to satisfaction ratio. I imagine that anything high in processed sugars is low, but those high in 'complex carbohydrates' will be high.
37
« on: 30 April 2015, 10:52:37 pm »
I've lost about one and a half stone in the last year. It's been slow but steady - not a crash diet. How? By cutting out one ingredient: processed sugar. I haven't restricted my diet in any other way. For two months (Jan -Mar this year) I ate a big bowl of popcorn every evening  I've just eaten what I fancied. Sounds easy, but it's bloody difficult because processed sugar is in everything. Not just sweet things, not just ready meals or tinned food or packeted food, but in stuff like tomato ketchup, bread, stock cubes, flavoured yoghurt, twiglets (gutted!), flavoured crisps, pies, anything with a bbq flavour, anything with a fruit flavour, things that've had something done to them (e.g. spicy beetroot, sold in the Fresh Veg section alongside ordinary beetroot), almost all breakfast cereals (including muesli, Wheetabix and flavoured Shredded Wheat), even things that say "All Natural Ingredients" or "Made to a Traditional Recipe" will likely contain processed sugar. And in fact I'm not 100% sure if the weight loss is due to losing the one ingredient or to the change in my diet from convenient to self-made foods. However whatever the reason, that weight has gone since cutting out processed sugar. So if you want to lose weight *just* cut out the processed sugar 
38
« on: 24 April 2015, 01:46:11 am »
Argentina uses its peso for day-to-day transactions but the US$ for property sales. Obviously people want to save their money in US$ for this reason but also because it is more stable than their own currency.
However the government only allows 20% of your declared income to be converted i.e. income they've paid tax on; apparently there is widespread evasion.
There is now a 'blue market' for US$ - not illegal but not through financial institutions. Through a bank you would get about 8 pesos to the dollar, but on the blue (street) arket you will get 12 or more.
It means that for an Argentinian they must pay 800 pesos for every 100 dollars, or more than 1,200 through a blue market operation. Therefore it is worth their while to declare more income and get the bank rate on 20% of it.
As it tourist it's a bit of a pain as you have to follow a guy down a back alley and you don't know if you are going to be passed fake notes, conned or even mugged. It also sniffs a bit of money laundering, converting peoples undeclared income.
Equator abandoned its currency in 2000 and now uses the USD.
Ireland's punt was linked 1=1 to GBP until 1979 when it was floated until 1999 when it was fixed to the DEM at 2.48.
39
« on: 16 April 2015, 05:20:55 pm »
Will be there if my bike still works. Good choice of venue, the SB will always be linked with him Cheers Eddie 
40
« on: 20 March 2015, 07:01:49 pm »
Worked in an office, asked the new girl to get lunch for the department from the local sandwich bar. One guy orders botulism on brown and a salmonella salad. Would love to have seen their reaction.
41
« on: 06 January 2015, 04:01:50 pm »
Many years ago I saw an interview with a copper who had previously been stabbed. He said the pain wasn't a stabbing pain but more like being hit with a cricket bat.
That's interesting I thought, so when a few months later I met someone from the Navy I asked whether steering a boat was like steering a boat. He looked at me like I was stupid and said "Yes."
42
« on: 24 December 2014, 10:16:41 pm »
Classic Tim: "Is it the camera or are you all fat?" 
43
« on: 24 December 2014, 10:14:31 pm »
Poof Miss you ps V v V v V v V v V v V v V v V v V v V v V v V 
44
« on: 24 December 2014, 10:11:49 pm »
Merry Christmas to the both of you.
45
« on: 23 December 2014, 07:05:30 pm »
46
« on: 21 December 2014, 08:52:40 pm »
It's a Jesus and Mary Chain tribute band 
47
« on: 21 December 2014, 06:32:47 pm »
...from the hot half of the globe 
48
« on: 21 December 2014, 06:13:11 pm »
Cheers Yes it's been too long.
49
« on: 04 November 2014, 11:51:14 am »
Welcome back. Is it any coincidence that you've been away whilst Norman Baker has been a minister, and now he's resigned you're back?
50
« on: 26 October 2014, 10:52:48 am »
Hi Glyn Do you still hear from the Dutch policeman?
|
Show Posts
