louisiana

concita Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > that's why good causes never receive the right > money. > This sort of charity is OK for this country, but > overseas, people do help local people and do not > mind if they see others walking in the same street > with their clothes on. > Charities in this country are already supported by > tax payers, by the national lottery, raffles > etcc... Most charities receive absolutely nothing from the National Lottery. Charities will only receive any money from a raffle if they themselves actually operate a raffle, or if some kind soul decides to give the cash from a raffle to that charity. Charities receive Gift Aid only as a consequence of having raised money themselves from individual donors/taxpayers. > As you said there are many charity workers, but > there are also many highly paid directors, who > would not give a penny of their salary to support > the charity they represent. It is certainly not a > good thing. Concita, you seem to have some pretty strange ideas. There are paid employees in many charities. After all, those charities have a job to do, and sometimes a very unpleasant or even dangerous one. (Here, I'm thinking of a friend who was working in the field in Rwanda/Burundi during the awful events there.) Most charities (and NGOs) also generally have quite a few volunteers. But it's pretty difficult to do any serious work without some paid full-time employees. Detail of exactly what money is paid as wages is available for all charities, in their accounts available on the Charity Commission website. Charity trustees cannot receive any payment for services from the charity of which they are a trustee. Charities do not have directors (as in board of directors) unless they are also limited (by guarantee) companies. Charities may have executive director(s) who is paid, but that tends to be a very full-on full-time role, in other words the 'director' bit is just a job label and it's a job like any other. Would you give money out of your (after-tax) wages to 'support' the company or organisation you work for?

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Maybe they do. Didn't Tony Blair say that God told > him to go into war with Iraq, or something along > those lines? Indeed. Which is why I think the OP unfairly impugned pagans by making a far less warranted causal association. Pagans strike me as a pretty inoffensive bunch on the whole.

Jeremy, I think that's giving paganism a bad name. You might as fairly (or more fairly) say that US and UK warmongers and mercenaries have particularly skewed views influenced by Christianity. :-$

That'll be their company registration number.

Indeed, Pearson. There appears to be more than one dog involved here, and maybe people are getting them mixed up.

Small charities will also often be companies (limited by guarantee) and so on the CoHo database. You can't be a chairty without having some legal form (company or whatever). It's best to check charitable status on the Commission website.

If they have no charity registration number they are not a charity*. You can check the name on the Charity Commission website http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ (text box at the top of the page, in the centre) *except for housing and some education charities

On mine it's > iTunes menu > Preferences > Advanced, then untick 'keep iTunes media folder organised' - but I'm using an old version of iTunes for Mac.

You need to go into Preferences or Options (depending on which version of iTunes) and set a switch to say 'do not organise files when importing'. It might be under Importing > Advances Options or similar. (I'll check) if I get a moment.) At the moment it's reorganising by artist, album etc., which of course produces daft results for mix CDs.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The actual 2001 census question: > > "10 What is your religion? > * This question is voluntary > * Tick one box only > > > I don't call that a leading question, This is a leading question. (I design questionnaires, forms and complex interactive systems, and advise on national democratic systems, so have considerable experience on this issue.) People will tend to read and start to process the question before they look for 'their answer' among the possible responses. The question assumes the respondent has a religion. Of course, the order in which the possible responses are listed will have an effect on results; people will tend to pick the first from the list that they find reasonably accurate (where there are grey areas, as there are here, and so more than one response possible in principle), and most will read top to bottom and/or left to right. There are various ways you can significantly alter the results achieved. I've seen how the census data on religion can be used: the religion stats regularly get an outing in relevant planning cases in Southwark, for example. Televangelist-style churches use it as one of their justifications for taking over our remaining D2 (leisure) buildings. I went to a meeting of such churches last year where the 2001 religion stats were quoted and many in the audience seemed to find it incomprehensible that there were people in Southwark that did not belong to any church.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi helena handbasket, > Roughly where do you and your neighbours live that > were burgled? > > Hi sb, > This thread should perhaps be retitled "burglaries > in Forst Hill/East Dulwich areas/Bellenden/Peckham > Rye /South Camberwell with bits of Dulwich > Village" because roughly that's the areas posted > about. Such an area has about 50,000 homes with > 80,000 residents. Don't forget Upper and West Norwood etc.! There are people from Crystal Palace etc. also posting on here ;-) (and College ward stretches almost to the Transmitter).

When I was in the sixth form, my mum paid me the child benefit she got for me (I was no longer living at home). That and part-time bar work got me through to A levels. Or it was doing until the pub manager become overly familiar (they'd call it harassment these days) and I had to leave in a hurry. Working evenings and weekends in the pub didn't leave me much time for doing any homework, so my grades were not as hot as they could have been, and I ended up having to drop one A level (or rather, the school was so fussed about grades, that they'd force you to drop any subject that you might not get a top grade in). I'm sure there are still some school students who for various reasons have to support themselves. What happens to them these days?

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pipes > Bowler hats > Snuff > > > ....the times they are a changiing Last week I saw a young-ish lady in the champagne bar at Frieze partaking of snuff. Perhaps we are about to see a revival.

