The Budget

[allan tracy]

Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.

A 'steady as we go' budget set in a context of an ever so slightly
sign of an economic upturn.

You do get the feeling that their business friendly stuff, like
cutting corporation tax, is beginning to take effect and that most of
the bad news is now out of the way.

True, there's a lot of cuts still to come but they're not generally
big vote losers and besides, after years of Labour's 'beggar all
belief' non-job profligacy, the mood out there is by now pretty
positive towards that.

As for Labour, it finally looks as if what they always knew was likely
to arrive, arrived today, namely the first signs that the medicine may
just, ever so slightly, be working.

Unemployment down again, no triple dip, after all, and, taking out the
stuff that doesn't count, economic growth that's probably nearer to
2%.

Let's face it, it's all been downhill for Labour, so far.

Everything that could go wrong on the economy has for Osborne and
that's allowed Labour to ply their 'we told you so' pseudo science,
always borrow, economics.

Well now it's going to be rather more uphill for them, from now on,
and on the evidence of today, well, they looked beaten just walking
onto the pitch.

Ed and Ed looked shell shocked and Yvette looked as if she wanted to
be somewhere else - anywhere else.

Harriet was, well, just there, begging the bleeding obvious question
as to why.

They all looked a bit tired and forlorn really, not a good sign if any
improvement gathers pace.

Good old Dennis Skinner looked to have more life still in him than the
rest put together.

I think the tide may just be beginning to turn.

[Gary K]

On 20/03/2013 20:06, allan tracy wrote:
> Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
> manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.
>

You do make oi larf!

[Roger Dewhurst]

There is still a very large discrepancy between money coming in and
money going out. That is getting larger and not smaller. Window
dressing which fixes nothing. He is making exactly the same mistake
that the Americans made a few years ago. He will push house prices up
and when people cannot pay their mortgages house prices will fall and
many will go into negative equity. In the USA a house owner with
negative equity could walk away and leave the bank with the problem.
That, I think, is not so in the UK.

[abelard]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:11:24 +0000, Gary K <gposer...@orange.net>
wrote:

at last...
a brilliant rejoinder...full of analysis and content....

you're clearly a socialist and an 'interlectual'

[abelard]

no it isn't....not by any rational measure

> Window
>dressing which fixes nothing. He is making exactly the same mistake
>that the Americans made a few years ago. He will push house prices up

good...more people with capital...

>and when people cannot pay their mortgages house prices will fall and
>many will go into negative equity.

for a while...so what...

> In the USA a house owner with
>negative equity could walk away and leave the bank with the problem.
>That, I think, is not so in the UK.

of course it is so in the uk...

[Mel Rowing]

On Mar 20, 8:06 pm, allan tracy <letshaveatonkapa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
> manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.

What's this 1p a pint off beer?

The price of a pint of beer (£2 - £2.50) varies from pub to pub and
even between the brands.

The 1p will go straight into the landlord's pocket and who will know
let alone make an issue of it?

Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
punter.

[Hotblack Desiato]

"abelard" wrote in message
news:0p6kk81qrmb2fmsq6...@4ax.com...

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT), Roger Dewhurst
<dewhurs...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> He will push house prices up

>good...more people with capital...

Which will come from where?

[abelard]

god...
growth...
redistribution...
inflation...
the government...
increased productivity...
russian and arabic immigrants...

[Hotblack Desiato]

"abelard" wrote in message
news:i29kk8l2oapfnhm83...@4ax.com...

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:01:09 -0000, "Hotblack Desiato"
<trash855...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>"abelard" wrote in message
>>news:0p6kk81qrmb2fmsq6...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT), Roger Dewhurst
>><dewhurs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> He will push house prices up
>>
>>>good...more people with capital...
>>
>>Which will come from where?
>
>god...

hmm
>growth...
Not really. normal salaries have remained largely stagnant through decades
of growth .. this has been largely covered buy dangerous lending practices
which we really don't want to return to
>redistribution...
Possibly
>inflation...
Can't really see how the economy benefits from that one
>the government...
The government doesn't have any money
>increased productivity...
At last.. increased productivity.. That is the only thing that can fund it.
People have to become more and more productive in order to have more money
to spend on the same damn house. But as productivity has been on the rise
for decades and normal salaries haven't really moved upwards much, all
people can effectively do is get more and more jobs .. yeah .. you can see
that's a very short cul-de-sac
>russian and arabic immigrants...
A vote for immigration ? .. seriously? .. Where do you see, normal every day
people living in the future? .. is it actually the gutter or is that even
too good for the fucking plebs?

