| Author |
 Topic  |
|
tripps
|
 Posted -
12/01/2009
:
22:52
|
I received today my 60 pounds electoral bribe generous bonus from Gordon Brown. I imagine a few other contibutors will also do so. As a pathetic and futile bi-digital gesture of comtempt for this government. I have decide to give it away. After at least a full minute's careful consideration, I have bought Stanley's Bancroft book, and given the balance to the site fund.
I did not donate last year, as I was not happy with the direction we were going in, but now we seem to be back on track (purely a personal opinion of course), so it's back to contributing.
Good stuff this French brown ale.........
Edited by - tripps on 12/01/2009 10:53:54 PM
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
Cathy
|
Posted - 17/01/2009 : 06:29
We had a male teacher in high school who once hung a male student out of a two storey window to discipline him. Mr Peard was his name, oh he was horrible!!, a real sleeze, every young girl's nightmare.
All thru the fields and meadows gay .... Enjoy
Take Care...Cathy  |
Sue
|
Posted - 17/01/2009 : 09:47
As I said, I was a NICE teacher but I did have firm discipline. I used to relax a bit when the students were under my control and trusted me to deliver what I said I would do. They knew that if I said it I meant it. I think I can count on one hand the students I never really managed to control in the 33 years that I taught in college. Mind you they also trusted me to deliver their subject matter too.
Sue
If you keep searching you'll find it |
Another
Traycle Mine Overseer
6250 Posts
|
|
Posted - 17/01/2009 : 10:12
I'm proud to say that in the 1970's I was directly involved in bringing to light and ending the reign of terror imposed on some kids at a local high school by one particular teacher who was far too handy with his fists and feet. Its a pity he's not around now as there are a few youngsters I know would now give him all he deserved. Nolic
" I'm a self made man who worships his creator"  |
Sue
|
Posted - 17/01/2009 : 13:42
Ruling by terror seemed to be the only way in years gone by, ruling by respect is better, and actually more fun as two way communication between teacher and students is great fun. I learned a lot from my students and had a jolly good laugh with most of them too. I mean when you have a 2 hour 'A level' class 2-4.00pm on a friday you have to work hard at making the lesson fun.
Sue
Edited by - Sue on 17/01/2009 1:45:15 PM
If you keep searching you'll find it |
tripps
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 09:58
This might be a good place to park this one....
Did you notice that in yesterday's budget, the Winter Fuel Allowance was reduced by £50 No neither did I. That's the one they said they would "protect" in their election manifesto. They seem to justify this corruption of the English language by saying that they have only reduced the extra part of it which the last government added.
I'm not saying it's the wrong thing to do, but it looks a bit sneaky to me.
|
frankwilk
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 12:10
I agree it was sneaky, rather than just saying we need to increase the age at which it is paid from 60 to 65 and then it becomes a part of the Old Age Pension rather than a Bribe from the Goverment, of any Colour.
No that wouldn't work because it would become taxable for a lot of people. This being in Goverment is not easy eh.
Take this Bus Pass business going to take the Grandaughter out to the Zoo in Edinburgh that's 3 of us on the free bus service, can't be bad. Bring back the Socialists missing them already. -)
Frank Wilkinson Once Navy Always Navy |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 17:42
quote:
tripps wrote:
I'm not saying it's the wrong thing to do, but it looks a bit sneaky to me.Let's not mince words here. It IS the wrong thing to do and it doesn't look sneaky, it IS sneaky.
=================== www.sheldrickrose.co.ukwww.bernulf.co.ukwww.bernulfsplace.co.uk |
tripps
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 19:07
I do a lot of mincing on here! If I said what I think on several topics, I would probably cause offence, and be barred. Living in the South for so long seems to have taken the edge of my forthrightness. Actually I do think it might be the right thing to do - why should millionaires, and peolple who live in Spain get it? On the second point sneaky is the default mode of all politicians.
|
catgate
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 19:47
quote:
tripps wrote:
..... On the second point sneaky is the default mode of all politicians.
Mr Roget realised this many years ago when he produced his Thesaurus. Just look where he placed politics.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v338/catgate/roget.jpg
Edited by - catgate on 24/03/2011 7:48:46 PM
Every silver lining has a cloud.
|
Bradders
|
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 23:47
quote:
tripps wrote:
why should millionaires, and peolple who live in Spain get it?