Breakfast? Saturday Kitchen? James Martin? I don't know any of these. Maybe you have too much time on your hands. :)

I don't think having been awarded a degree (from any institution, of any class, from any era, in any subject) says anything about your use of English. Having taught on both undergraduate and postgraduate degree courses at different universities in various countries, I'm only too aware that marking schemes barely touch on ability to write. Most university lecturers are in any case not masters of their own language. My major language learning experiences were teaching for the British Council across the range of language abilities, from near-beginners to post-docs working for international publishers; and teaching English editing modules on higher degree courses outside the UK. Incredibly proficient but foreign speakers of your language ask the most difficult questions imaginable about usage, and you have to be able to answer all of them. So there's a need to move from instinct, based on reading or other exposure, to having to defend a particular construction as correct, generally based on authority. I have never loved English usage books so much! Translation can also hone a person's skills: you then understand that languages can work in very different ways, and that communication and ambiguity are key issues. Your target is always to construct a text that reads believably and without the slightest niggle, in the target language, regardless of the quality of the source text. But online forums are informal spaces where anything goes. Pedants should reserve their analysis and comments for texts of greater significance.

As Huguenot says, there needs to be certainty in law that your claims are valid. That's the reason it takes a little time. Meanwhile, you should not break the law (e.g. by breaking into the property while they are there) in order to achieve your goals extra-legally. But you can use *all* the laws at your disposal to help yourself.

Am I not a pedant, LM? :) I do try to keep it under control these days, as I know it can be infuriating for others. The thing that drives me totally potty is random punctuation. I think poor punctuation and incorrect syntax are signs of woolly or lazy thinking. But they can be forgiven on a forum. I do a fair amount of translation, and badly written texts where nobody working professionally in my language pairs can state for certain what the writer was trying to say are the bane of my life.

Still big differentials in salaries within a company, which is why Western companies are using big teams in China, India etc. In some firms, this is where projects that have run out of budget get sent, in order to hit costs on the head. I'm sure the differentials are narrowing though. People out there inevitably find out what foreign colleagues are earning, get resentful (they're also living in a big, expensive city after all) and jump ship, which is going to drive rates up.

My rule is to use what people themselves want to be called, unless this is overruled by the house style (but I would fight a house style that sought to deviate from accepted forms). The Royal Parks themselves use the form St James's Park, so I would too.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > " have put the western world out of work" > > That's not true either, China's manufacturing > contribution has only been made over the last > twenty years - a period when more people have been > employed in the 'West' than at any time in > history. > > I think you're just thinking in black and white > terms about manufacturing again SteveT. 75% of our > labour market work in 'Services' to which China > offers no competition. It's starting to offer competition in such areas as software (development). Under the auspices of US and European multinationals.

Ladymuck Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually, whilst on the subject of grammar could I > pick the brains of some of you. > > I have a problem with apostrophes in this > situation: > > Prince Charles' garden. > > Is that correct? Or should there be a second "s"? > I.e. Prince Charles's garden. The internet is > split on this. I always feel there should be a > second "s", but think it looks odd and therefore > tend to omit it. > Prince Charles' garden is always correct. Some publications - such as The Currant Bun - may, however, regard this form as affected and unnecessarily challenging for their readers. You'll find out more in the style guide, if the publication has one; this will invariably include instructions on dealing with proper nouns. Essentially it has become a matter of house style. The main issue is consistency. You should not use one form in the body and the other in the headline, as I have just spotted in one publication, or both forms in the same publication.

dita-on-tees Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ladymuck Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Well Dita, I failed my English Language O Level > > four times before I eventually passed. In fact > I > > obtained all of my qualifications (bar French O > > Level) whilst attending evening classes/working > > full time:-$ as I left school at 16. Still as > > thick as 3 planks:-S. > > > ah well least you haven't had 100 driving lessons > plus, and still no bloody license... Licence - noun British English License - noun US English License - verb British English

Saila Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not a legal-minded person but my own rational > assessment of my situation is that someone's > living in a flat that they don't own or belong in. > the fact that they are illegal immigrants (or not) > in my mind should be irrelevant? > > it's a separate issue, but i'm grateful for your > Sure, it's a separate issue, and you need to go through due process for evicting squatters, but if they are basically taking the piss and making things worse than they need be, I would be tempted to pursue, simultaneously, other avenues available. If someone plays dirty, I tend to have the attitude 'all deals are off'.

"The question to me is not do you foreclose or do you not foreclose. The question is when and with what philosophy you foreclose," the man on the bank restructuring team said. "If you want to reduce the amount of leveraged homeowners you have, you need to ultimately kick them out of their homes." A colleague walked up: His recommendation was to burn houses. It would lower the supply. *** from The New York Observer http://www.observer.com/2010/wall-street/foreclosure-fiasco-and-wall-streets-shrug

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Technically that's what they have done...stolen > someone's property. > > Mind you, it used to be far harder to get > squatters out. Used to take years in some cases. > When was that?