Used to love that album oddly. Back in the day had an Escort Mk2 with a pair of Pioneer TS X9 speakers on the parcel shelf. The sound was unbelievable and you could literally feel the sound on Rio moving from one side of the car to the other. I wonder what people my age now said as I cruised down Drayton high street...........
Without being to specific for some privacy it is sports related, Turkey now have enough people with the same qualifications as me but not in 94-01 when I was there, Ukraine still do not have many neither does Kenya.
Well since the abolition of apprenticing in the building game , skilled workers are imported from countries that still train them - you can apply this to most traditional industries -so called market forces ideology ..,,,,,, beloved of the tories and shamefully continued by Blair and company .....
I'm not so sure that "market forces" are such a bad thing. It's hardly perfect, but what is? We can start shuffling money about the place in an effort to please some part of the populace, but at what cost to others? With limited amounts of funds available, everybody get less than they desire. So if we want to place bigger restrictions on the free market, how do we do it and at what overall cost? Bump up tax, most will squeal like stuck pigs. And what is the alternative, more protectionism? Someone in this debate said that the UK is about the sixth largest economy in the world, this is not peanuts, it's massive. I'd suggest that for the most part, you got there on the back of the free market ... warts and all. You have to look around and admit that the UK is wonderfully placed economically, compared to just about all of the other 196 counties spread across the planet. I don't know whether the UK would be better off today without the free market operating as it has, but I don't think I'd like to go back and re-roll the dice to find out.
I'm just in the process of getting my 3 year old son into The Ramones, he keeps asking for them every time we get in the car now. Can't have him growing up on One Direction and all that ****e!
I agree with most of this in principle. However, there's no point having a thriving economy when it only serves a small minority of people. During the 19th Century Britain had a trading empire that dwarfed everything that had gone before it, and moved more goods and wealth around the earth than the Egyptian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Chinese and Russian Empires combined.Britain also played host to some of the most grinding poverty and hardship seen anywhere on earth. All those millions of pounds worth of goods being shipped through the Port of London were being unloaded by a workforce with no rights, no job security, living in absolute squalor. This led to the London Dock Strike of 1889 and the birth of organised Labour as a force for progress. Without that force to counterbalance the power of wealth, the free market will only ever benefit a privileged minority - the 1% referred to by the Occupy Movement. The free market is effective at creating wealth, yes, but unless it is regulated and unless it serves the many not the few, it's as much curse as blessing. And all thast's before you consider the impact of wealth creation on the environment.
All societies need services that are not at the mercy of the market - health , infrastructure , transport , utilities - the basics of civilisation - unless you want to end up with a society like Haiti ........ Indeed as archers has highlighted , it's the people who have sacrificed to create what we have - the mob in place at the moment are trying to dismantle our society for their own selfish ends ......The debt has doubled in last four years ......austerity for the poor , riches for the rich
It's in the public domain so have a read. In essence Government policy is to stay in. Ministers can go against that in their personal capacity but cannot use Government machinery to promote the out vote. All entirely consistent and fair. Unless, of course, you feel it is ok for a Minister of the crown to routinely ask Civil Servants to draft speeches for him when he is opposing Government policy. https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ce-for-the-civil-service-and-special-advisers
I don't know if I've been lucky in life. I've won a $3,000 holiday playing poker, I won a good woman who's put up with me for 37 years and I once won a few hundred dollars in the lotto. But I've not won anything like young Russian Ruslin Schredrin. The 16 year old entered a competition on a site selling arms for computer games, and won. The prize? One month in a hotel room with a porn star. His mum is not happy, but Ruslin is over the moon about it. Makes my holiday win look a bit piss poor.
But my point is that he only called a referendum because of divisions within his own party and to prevent UKIP cornering a market in anti EU feeling. The people did not call for a vote, there were no anti EU street protests simply a groundswell in the Tory party and a few UKippers who polled so low in the last election that they won one seat. By the time this referendum comes round I expect it to be a no contest. Stirling has been falling all week just because of the slight possibility of an exit. Odds are currently 2-5 to stay in. Murdoch will have a problem as he loves to use his media empire to promote his own will but he also likes to be seen to back the winner, he may find that a difficult balancing act.
And I want Australia to become a republic before I kick off. I don't know what the UK wants in regards the EU, but I want us out of what we're in.
4m votes is not a low polling amount, it was our voting system only give them 1 seat and UKIP came 2nd in many areas, there is certainly enough anti and pro EU feeling in the UK to warrant a referendum that is for sure, especially when the EU is going to become one state.
Fifi, the only operational B-29 Superfortress in the world. I'd give anything to take that nose seat.