Tripps they may have payed a lot more in taxes etc than most, so I don't have too much of a problem with it.
On the other hand ,my Mum is really upset about the cut . At 87 years old , having voted Tory all her life, she is now starting to talk about being kicked in the teeth !
And you don't want to mess about with my Mum when she gets in a mood ...Cameron could be toast sooner than we think.....Ooooph !
BRADDERS BLUESINGER |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 25/03/2011 : 05:56
One of the basic principles of a progressive tax and benefits system is that it is geared to disposable income, that's why there is a personal allowance to set against tax liability. This is of course a Means Test and I have never had any problem with it. Problem is that 'Means Test' is used as a red rag to a bull after the disgraceful misuse of it in the Inter-war period. The winter fuel payment was intended to take the strain off those who had to cut back on heating to afford the other essentials of life. So why not treat it like the other benefits?
The major problem of course is the degradation of the Old Age Pension. People like me who worked all their lives in a low wage economy with no suparannuation schemes were comforted by the promise that we would be looked after in old age, we did not have to fear the workhouse. Remember that when I was born Parish Relief was still one of the main safety nets.
The most interesting part of the budget reporting process is always the programmes the day after where excellent commentators like Paul Lewis dissect the beast and tease out the real implications. The one that struck me was that the average family income falls by £750 in the first year and over the next five years is estimated to fall even faster. Did I hear the figure of £1500 a year? As I have been saying for months, the people who bear the greatest burden are the ones with the lowest disposable income. The results of the cuts announced last November haven't hit us yet, never mind the hidden demands of the Budget. We ain't seen nothing yet!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Tizer
|
Posted - 25/03/2011 : 10:20
Catgate, there some intetesting words in that link. I can imagine the opposition standing up in the Commons and shouting `knavery', `duplicity', `jugglery' but I'm not sure any of them would have the courage to yell `nigger in the wood pile'!
|
Bruff
|
Posted - 28/03/2011 : 13:02
It is correct that the Winter Fuel Allowance has been cut by 25%, but the spin is that this isn't a 'cut' as this increase that has been 'cut' was a one off sweetener by New Labour carried on by the coalition as a temporary measure and as such, not a permanent change rather the reversal of a temporary uplift, and so not appropriate for a budget statement - is everybody with me? In addition, Cold Weather Payments have I think been protected, which I think might be what the government is talking about when it notes protecting payments in cold weather.
There's some confusion around this. Mr Clegg got it wrong in an interview the other day, which suggests he's too lazy to read the briefs civil servants give him, or too daft to understand them. I suggest it's the former - he's new to this game and will learn, so we should all laugh while we can.
If anyone feels they don't need the allowance, then give it to charity, or write a cheque for the amount payable to 'HM Revenue and Customs', who will cash it when they get it.
Richard Broughton
|
tripps
|
Posted - 28/03/2011 : 14:20
"There's some confusion around this."
I think you may be contibuting Richard. It was the winter fuel allowance which were promised to be "protected", not the cold weather payments, which are rarely payed, and seem to have been. The word protected seems to mean one thing to the electrotae, and another to the Government.
|
Bruff
|
Posted - 28/03/2011 : 15:19
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The Winter Fuel Allowance has on one interpretation been 'protected'. It was increased from 200 to 250, and 300 to 400 as a temporary measure by Mr Brown, and maintained at this level as a temporary measure by the coalition. This temporary increase has been removed, or cut of you like, with the original 200/300 'protected' (don't mean I'm happy with this interpretation). You could look at it as the removal of a one-off bonus, with your base salary being protected.
I was being charitable in suggesting that the maintenance of the cold weather payment was also a reason to 'spin' the changes as maintaining provision.
I mentioned Mr Clegg as he seemed to think the allowance was being increased(!) the other day on Radio Sheffield.
I agree wholeheartedly that what politicians say and interpret is not what many of us would interpret, which makes it all the more reason you unpick what they do say and take very little at face value. Of course, this annoys the very heck out of them as Parliamentary protocol never exposes them to the direct charge of being liars. Did you see Danny Alexander flinch on Question Time last week when the audience member accused him of being a liar and so any assurance he could give on anything wasn't worth a tin of beans?
Richard Broughton
|
What are you spending yours on?
