Rico

Where is East Dulwich Grove? You mean Camberwell Grove?

Train service ends 2011.

Annex into East Dulwich all of the Grove up to Camberwell Church Street. Then build a huge wall between Camberwell/Peckham and East Dulwich. Oh and sell off Council Housing to outfits who can run it properly and weed out the deadbeats.

Absolutely. I'm for right to buy. Go for it.

Every bar is bi-sexual around 11pm onwards...

Chav do you live in publicly subsidised housing now? Forgive me for not being sure, though I infer from your post you have been/still do while you've gotten on your feet to 'start earning'. If so, are you now saying you'll save enough cash in the next few years to pay outright for a property/house in France and move there? Wouldn't it be a better plan to invest in a property here now that you can and then sell up? Besides the facts your means may now or very soon (assuming you can plow a lot of cash into savings) mean you no longer require subsidised housing (though you'll not be means tested or challenged, sadly) it just seems good financial sense to do it.

Agree James. Though liberals tend to be harder on their own. Just look at today's Labour Party! To be fair, any party in power inevitably implodes due to the fragile centrists/far left/right coalition they must court to win. Anyway, maybe Marr is liberal and thus harder on his own. Human nature.

Moos - love it! Saw Prescott railing against it on Newsnight last night. He's great when he's in his element: 'People should not be treated as economic units!' He's actually really good. I had forgotten.

Okay it sounds like it could go on the main forum, but it will be inevitably lounged. This report suggesting Northerners move south, which sounds silly until you listen to those who produced it and they make (some) sense. So can ED take in its share of Northerners looking for a better life?

Of course the whole point of the gay rights movement, and for that matter any similar movement, is to say 'my sexuality doesn't matter, it doesn't define me'. It's about making a BIG issue of something so that eventually (the end game) it will no longer be an issue. So arguably, we simply define 'sex' and not the person. 'Gay sex' (same gender) 'straight sex' (opposite) but eventually just 'sex'. As for people, they are just people. Not defined by 'sex*'. *if allowed in their tenancy agreement, of course

I'm enjoying his book as well James. Taking it slow and find it fascinating. I think he's fair - Thatcher was a visionary in the long view, though her vision wasn't shared. I personally think she did the right things but the wrong way, but that's not the topic of this thread. So as a book I think it's fair and not politically slanted. For some odd reason, I also picked up Ian Smith's autobiography. It's been recently re-printed with a forward saying 'with all that is happening in Zimbabwe, it's worth revisiting Ian Smith's views to see if maybe he was right on some things'. He's a bit of a one-theme poney, but indeed did make some sense. But reading his views of being abandoned by the world (and the UK) are especially interesting when reading Marr's take on what was happening back in the UK. Neither a favourite book though.

Ah. God bless corporate sponsorship.

Here's another: private back gardens. USA has seen litigation where neighbours complained. And several cities have banned smoking in public spaces/beaches. I really do smoke. But I'm well aware how annoying (not to mention unhealthy) it can be for innocent folks in the path of my smoke. My garden is so close to others it must be annoying sometimes. I really should quit. Maybe if I couldn't afford it and my only option for cheap housing banned it (or tested my income and realised I spent more a week on ciggies than what I claimed I could afford for rent) I would quit more quickly. Ummm...

My uni flatmate, who I think is 'totally straight' but would have sex with anyone: 'Friction is friction'

I guess enough abuse or enough pints will lead many to cross the line. Though I think there is actually a difference in being gay/lesbian and having the odd sexual experience with the same sex. James, does that make sense?