[Ian Field]

"Hotblack Desiato" <trash855...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2pudnWR1D7f4tdfM...@bt.com...

>
>
> "abelard" wrote in message
> news:i29kk8l2oapfnhm83...@4ax.com...
>
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:01:09 -0000, "Hotblack Desiato"
> <trash855...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>"abelard" wrote in message
>>>news:0p6kk81qrmb2fmsq6...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT), Roger Dewhurst
>>><dewhurs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> He will push house prices up
>>>
>>>>good...more people with capital...
>>>
>>>Which will come from where?
>>
>>god...
> hmm
>>growth...
> Not really. normal salaries have remained largely stagnant through decades
> of growth .. this has been largely covered buy dangerous lending practices
> which we really don't want to return to
>>redistribution...

Don't ya just love it when Lard demonstrates to all who are not inellectualy
stunted that he is totally insane.

[abelard]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:21:32 -0000, "Hotblack Desiato"

<trash855...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>"abelard" wrote in message
>news:i29kk8l2oapfnhm83...@4ax.com...
>
>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:01:09 -0000, "Hotblack Desiato"
><trash855...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>"abelard" wrote in message
>>>news:0p6kk81qrmb2fmsq6...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT), Roger Dewhurst
>>><dewhurs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> He will push house prices up
>>>
>>>>good...more people with capital...
>>>
>>>Which will come from where?
>>
>>god...
>hmm
>>growth...
>Not really. normal salaries have remained largely stagnant through decades
>of growth .. this has been largely covered buy dangerous lending practices
>which we really don't want to return to

why not?
values are relative...a lot of idiots have been valuing gold recently.

sell it and buy houses...

inflation raises asset prices...then the profits can buy flat screen
tellies...meanwhile productivity lowers the prices of the
tellies...

split you 35 metre flat into two....and sell part or rent both...and
go live in orkney

gdp is mostly a load of toss...

>>redistribution...
>Possibly
>>inflation...
>Can't really see how the economy benefits from that one

will people dig a hole in your garden for �200 or �400?

wages are being eroded...that makes labour cheaper...

labour (except 'new' labour!) makes things...even holes

>>the government...
>The government doesn't have any money

the government 'owns' *huge* amounts of real estate...

>>increased productivity...
>At last.. increased productivity.. That is the only thing that can fund it.

not if you try believing in 'gdp' instead of reality

>People have to become more and more productive in order to have more money

the industrial revolution and much else advance keeps that happening
year by year...
this year's car or tv is better than last years...this year's carpet
making machine is faster and better than last years...
repeat, gdp is toss

>to spend on the same damn house. But as productivity has been on the rise
>for decades and normal salaries haven't really moved upwards much, all
>people can effectively do is get more and more jobs .. yeah .. you can see
>that's a very short cul-de-sac

that is false...the same wage will buy a better tv this year...

constant deflation and static wage is rising living standards

government numbers are toss

>>russian and arabic immigrants...
>A vote for immigration ? .. seriously? .. Where do you see, normal every day
>people living in the future? .. is it actually the gutter or is that even
>too good for the fucking plebs?

smaller units if you keep importing more forriners...

the orkneys if you start building in the scotchland and stop
fussing about planning permission in wales

repeat, government stats are toss

[abelard]

you are thick...that's what comes of letting the mirror
rule your 'brain'

[DerekG]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:27:24 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
wrote:


<Snip>

>>and when people cannot pay their mortgages house prices will fall and
>>many will go into negative equity.
>
>for a while...so what...
>
>> In the USA a house owner with
>>negative equity could walk away and leave the bank with the problem.

That is the case. In fact not just negative equity. AIUI
you can just choose to walk away from the deal

>>That, I think, is not so in the UK.
>
>of course it is so in the uk...

