The (Sir) Alwaysright Gordon Road Stand Thread

Personally I don't think it would be a bad thing if alcohol was banned all together, made a class A drug if you will, but that will never happen and it is another debate entirely. I'm not saying it should just that it wouldn't bother me in the slightest if it was. No I don't drink and when I have it has made me depressed and angry and that is not the person I am and not a person I want to be.

I do think James is right with his thought that it (minimum unit price) will effect the cheap white lightning type of drinks. As for hospital admissions because of drink related issues I feel they should be billed for the treatment but again that's a personal thought and will never happen.

But IMHO the real issue isn't the cost of drink it's HOW people drink. Too much, too quickly! If people would just be a little thoughtful and controlled at the beginning of a drinking session it would cut out many issue at the end of it.

 

Whilst talking about minimum pricing of a unit of alcohol - what exactly is the unit to which the Government refer ?
Most beers have very little alcohol in them ( circa 4% ), wines around 10-12% and spirits about 40%
As I see it the introduction of a minimum price of a unit of alcohol should impact on the beer / lower strength drinks consumers - maybe even to encourage some not to binge drink - but - the policy is to become another tax hike and a nice 'little earner' for the Government. The majority of drinkers, who already drink responsibly, will have to pay - probably a far greater amount than any loss of revenue by some who may be deterred by the price increase, from buying the more expensive alcohol in the same quantities.
I rather suspect that any price increase will have virtually no effect in curbing binge drinking - and its' effect on society - rather like any price increase in petrol - I don't see fewer cars on the road !

 

So some people are not happy with the proposed introduction of a minimum price of a unit of alcohol -
Today many of you will be opening Advent calenders. Have you stopped to consider just how much ( how little ) poor excuse for chocolate you are getting for your money? The cost per gram of the chocolate in these gimmicks is astronomical compared to alcohol or petrol !
Happy Christmas.

 

BRB agreed .......it is stealth taxation under the guise of it being out of (alleged) concern for 'our' welfare. I enjoy a beer or two....I do not get drunk or violate other people or their space. I enjoy a glass or two of wine with a meal and manage not to vomit openly in the street, scream profanities at our custodians of the peace or engage in other forms of anti social behaviour. So why am I and others like me disadvantaged financially because of the 'mindless' (but noisy) minority. The 'punishment' should be directed at those who need targeting..........but that wouldn't fill the coffers for the government would it?

Cynic.....no, but I'll accept being called an 'objective realist'.

 

The subject of pricing on alcohol or cigarettes is one that has caught my attention for many years and these quotes best sum up my thoughts on the matter...

“The level of duty on beer is a tax on socialising. It’s a tax on communities, on jobs and investment. The average working man wants to have two pints with his mates after work. It’s dangerous for society if the price of beer is pushed so high that people on low incomes are forced out of the market.
“If pubs become the domain of the well-off it will undermine what the pub is about.”

...................

He feels that minimum pricing would not tackle the problem of alcohol misuse by a minority and is unlikely to reduce consumption. And he’s not convinced that higher prices on the high street would send people back to the pub.

“Beer drinking has declined by 35% since 1979. Consumption is falling and teenagers are drinking less. The brewing industry is sensible. We want customers to lead healthy, active lives and beer is part of that."

http://protzonbeer.co.uk/features/2...r-tax-killing-pubs-and-the-working-man-s-pint

So in my view and in the same way the government has tried to take the working classes out of our football stadiums, I agree with that article when it states beer tax is killing the working man's pint. If the government were genuine in their intentions, why not bring down the cost of real ale as an alternative measure in pubs? This recent introduction on alcohol pricing is as WINDYROG states...it is stealth taxation under the guise of it being out of (alleged) concern for 'our' welfare.

 

Looks like you're getting some snow down there, so I'll kick off on my favourite winter whinge.

Councils spend millions gritting roads trying to keep them useable, and drivers still whinge when they get stuck in jams caused by snow. But the root of the problem lies with the car owners using inappropriate tyres.

Yes, in Germany and Denmark and other countries, probably Switzerland and Austria the roads stay open, but in wintertime (don't know the exact dates but I'm sure they're out there somewhere) you MUST use winter tyres - those which are M&S (mud and snow) rated.

That is why when you go to Frankfurt in January and the city is under 4+ inches of snow, all the rear wheel drive Mercs and BMW's stay on the road.

If you use standard summer tyres on snow you are on the fast road to an accident in snow, and the number of wheels that are driven doesn't make a lot of difference.

I wish that Top Gear would actually do something useful and show how much of a difference proper tyres make, but maybe that's too much of a sensible and safety message.

And it's not that you MUST use them in snow (those are the more extreme studded ones) - they're fine in temperatures up to about 15degrees C, in other words most of the year here.

Smugupnorth with his (far from new) BMW on winter tyres that has got to places in snow where Chelsea tractor 4 wheel drives' couldn't go.

