Jump to content

Recommended Posts

candycat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> daizie Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Blimey , any sighting of a chav, an England

> flag

> > or a dangerous dog ?

>

>

> I actually find that comment quite offensive. I

> live in council accomodation but am not a chav, do

> not own a dangerous dog & am not flying the

> england flag. You imply that every council tenant

> is the lowest of the low, but I can assure you,

> that is not the case. Maybe you should not be so

> narrow minded!


Oh thats a shame i want you all to be the same cant you try ?

CandyCat

Far be it from my tepid nature to get involved in any sort heated debate, but I couldn't help but notice that at no point in any of Dazie's posts did she imply council tenants are the 'lowest of the low'. Please could you confirm in which post this was implied as I seem to have missed it, having read through them all several times ?

santerme

You obviously have nothing better to do, this is supposed to be a forum for sensible discussion for sensible up standing people ! Yet all you seem to do is pick on peoples technical errors in the messages. It is that sort of attitude that i believe is indicative of the moral decline of this nation....

Kidneypunch! Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

It is that sort of attitude that i

> believe is indicative of the moral decline of this

> nation....


Kidney Punch, you said 'indic' which is so like nearly almost the same as like, IN DICK it couldn't be more similar if it tried..

You're so morally declined, dude it's just not true.

Seriously, man I'd decline anything you offered if you was my waitress. Trus' me geez.

daizie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes! What was so funny, my mum wiped my bum on a

> sheet while my dad sat on the couch effing and

> cursing in disgust, i remember it well (tu)


---------------------------------------------------------


::o Please tell me that this didn't take place last week..

Kidneypunch! Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> santerme

> You obviously have nothing better to do, this is

> supposed to be a forum for sensible discussion for

> sensible up standing people ! Yet all you seem to

> do is pick on peoples technical errors in the

> messages. It is that sort of attitude that i

> believe is indicative of the moral decline of this

> nation....


...?

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think you might mean 'repossession' rather than 'reprocessing'.  
    • I think this is a bit of a myth.  It's true that some of the current owners are pension funds (chiefly the Ontario Universities') but they're global outfits, big enough to know what they're about. As for ordinary UK pension funds, they mostly invest in publicly-tradeable stocks, which Thames no longer is (it's a private limited company, not a PLC), so even those that lazily track the markets by buying everything in the index won't be exposed as Thames isn't in any index. In other words, it's a lot less complicated than Thames, the Government or innumerable consultancies and PR outfits would like you to believe. In case, incidentally, the idea of a cooperative offends any delicate Thatcherite sensibilities, I'd argue that it fits the Thatcherite vision of a stakeholding democracy much better than selling tradeable shares to the public very cheaply. The public, despite their blessable cottons, are too easily tempted by the small but easy win (which is how they sold off their own building societies, preparing the ground for the credit crunch and then the crash) and, as became obvious after every privatisation before or since, their modest stakes inevitably end up in the hands of financial engineers whose only priority is to siphon off the assets and leave the husk to either go bankrupt or get "rescued" by the taxpayers (who thus get to pay twice for nothing). The root of that is the concept of "limited liability" which makes it all possible, but even the most nauseating free-market optimist would struggle to predict the demise of that.  
    • Repossession? Oh no, that's really sad 😢 
    • That's a really interesting possibility!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...