Difference being in the UK you could end up by being pursued through
the courts for a humungous amount of debt by the building society and
will find it nigh on impossible to get another mortgage perhaps for
ever.

According to a work colleague in the USA the proceadure is ... Throw
your shit (chattels) in the back of your truck, leave the keys and the
mortgage deads on the kitchen table, head off in the truck to
somewhere where they're still hiring.

DerekG

[abelard]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:48:39 +0000, DerekG <geldar...@memaw.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:27:24 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>wrote:
>
>
><Snip>
>
>>>and when people cannot pay their mortgages house prices will fall and
>>>many will go into negative equity.
>>
>>for a while...so what...
>>
>>> In the USA a house owner with
>>>negative equity could walk away and leave the bank with the problem.
>
>That is the case. In fact not just negative equity. AIUI
>you can just choose to walk away from the deal

that is pretty general in the west....the debtors prisons are
receding into history

>>>That, I think, is not so in the UK.
>>
>>of course it is so in the uk...
>
>Difference being in the UK you could end up by being pursued through
>the courts for a humungous amount of debt by the building society and
>will find it nigh on impossible to get another mortgage perhaps for
>ever.

certainly there may be consequences...but as i remember
you can go through the courts and get free in about 5 years...
you may still find difficulty in getting a mortgage...but then that is
a common problem at present...

or you could buy with others...eg by setting up a company
or letting your insignificant other sign the mortgage...
or by saving a substantial deposit...and getting a solid well
paying job

>According to a work colleague in the USA the proceadure is ... Throw
>your shit (chattels) in the back of your truck, leave the keys and the
>mortgage deads on the kitchen table, head off in the truck to
>somewhere where they're still hiring.

just so...
and they even have different states with different people
and different rules...

and of course there's canada or peru!

[Truebrit]

On Mar 20, 8:06 pm, allan tracy <letshaveatonkapa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
> manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.

"Mel Rowing" <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
What's this 1p a pint off beer?

The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
even between the brands.

The 1p will go straight into the landlord's pocket and who will know
let alone make an issue of it?

Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
punter.

The exchequeer needs to show he understands the working mans plight and
offer some relief. ;-)
Truebrit.

[Ian Field]

"abelard" <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:rkakk811i8pf9k2d7...@4ax.com...

You wouldn't be saying that if it hadn't plummeted under toraidhe
incompetence (or malice).

[abelard]

ferkrisakes, throw away your mirror...in fact both of them....

and do some study...if you're capable
http://www.abelard.org/economics/gross_domestic_product.php

your household 'growth' would stop growing if you stopped
borrowing irresponsibly...
and started to try to get out of debt...

that is exactly what is happening in the uk...

you know nothing...no socialist is numerate...or if they
are, they are intemperate liars...
which are you?

[Roger Dewhurst]

On Mar 21, 10:01 am, "Hotblack Desiato" <trash855-

killf...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "abelard"  wrote in message
>
> news:0p6kk81qrmb2fmsq6...@4ax.com...
>
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT), Roger Dewhurst
>

> <dewhurst.ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> He will push house prices up
> >good...more people with capital...
>
> Which will come from where?

From the increasing differential between what the government spends
and what it extorts.

[Roger Dewhurst]

On Mar 21, 11:30 am, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 22:19:21 -0000, "Ian Field"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <gangprobing.al...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> >"abelard" <abela...@abelard.org> wrote in message

The inescapable fact is that the average standard of living of the
population is proportional to the total real goods and services
divided by the population. Total goods and services (things that are
of real value one way or another) are declining while the population
steadily rises. No amount of fiddling with the books will change
this. Production of real useful stuff must increase and expenditure
on useless stuff, local government activities etc, must decrease.
When one examines the pie chart of government expenditure the largest
slice, which exceeds the total of income tax, relates to 'social' and
'welfare'. It is here that the chop must start. Health and education
cost are substantial but nowhere near the first item. Defence costs
etc. are trivial relative to the big ticket items.

[JNugent]

By the time the pub landlord gets the beer, the duty is already paid.
The duty thereby effectively forms part of the wholesale price of beer.

A reduction in that wholesale price might or might not have a serious
effect on what the retailer needs to charge. And a small change is bound
to have a small effect. But the change is symbolic - at least it wasn't
an increase.