 

Absolutely agree. Forget the advent calendar and get a bottle of scotch in instead.

Drink sensibly chaps and chapesses

 

Itsimupnorth.........there is quite a bit of 'myth' about 'winter tyres' and the below links give a balanced and factual viewpoint. It's not usually the equipment that is at fault but the 'loose nut' behind the wheel.

For more information on Winter Tyres, please see the clip below on YouTube – not the usual rubbish but a good factual one from Continental Tyres, that gives clear logical information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clSC7APitaQ

This one also from Tyresafe.org – Quentin Wilson with another factual view in a different style

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKEdKHZJtRg&feature=related

Better information allows you to make better choices!

 

Ha....and 4x4s are yet another issue altogether.

 

Whist I'm bored and sitting in my office in the middle of nowhere (60 miles north of Basra) I've dug out another article that may be of interest on the road safety theme.......... pretty relevant seeing that 'Wiggo' got knocked off his bike recently....

Makes interesting reading and gives a nice physiological reason why drivers don’t see cyclists or motorcyclists.


http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/

 

Windyrog - Not much need for winter tyres in your part of Iraq methinks..

I think the links you've given verify my point - that all-season / summer tyres don't work as well in winter, and when it comes to snow they hardly work at all. In colder conditions a winter tyre is more efficient. As I said in my post, winter tyres are better below about 15 degrees. The bit about 'most of the year' was a bit flippant, but was meant as a throwaway point. I think that the fact about the climate that people are usually most aware of is the temperature.

Another link for the sceptical :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iP8SS9vQaU

From a tyre company pushing their product, but making the same point.

And one that probably nails it completely

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=elP_34ltdWI&NR=1

The problem is that most people don't understand that their 'all season' tyres don't work in snow, and worse than thinking they can still use them, they don't adjust their driving style, and just expect the council to clear the roads for them so they can continue on their merry way as usual.

 

Aha...getting people (not just drivers) to a) think and b) accept responsibility for their actions (or lack of) is a tough one.

Very very few people would admit to being a less than proficient driver and many see themselves as being 'what they drive'. 4x4s in the winter is a point in question. Extra grip and traction they may have.......but their mass, weight distribution, and general handling put them in a different category as many find to their cost.

As for expecting the council to clear the snow and post winter debris.......why not, that's what council tax is for ....surely. (Tongue firmly in cheek).

 

Oh....and as an aside, this has already been the wettest winter out here for more than a decade. Tyres?......I need a boat!

 

We all like a prank - especially at the expense of somebody else - don't we ?
We tend to join in with the ritual humiliation of the hapless 'victim' - with little or no thought for any sympathy....... they should have seen it coming !
SO - Why the outcry against the Australian DJs who pretended to be senior members of the Royal family to get news about Kate ? If a stranger tried to illicit medical information about you or your family - and the hospital was fooled into co-operation - in circumstances that were a clear breach of the Data Protection Act ( over the phone ) - the member of the nursing staff should expect to need a surgical procedure to re attach their productive organs !
It is a tragedy for the family of that nurse - but the next time you decide to play a prank on somebody - do you really expect that the 'victim' will top themselves because they can't take a joke - or do their job properly? ( goodness knows how many people I would have killed in my time )

 

alwaysright - Look at it another way, IF you were publicly ridiculed or just merely part of a world wide hoax, how would you react?

I expressed a view on this topic on another site I visit, so I have carried out some editing but in general the comments below are more or less in the same context of what I posted...

I do not read the tabloids and on seeing the original story about the hoax on SKY News, it sort of did not really gain my mental attention.

However, you could not fail to miss via tv media the sad turn of events that followed. What relation the hoax bare to the following suicide is impossible to know unless you knew the nurse personally or until subsequent investigations are completed.

I will use Candid Camera style stunts as a way of expressing an opinion, example of my thoughts, which involve a certain amount of research having been done beforehand, if not least to check that any potential victim is not going to knock the living daylights out of the presenter, when the stunt is eventually revealed.

Today people such as Don Joly still play out Candid Camera style stunts on unwitting victims, again though these are in pre recorded situations and the plug can be pulled at any time dependent on the reaction, there are probably many clips we never see (assumption).

All very funny dependent on your own personal humour.

Maybe the trouble in this instance, the HOAX is going to go World Wide.

Which leads me to ask, since when have we taken to giving innocent, private, hard working individuals World Wide air time as part of a prank, without their permission, IF that was the turn of events? Was there any breach of Australian broadcasting laws is the question currently being aired?

Continuing with the topic, does a hoax lead to ridicule, does the ridicule then become the tipping point and not the hoax in question. The hoax might only have been the starting block if ridicule followed in any form (not suggesting it did but just thinking out loud). Ridicule does not have too or may not be intentional but it how it is deemed in the mind of the recipient.

