silverfox

Fair enough Loz. I realise it is a perfectly valid voting procedure although it is not actually one system. There are many variations of how STV is used across the world and how votes, and even fracrtions of votes in some cases, are transferred. I would question though whether in most cases the winner can claim to have a mandate given that their cumulative votes are made up of 2nd, 3rd or 4th preferences. Ironically, our imperfect system at the moment is quite clear on who really has the mandate in terms of votes cast (see Mamora Man's percentages required above) but the first past the post system means they don't necessarily win a seat.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'd like to see a change to Single Transferable > Vote. > > The last candidate is eliminated in each round of > counting, and their votes handed over at full > value to whoever was the second favourite on their > voters' cards. > > The rounds continue until one candidate has over > 50% of the vote, and they are elected. > I'm not sure how this is an improvement on the current system. People will have voted for the disqualified candidate, not for whoever is reallocated their votes. Surely in theory the BNP could win on this basis?

I don't know if it's an American thing but have you noticed how as well as holding the knife in the left hand some of these etiquette abusers also hold the fork in the right hand tines down in a clenched-fist fashion, pinning the food to the plate while sawing away with the left hand as if cutting a loaf of bread. Whatever next, passing the port to the right?

Definitely a social faux pas using knives in their left hands and forks in their right. I blame the parents (and eating in front of the telly).

Thank you for taking the time to respond Tessa, if I may be so familiar. Personally, I don't think it's necessary for politicians to live in the constituency they represent. Secondly, the question of renumeration is a difficult one. It's not that there should be an upper limit set on what a person may earn per se, rather how it is earned or awarded. What the financial crisis exposed for all to see was how many workers in the banking industry were receiving huge bonuses prematurely, ie, being rewarded in advance for deals that turned out to be disasterous. Bonuses paid in arrears would be the answer here, as well as progressive taxation. However, there cannot be any doubt in most people's minds that there has been a profound explosion of 'Big Brother' surveillance under Labour which cannot simply be excused by fears of terrorism or anti-social behaviour. In fact, much of the surveillance appears to be generated by the need to make money and raise revenue, eg, speed cameras, congestion charge. Let's hope the idea of Identity Cards is now dead and buried.

Don't you mean levitates?

Taxi

What is the deadline for submitting potential questions for the PPCs to you?

M7post, you can't save the planet. It's doomed. Okay not for five billion years or so when the sun exhausts it's fission supply. But it's doomed nevertheless. So, logically, adopting a 'green' lifesyle, eating less meat, recycling, switching off lights in your household, wind farms etc etc are a useless waste of time if you're trying to save the planet - which you can't. So, really, your question is: Given the world's current politcal, economic, financial and trade structures would having less babies help the current structure? Well, the answer is yes if you restrict yourself to such thinking and you consider the question to be there's too many mouths to feed under the prevailing status quo. However it's not as easy as this. Eg, to take an example from Professor A J Ayer: What does it mean to be bald? If the definition is having no hair then if I have xx thousand hairs on my head and I lose one that does not make me bald. Lose two, still not bald, and so on until if I still have one hair on my head I'm not bald. Your question: Stop Having Babies to Save the Planet ? suffers from the same flaw in logic. You can ultimately get to the stage where the human race will die and this raises the question if we're not here to perceive the existence of the planet does it exist? And if it exists independent of our existence why should we care? - which of course we won't be able to anyway. Alernatively, what you're saying is too many mouths to feed is threatening my comfortable existence here in the pampered first world. Edited to change million to billion

Conch earrings and seaweed ugg boots as modelled by Man Friday

True, legalbeagle. On the other hand it might not be true.

Okay, so let's get this straight. You witnessed two women slashing and stabbing eachother to pieces with broken bottles. Right in front of you. Presumably you've given a statement to the police, given a description of the two. You may be due to visit the police station to look through mug shots to identify them given how close you were. And presumably you'll be in court to identify them if called upon? Am I right?

I still find this a bit far fetched. Jaws, explain yourself, witness statements etc. If Rye Lane was at a standstill why is only Brum, who wasn't there, sticking up for you?

Posted by: Santerme Today, 09:30AM '...We didn?t make a fuss about Hong Kong...' Course we didn't because we weren't going to win that one. Sorry Santerme, I normally respect your posts but Hugo Rifkind's article is a load of jingoistic tripe.

Narnia Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > I may have joked that this is Drawing Room > material but it isn't. It's more important than > such threads as 'Is there a God'. This is a person > not a debate. It's good to know when to keep > quiet. I don't agree with you. It goes to the core of our existence, how we perceive ourselves, how others perceive us (not that we should be concerned what others think).

First thing I'd say is this is drawing room material to which everyone can contribute. What does it mean to achieve? What does doing something worthwhile/fulfilling mean? Too late for what? Catch up with what? These are big questions Ladymuck and for once I'll shut up and not give any opinion. (Edited because of sticky 'h' key. Is this significant?)

Not sure I believe this

Jumpers knitted for bald chickens Former battery hens which have lost their feathers are being knitted jumpers by a Somerset craft club to keep them warm. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8536576.stm

Cool. Thanks charliecharlie, sorted.

Can you get that in a chrome wheels version?

Yes, seems Liddle interest in this tread at the moment.

Poor donkey, it must have been speeding and caused a pile up. See what happens when you introduce 20mph limits.

charliecharlie can you tell me how to get to the post office on Lordship Lane from the Sea Cow, near Foxtons. I've spent half an hour on the web but TFL and Googlemaps are no help. Please advise

There is a danger we're straying off topic slightly but to bring us back on topic there are very few handouts given to poorer countries. Rather one of the biggest problems for poorer countries has been loans from the IMF and other sources where the compound interest has crippled the country and, ironically, perpetuated the poverty in those countries, whether well governed or with despotic leaders. The EU, I would maintain, is also a victim of its loans to itself. By lending money to other members states to help them modernise it now finds itself in a very precarious position which is not simply a result of the global financial crisis. There's two interesting articles in The Telegraph which are slighly worrying. The first is that 'European banks need to roll over ?1 trillion (?877bn) of debt over the next two years at a much higher cost and in direct competition with hungry sovereign states, according to a report by Morgan Stanley...Roughly ?560bn of EU bank debt matures in 2010 and ?540bn in 2011. The banks will have to roll over loans at a time when unprecedented bond issuance by governments worldwide risks saturating the debt markets. European states alone must raise ?1.6 trillion this year...' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/7294624/European-banks-face-showdown-over-1-trillion-of-debt.html The second is a warning that 'Failure to save East Europe will lead to worldwide meltdown. The unfolding debt drama in Russia, Ukraine, and the EU states of Eastern Europe has reached acute danger point... Whether it takes months, or just weeks, the world is going to discover that Europe's financial system is sunk, and that there is no EU Federal Reserve yet ready to act as a lender of last resort or to flood the markets with emergency stimulus. Under a "Taylor Rule" analysis, the European Central Bank already needs to cut rates to zero and then purchase bonds and Pfandbriefe on a huge scale. It is constrained by geopolitics ? a German-Dutch veto ? and the Maastricht Treaty...' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/4623525/Failure-to-save-East-Europe-will-lead-to-worldwide-meltdown.html Worrying indeed. (PS Mockney, I've put you back on my Christmas card list - but only in pencil for now) Edited so urls work

Glow in the dark loo roll Glow in the dark loo roll has been developed, in a bid to help consumers on any nocturnal trip to the lavatory. The invention comes hot on the heels of Waitrose's cashmere loo roll, which claimed to offer the bottom line in comfort and went on sale earlier this month http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7292004/Glow-in-the-dark-loo-roll.html