[abelard]

fine...as long as there's no codicil and good definitions

> Total goods and services (things that are
>of real value one way or another)

be careful....
1)things are only of real value if people value them...
2)people's attributed values are in constant flux...

> are declining while the population
>steadily rises.

as the population rises, there are more people providing
services and more people to value those services...

> No amount of fiddling with the books will change
>this.

that stt is meaningless

> Production of real useful stuff must increase and expenditure
>on useless stuff, local government activities etc, must decrease.

that would be sensible

meanwhile i hope your definition of 'real stuff' is clear

>When one examines the pie chart of government expenditure the largest
>slice, which exceeds the total of income tax, relates to 'social' and
>'welfare'.

i'll go with that provisionally

> It is here that the chop must start.

i'll go with that...

> Health and education
>cost are substantial but nowhere near the first item.

i'll go with that also...

> Defence costs
>etc. are trivial relative to the big ticket items.

ok...

most of what you're saying looks reasonable...but i'm as
yet unsure why you are saying it...or where you are
hoping to travel with it

[aaa]

I thought the budget was one of his worst ever.
One of the reasons the UK is uncompetative, is because our housing costs are very high.
High housing costs = hight / uncompetative wages + large amount of tax spent on benefits like housing.
This budget will just make what was already one of the worst features of the UK, even worse.

The govenrment are still spending 5 pounds for every 4 pounds of revenue.
The government could not even cut their way out of a wet paper bag.

[jbm]

On 20/03/2013 20:06, allan tracy wrote:
> >
>
>
>

> Unemployment down again, no triple dip, after all, and, taking out the
> stuff that doesn't count, economic growth that's probably nearer to
> 2%.
>
>
>
>
>

I have no idea where you are getting your information from, but the bit
about "Unemployment down" is an absolute load of bollocks.

Here in Northampton, unemployment has gone up from 5,721 in January to
5,934 in February. That an INCREASE of 9.3% in a month.

Verifiable link at:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/local/number-of-northampton-jobless-rises-again-1-4916789

I'd be interested to see the links to the utter tripe you just spouted.

jim

[Roger Dewhurst]

>
> meanwhile i hope your definition of 'real stuff' is clear
>

There are difficulties. What is useful grades into the frivolous.
The extremes may be obvious, the intermediates may not.

Cabbages are useful and/or essential. The same cannot be said for
some exotic fruit.

A surgeon engaged in general surgery is rather more valuable to
society than one doing boob jobs.

A policeman doing what policemen used to do is rather more valuable
than a Birmingham council jobsworth sending out rubbish bin notices
which include questions on the bin users' sexuality.

A fitter and turner making machine tools is rather more valuable than
a squealing lout on a stage.

[abelard]

no problem with any of that....

which is just part of why i regard neurosing over gdp as
close to nutz...

[JNugent]

On 20/03/2013 23:42, jbm wrote:
> On 20/03/2013 20:06, allan tracy wrote:
>> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>> Unemployment down again, no triple dip, after all, and, taking out the
>> stuff that doesn't count, economic growth that's probably nearer to
>> 2%.
>>
>>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> I have no idea where you are getting your information from, but the bit
> about "Unemployment down" is an absolute load of bollocks.
>
> Here in Northampton, unemployment has gone up from 5,721 in January to
> 5,934 in February. That an INCREASE of 9.3% in a month.
>
> Verifiable link at:
>
> http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/local/number-of-northampton-jobless-rises-again-1-4916789

And of course, Northampton is the WHOLE of the United Kingdom, isn't it?

[abelard]

selecting out one small area just makes use of government
stats even more ridiculous


but there is a slight rise in 'unemployment' this month...

there's also a rise in employment to the highest ever...

[John Turner]

"allan tracy" wrote

> Unemployment down again, no triple dip, after all, and, taking out the
> stuff that doesn't count, economic growth that's probably nearer to
> 2%.

Really, I seem to recall having read that unemployment rose by 60,000 in the
last month?

John.

[John Turner]

"allan tracy" wrote

> Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
> manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.

One question if I may?

Give me any example where severe austerity measures have ever resulted in a
boost to any country's economy either in the short or long term.

John.