Everything is dependent on the victims current emotional and fragile state as well as there upstanding beliefs/culture/pride including any shame felt brought on family and sensitivity towards such situations and if the hoax was in any way partly to blame for the death of the nurse, what were if any all the other life events that led up to it?

Personally In life I tend to follow in the words of the humorous Karl Pilkington by saying 'You're not allowed to laugh anymore. Laughing is dying out. Crying is the new thing'

Sadly in this case, are tears as a consequence of the laughter.

 

brb Initially I was cross with the Australian DJs - for 'causing' the suicide of the nurse - but on reflection, I don't think anyone could have foreseen the end result. Mankind can't exist without taking risks - even if the result of his actions were OTT. I have received ridicule ( and given it in much greater quantity ) - usually just for a cheap laugh. ( I appreciate that none of the occasions went global. ) I will also accept that some pranks are more nasty than funny ( Russell Brand / Jonathan Ross ) - but the situation with the nurse was not intended as personal ridicule- but deceit to purport to be family of a hospital patient. The nurse should have done her job properly and told the caller to go forth..
If I was one of the DJs I would now be feeling gutted at the consequences - I would feel as bad - or even worse if I killed a child that ran out into the road right in front of my car - but ( in my honest opinion ) I would not feel guilty - just as those DJs may regret their actions - but cannot be guilty for the extreme reaction that one person chose to take.
ps R.I.P. Jacintha Saldanha

 

I want to have a moan about our postie this morning. Not the hardworking postman on foot but the lazy gits that drive around in a postman pat van. What is it with these people, I pay a lot of money for parcel deliveries only for them to knock the door and run away in 5 seconds, I caught one of them this morning, already had the outcards in his hand before he had even knocked the door. Are they not performance accountable for their number of returns? Just look at the queues outside the post office parcel collection place around Christmas it says it all. We are paying for something they are not delivering. Yes, we can have all the excuses about people out to work, etc, etc but it is a bit concerning when the postman is only to ready to stick the card through the letterbox, pre-empting you being out. If we have to collect it from the post office, we might as well have picked the online products up from the shops ourselves in the first place, hence doing the postal delivery service out of a job and saving all the various delivery costs.

Merry Christmas!

 

I have a friend who is a postman - he bemoans the cutbacks in their numbers and the threat of further cuts and closures of mail sorting & collection offices. Despite the current official policy that they endeavour to leave parcels with neighbours - he states that this practise is not in the best interest of post office employees - reducing the need for collection offices, and thereby creating another excuse for staff reduncies - so they seldom bother to trouble a neighbour.
In his defence, I can see his point of view - especially when the likelihood is that the recipient may be out at work - and with the high volume of parcels at this time of the year, if the recipents are not in, waiting around for a reply (to a bell that may not work) takes up valuable time when they are on tight schedules !

 

No disrespect to your postman alwaysright, maybe he is one of the good ones. This is not about troubling a neighbour though, if I cannot get to the door in time, because they disappear so quickly, what chance do elderly customers have? I don't want to practise the marathon because the postie already had outcard at hand.

IMO they are the WORST delivery service. I generally have no trouble with the many couriers I use, because they go to the trouble of understanding their customers. Do I have to knock at this property a bit louder, do I need to walk round the back, is there a place designated to leave the delivery etc, etc. Lets be honest mate, my house dosen't exactly move, so if they don't know me after all these years, they can't have much devotion to their job.

Their is one particular post van man, who has plenty of time to hang around for a cigarette outside his van, but if looks could kill, if he has to get that parcel out of his van again because you do not answer the door quick enough.

I would love to know the extent of their undelivered items.

 

Took younger son & girlfriend ( that's his girlfiend ) to Gatwick - going to Thailand ( via Amsterdam connection ) for Christmas/New Year. They were about to board the plane when told they they had been selected for routine screening. Now, I know that there would have been a standard criminal records check made with his name & d.o.b. - which would have been negative ( he has to be CRB checked for his job. ) - so why 'waste' time picking on him ?
After the 'screening' he was not allowed to board the aeroplane - because he was too late getting on board. Son was angry...... If it had been me there would have been a bloodbath.
After much negotiation it appeared that there was no suitable alternative flight this side of Easter ! Son was offered a flight 12 hours later -- but from Heathrow ( via an expensive taxi ride ) AND they had to pay for new tickets. ( well over £ 1000 for the pair )
WORST OF ALL - there appears that there is nothing that son can do to recover his additional costs. He had insurance - but not such that it would cover the eventuality of missing a flight because of being searched at the last minute before boarding.
I don't think that I would have been able to control myself in the situation. Was it ( is it ) a devious plan designed to put travellers into a situation whereby they miss their flight and have to part with huge amounts of new money for an alternative.
How can the organisations be allowed to get away with no repercussion ( especially when it was established that my son was 'clean' )


the only saving factor in the matter is that son was able to cancel his original ticket from Amsterdam to Thailand and get a refund ( minus the £ 100 admin fee for each ticket )