V511

Looking at social media lately suggests that eggs are scarce because of the number of people suddenly making cakes at whilst stuck at home. Which also explains why flour supplies are low (as well as being used to make bread)

Both of the local constituencies - Dulwich and West Norwood, Camberwell and Peckham - are safe Labour seats, so from the perspective of all of the parties, there's not much point in spending time and resources campaigning here. That's one of the big flaws in our First Past the Post electoral system.

Maybe the way to deal with Smith is not to deal with him. Just factor in that he will score a big chunk of runs every innings and don't spend your energy and focus trying all kinds of tactics on him. Instead, give him singles so that the strike keeps rotating to the other players and focus your energies on getting them out, because the rest of the aussies batting line up isn't firing reliably. They are vulnerable. And then sort our own batting out of course...!

Thanks Penguin68, that makes senses.

Have voted. Trying to work out though why 'The final name must be approved London Fire Brigade'? any ideas?

Hello all, New to this thread but thought I'd jump in after the first test has played out it's exquisite torture. I'm not too despondent though. England were a player - and such a crucial player - down, and if they can find a solution to limiting Smith, the sides are fairly evenly matched on paper. Still plenty to play for.

Lovely. Always nice to make someone smile.

Which Doctor were they dressed as?

Keep in mind too that many local councillors are not doing it as a full time job. Many have other careers too. You don't get paid a salary as such to be a basic councillor, but receive an allowance of ?11,270 per year in Southwark (other councils may differ slightly) https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-mps/member-allowances-and-expenses If you take on more roles and duties by joining certain committees for example, you are given a greater allowance, which could then mean you'd earn enough to make it your full time job. Seems to me that properly paying councillors to make it a full time job would help things a little.

I believe that '2 Girls Cafe' has a small selection of items to buy in a zero waste format. They're over on Peckham Rye. https://www.facebook.com/pg/2girlscafe/posts/?ref=page_internal

I'm a zipcar user and as far as I know, it still is and always has been the case that we have to leave the cars in the designated parking bay. Perhaps the person has hired the car for a long period and is just parking there as though it were their own car? And then they hired a different vehicle?

oh that's a great offer. Well done Southwark. Signed up already.

My girlfriend wants to join the gym in the next week, but just wondering if it would be better to wait until the new management takes over? I assume memberships will automatically transfer over, but maybe they will offer introductory membership prices?

From the data in that graph I posted, there is no evidence the market is desperate to build more houses if only governments would unshackle them. They've had 50 years under various governments of all colours and differing regulatory regimes and haven't fundamentally changed how much they build. Your faith in markets isn't backed up by the evidence in this area. My argument is simply that they don't build more because controlling supply is a simple way of maintaining profits. And if governments don't cover the gap between what the markets will build and what the public need, then we get a structural housing shortage. Hence why I will moan about government inaction, not markets.

Well I think your response proves my argument rather than being wrong. Who is going to make the plots of land available? Barratt etc won't because they want to make money. And Governments have lacked the will to either make public land available or to buy back private land. So my point stands. Markets won't and governments haven't.

Fazer71 - It's inaccurate to think the market has or will build enough homes. This graph shows that as government housebuilding declined, the market didn't step up to match public need. http://www.cityam.com/216218/uk-house-prices-whos-building-britains-houses-and-can-we-really-build-200000-homes-year Primarily because why would they? If demand goes up and you restrict supply, prices go up. It's not some evil capitalist system - it's just simple capitalist supply and demand. There is no incentive for the market to build what is needed. If it was for something inconsequential like luxury cars or smartphones then so be it, I don't mind, but when it comes to one of the most basic human needs of shelter, I don't believe the market can work to cover society's need. It's internal logic means it won't. So I don't blame it for sticking to its nature. Instead, I blame and moan about various governments abdicating their responsibility in providing for where the market cannot. And as a believer that shelter should be considered a human right, I'm proud to moan about the failure of a society to provide the means to house it's own citizens.

TheCoalLine - thanks for sharing your thoughtful blogpost. You seem to be aware of the issues and perceptions that can arise and how you plan to address them in the future, which i'm pleased to hear. Onwards and upwards.