[abelard]

do your own research

[AC]

Since its all in your little mind, asking you was doing is own research.

--
AC

[AC]

So like this government, you don't actually know.

--
AC

[Basil Jet]

On 2013\03\20 20:48, Mel Rowing wrote:
>
> What's this 1p a pint off beer?
>
> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
> even between the brands.
>
> The 1p will go straight into the landlord's pocket and who will know
> let alone make an issue of it?
>
> Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
> punter.

He's worked out the cost of getting Nigel Farage to rejoin the Tories.

[Steve O]

On 21/03/2013 03:16, Basil Jet wrote:
> On 2013\03\20 20:48, Mel Rowing wrote:
>>
>> What's this 1p a pint off beer?
>>
>> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>> even between the brands.
>>
>> The 1p will go straight into the landlord's pocket and who will know
>> let alone make an issue of it?
>>
>> Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
>> punter.
>

Well, if you buy 249 pints you get one free.

[Paul Hyett]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 at 21:24:35, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in
uk.media.tv.misc :
>
>you're clearly a socialist and an 'interlectual'
>
You can't be both?
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

[abelard]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 07:31:08 +0000, Paul Hyett
<p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 at 21:24:35, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in
>uk.media.tv.misc :
>>
>>you're clearly a socialist and an 'interlectual'
>>
>You can't be both?

pah, you caught me out!

[abelard]

i know what i don't know...and i know how to find out what
i didn't know...

you are merely both ignorant and arrogant...a common and depressing
condition...

[abelard]

read what you typed...and then try again...or perhaps
not..
you'll only waste your time...and much worse, my time

[Norman Wells]

Roger Dewhurst wrote:
>> meanwhile i hope your definition of 'real stuff' is clear
>>
> There are difficulties. What is useful grades into the frivolous.
> The extremes may be obvious, the intermediates may not.
>
> Cabbages are useful and/or essential. The same cannot be said for
> some exotic fruit.

Not if you judge by what people are prepared to pay for.

> A surgeon engaged in general surgery is rather more valuable to
> society than one doing boob jobs.

Not if you judge by what people are prepared to pay for.

> A fitter and turner making machine tools is rather more valuable than
> a squealing lout on a stage.

Not if you judge by what people are prepared to pay for.

[GordonD]

"allan tracy" <letshavea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:52e72dc2-5713-44a1...@fn10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

> True, there's a lot of cuts still to come but they're not generally
> big vote losers

Well, no, because the people who will be affected don't vote Tory and the
people who do won't be affected. It's typical Conservative policy - fuck the
poor, they don't matter so long as Jocasta can get her riding lessons.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."

[abelard]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:53:57 -0000, "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com>
wrote:

>"allan tracy" <letshavea...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:52e72dc2-5713-44a1...@fn10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> True, there's a lot of cuts still to come but they're not generally
>> big vote losers
>
>Well, no, because the people who will be affected don't vote Tory and the
>people who do won't be affected. It's typical Conservative policy - fuck the
>poor, they don't matter so long as Jocasta can get her riding lessons.

so you want even more free money...we all know that full well...

[GordonD]

"Basil Jet" <no...@none.spamspam.com> wrote in message
news:514a7b7c$0$1106$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...

They wouldn't take him - he's too left-wing.

[allan tracy]

>
> What's this 1p a pint off beer?
>

> Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
> punter.

He didn't have much choice over the duty on beer and fuel.

The fact is those taxes had gone too far and, like all tax increases,
were beginning to follow the law of diminishing returns until finally
turning negative.

Fuel duty revenue and alcohol duty revenue are well down, in fact
they've tanked, so he has had to adjust those duties in the hope of
raising more revenue, not less.

Of course, this is a concept that passes over Labour heads at 10,000
ft.

[allan tracy]

>
> Give me any example where severe austerity measures have ever resulted in a
> boost to any country's economy either in the short or long term.
>

Actually, in the 1930s, a very similar austerity, coupled with
infrastructure spending, led eventually to record levels of economic
growth. So much so, that its architect, Neville Chamberlain, was
celebrated in the US on the cover of Time magazine, where his policies
were contrasted with the rather less spectacular results emanating
from the US New Deal stimulus.

As a general rule though, the one lesson, above all else, that no one
seems to want to learn from the 1930s depression is that it took a
bloody long time to recover, whatever was done.

Never better demonstrated than in Japan, back in the 90s when dealing
with a similar property crash recession. They threw the kitchen sink
at it, every economic theory in the book, and none of it made a blind
bit of difference.

[Cynic]

None of what you have said is true in *economic* terms.

A cabbage is certainly more intrinsically useful than a bar of gold.
But I know which one *I* would prefer to find lying in the street ...

--
Cynic

[Cynic]

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:48:54 -0700 (PDT), Mel Rowing
<mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>even between the brands.

You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.

Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �2.70 and �3.10

--
Cynic

[JNugent]

Is it?

[JNugent]

On 21/03/2013 16:58, Cynic wrote:

> Mel Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>> even between the brands.

> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
> Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �2.70 and �3.10

You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.

Round here, an average pint in a pub will cost between �3.25 and �3.60.

[abelard]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:54:02 +0000, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

you obviously live in a very cheap part of the country...

round here you can't get a pint in a pub for a king's ransom

[Ian Field]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:ar16o6...@mid.individual.net...

Gold has just as many industrial uses as decorative.

[JNugent]

Absolutely.

A cabbage could feed a man for a day. A metal bar could help feed a man
for a lifetime.

[Col]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:ar16o6...@mid.individual.net...

Indeed.
Think how many cabbages you could buy with a bar of gold......
--
Col

The gulls have plucked out my eyes!

[JNugent]

To be fair, Cynic's key word was "intrinsically".

[James Hammerton]

On 20/03/2013 23:57, John Turner wrote:
> "allan tracy" wrote
>
>> Pardon me for saying but, given the next to zero room he had for
>> manoeuvre, I though Osborne played a bit of a blinder today.
>
> One question if I may?
>

> Give me any example where severe austerity measures

It would help here to know what you mean by "severe austerity measures".

have ever resulted in a
> boost to any country's economy either in the short or long term.
>

> John.
>
>

James

--
James Hammerton,
http://jhammerton.wordpress.org/
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/news/
Follow on twitter: @JamesAHammerton

[James Hammerton]

But you might be able to get 500ml?

[abelard]

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:01:11 +0000, James Hammerton
<jamesha...@virginmedia.com> wrote:

>On 21/03/2013 20:30, abelard wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:54:02 +0000, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2013 16:58, Cynic wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mel Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>>>>> even between the brands.
>>>
>>>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>>>> Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �2.70 and �3.10
>>>
>>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>>>
>>> Round here, an average pint in a pub will cost between �3.25 and �3.60.
>>
>> you obviously live in a very cheap part of the country...
>>
>> round here you can't get a pint in a pub for a king's ransom
>>
>But you might be able to get 500ml?

and it'll be german pee!

[aaa]

Agree
Economy takes a long time to react.

Problem is that it will take a long time to correct the mistakes of the last couple of decades.
And our politicians are completely ill-equipped to do it.
Because (a) politics is about PR, not skill. (b) few in politics understand industry or science

[aaa]

GordonD wrote:

> "allan tracy" <letshavea...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:52e72dc2-5713-44a1...@fn10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > True, there's a lot of cuts still to come but they're not generally
> > big vote losers
>
> Well, no, because the people who will be affected don't vote Tory and the people who do won't be affected. It's typical Conservative policy - fuck the poor, they don't matter so long as Jocasta can get her riding lessons.

You are having a laugh. We are still spending 5 pounds for every 4 pounds of revenue. The current government could not cut its way out of a wet paper bag.

[Paul Hyett]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 at 20:50:38, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote
in uk.media.tv.misc :

>>>>
>>>> A cabbage is certainly more intrinsically useful than a bar of gold.
>>>
>>> Is it?
>>
>> Gold has just as many industrial uses as decorative.
>
>Absolutely.
>
>A cabbage could feed a man for a day.

Yuck - I'd rather eat the gold bar!

[JNugent]

I tend to agree, but as a poster elsewhere would say, eating cabbage
beats the crap out of starving to death.

[Cynic]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:54:02 +0000, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>

wrote:

>>> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>>> even between the brands.

>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>> Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �2.70 and �3.10

>You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>Round here, an average pint in a pub will cost between �3.25 and �3.60.

IIUC those are London prices. There are a couple of pubs round here
that are that expensive, but you won't usually find a pub charging
much above �3. *Clubs* OTOH can be far more expensive.

--
Cynic

[Ian Field]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message

news:ar2j1p...@mid.individual.net...

The weapons grade flatulence would probably beat the crap out of your arse!

[Ian Field]

"Cynic" <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:514c65cf...@127.0.0.1...

Last time I was in London was a couple of decades ago, we were moving the
company into new premises, as we shoved in the last packing case and shut
the door on it, we decided to stop in the pub over the road before heading
home, IIRC they were charging nearly �5 a pint - we waved bye bye to the
landlord as we left.

[JNugent]

On 22/03/2013 14:10, Cynic wrote:

> JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>>>> The price of a pint of beer (�2 - �2.50) varies from pub to pub and
>>>> even between the brands.

>>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>>> Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �2.70 and �3.10

>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.
>> Round here, an average pint in a pub will cost between �3.25 and �3.60.

> IIUC those are London prices.

Almost.

> There are a couple of pubs round here
> that are that expensive, but you won't usually find a pub charging
> much above �3. *Clubs* OTOH can be far more expensive.

Round here, clubs are cheaper.

Not nightclubs, just CIU-type clubs.

[JNugent]

�5 a pint twenty years ago?

They saw you coming.

[Cynic]

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 16:31:06 +0000, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

>> There are a couple of pubs round here
>> that are that expensive, but you won't usually find a pub charging
>> much above �3. *Clubs* OTOH can be far more expensive.
>
>Round here, clubs are cheaper.
>
>Not nightclubs, just CIU-type clubs.

Sorry - I was referring to nightclubs rather than the other type
(which, as you say, are considerably cheaper).

--
Cynic

[Ian Field]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message

news:ar3fbq...@mid.individual.net...

> On 22/03/2013 16:14, Ian Field wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Cynic" <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:514c65cf...@127.0.0.1...
>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:54:02 +0000, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
>>> wrote:
>>>

>>>>>> The price of a pint of beer (�ｿｽ2 - �ｿｽ2.50) varies from pub to pub and

>>>>>> even between the brands.
>>>
>>>>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.

>>>>> Round here a pint in an average pub will cost between �ｿｽ2.70 and �ｿｽ3.10

>>>
>>>> You obviously live in a very cheap part of the country.

>>>> Round here, an average pint in a pub will cost between �ｿｽ3.25 and �ｿｽ3.60.

>>>
>>> IIUC those are London prices. There are a couple of pubs round here
>>> that are that expensive, but you won't usually find a pub charging

>>> much above �ｿｽ3. *Clubs* OTOH can be far more expensive.

>>
>> Last time I was in London was a couple of decades ago, we were moving
>> the company into new premises, as we shoved in the last packing case and
>> shut the door on it, we decided to stop in the pub over the road before

>> heading home, IIRC they were charging nearly �ｿｽ5 a pint - we waved bye

>> bye to the landlord as we left.
>

> �ｿｽ5 a pint twenty years ago?
>
> They saw you coming.

And leaving without paying a penny.

[Paul Hyett]

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 at 08:28:41, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote
in uk.media.tv.misc :

>>>

>>> A cabbage could feed a man for a day.
>>
>> Yuck - I'd rather eat the gold bar!
>
>I tend to agree, but as a poster elsewhere would say, eating cabbage
>beats the crap out of starving to death.

Not if you vomit it straight back up! :)

[Col]

"JNugent" <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:ar3fbq...@mid.individual.net...

On the contrary, they saw them going.......

[Charles Bryant]

In article <768d3a7f-1e2a-4f57...@j9g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Mel Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
}What's this 1p a pint off beer?
}
}The 1p will go straight into the landlord's pocket and who will know
}let alone make an issue of it?
}
}Surely that is 1p that would benefit the exchequer more than the
}punter.

Spoken like a true leftie.

[GordonD]

"Charles Bryant" <ch.jmum9...@chch.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ch.news.2013....@chch.co.uk...

You say that as if it's a bad thing.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."