Less than a third of Gen Z polled think Royal family is good for Britain
YouGov poll reveals stark decline in support for the monarchy, with roughly a 50 per cent drop among young people in a decade
Only three in 10 young people think the Royal family is good for Britain, a new YouGov poll has revealed.
A majority of those aged 18-24 also said they held a negative opinion of the King as he approaches the first anniversary of his reign, with 52 per cent expressing disapproval.
The figures pose a significant problem for the monarchy, suggesting that attitudes among Generation Z have not improved in the last three years.
Younger Britons have been divided on whether or not to keep the monarchy since 2020, when the Duke of York’s friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and Harry and Meghan’s fractious exit from royal life saw support plummet.
The latest survey suggests that just over a third of 18 to 24-year-olds want the UK to retain the monarchy, while 40 per cent would prefer an elected head of state.
There is a genuine problem on the way if the figures stick and continue - as they well might. The monarchy is unabolishable for the simple reason it will never be in any party's interest to put it in a manifesto, even if only, say, 20% wanted to keep it. (that's 8 million voters - enough to swing any election). But it could become at the same time deeply disliked by quite a large majority. That would not be a happy state of play.
Ludlow it is! A foaming pint of virtual perry for @Carnyx and a faux thimble of Ludlow gin for @boulay
What a stunning little town
My hotel in the first pic is Dinham Weir House
Here’s my room in case anyone is scared that I’m suffering unduly on my Official Gazette Welsh Marches Road Trip
We were in Ludlow for a weekend a month ago. It's alright - nothing to write home about though.
It’s architecturally exquisite! A completely unharmed 13th-19th century English market town with the Shropshire hills at the end of every road
John Betjeman called it the “prettiest town in England”
However it definitely feels a lot poorer than somewhere like Hereford. Indeed, as I say, it reminds me of Hereford three decades ago - before it was gentrified
I wouldn’t go that far, but the wealth (or lack thereof) is certainly different. Hereford is squaddies and urban families relocated from a bunch of cities including, bizarrely, Glasgow (metalworking basically). There’s a lot of light industry in the city, not least Bulmers/Heineken.
Ludlow however is proper Herefordshire rural with a smattering of expat gastro Londoners. It was also, believe it or not, the epicentre of the computer games magazine industry in the 1980s.
If you want rural poor, Craven Arms is just one stop up the railway line. Good locally owned supermarket, though.
I went back to Hereford recently and it was proper posh compared to what I knew as a lad. I grew up there - I had Scottish friends and friends with SAS dads for the reasons you state
Every night there was a good chance of a major fight. They were guaranteed at weekends
Now it’s all sushi bars and gastro pubs and gleaming vinoteks
And for a good reason. It’s a handsome, safe, largely unspoiled cathedral city surrounded by magnificent countryside. A fine place to live. Not that I appreciated this age 17 and bored witless
A town of two halves. I thought the Widemarsh St. end of HighTown looked good, walking down to the newish food court shopping centre (where the Cattle Market used to be) is great. The other end, Maylords Orchard and the street that used to house Chadds, whose name escapes me, looks tired. Commercial Street down to the Hospital is the same as it ever was.
Ross, by the way is much improved. Much better kept than Ledbury and Newent.
You won't like Leominster or Bromyard as they are Eastern European conclaves.
That’s good. I’d heard sad things about Ross so yay
Leominster was lovely in my memory (possibly faulty); Bromyard was always basically Birmingham
Leominster is fine. Lots of antique shops.
In Ross, there is a really nice little deli/cake shop/cafe if you turn right at the market house coming up from Oveross. I think it is called something like the Secret Garden. If you have a vehicle, the Moody Cow at Upton Bishop is a decent place to eat.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
I reckon there are a lot more public buildings with dangerously unsafe concrete than the government is letting on. Have you ever noticed how every time a member of the Cabinet goes anywhere they're wearing a hard hat? They obviously know something we don't.
This is why Boris got brexit done. No hard hat in sight.
Ludlow has at least five pubs dating from pre-16th century ie medieval. I know this coz I just walked past them
The pub I’m in now dates from 1102
1102!!!!
When this pub was built the fields and hovels all around would still have been full of Anglo Saxons staring murderously at the obnoxious new Normans in the shiny new castle. I sense some of them are still staring
“Nothing to write home about”???
FFS
In Ludlow you had better visit St Lawrence Church - a Simon Jenkins *****.
This is one of their ~14C misericord carvings, of a cellar-manager in a monastery.
For a measurement that’s supposed to be hard for an opposition leader to do well on, 17% gap is looking quite commanding now. RW tend to poll higher % for Con too, compared to most other pollsters, even as Sunak is crashing personally in the fieldwork they still find yet another 28% for Con.
The momentum in which Sunak’s political stock is declining, as the electorate back away from him, has to be the main polling take from the last month.
The England sub sample breaks 44-30-16 (the highest LD number for a while). A 13 point Conservative lead in December 2019 is now a 14 point Labour lead so the swing is 13.5%. The Conservatives were 32 points ahead of the LDs in 2019, the gap now is 14 so that's a 9% swing.
We also have the conundrum of tactical voting and where that might take us.
The subsample isn’t weighted is it? Therefore it’s meaningless, yet you seem to quote meaningless subsamples almost daily.
It is weighted according to the data tables - don't bother about the apology.
Well apologies in this case.
However, you frequently ‘analyse’ unweighted subsamples and disappear whenever challenged on the practice.
I don't think I do - we can argue as to whether the correct weighting is being applied by pollsters. I don't quote regional samples any longer because they are absurd but England is a pretty big region and after all that's where the election will be won and lost.
I was told YouGov got the sub sample weighting right yet they are the pollsters with the lowest Conservative share - what to make of that?
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
I reckon there are a lot more public buildings with dangerously unsafe concrete than the government is letting on. Have you ever noticed how every time a member of the Cabinet goes anywhere they're wearing a hard hat? They obviously know something we don't.
Didn't we have a similar scandal to do with multi storey carparks ten or fifteen years ago?
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
Manchester United and Brazil winger Antony is being investigated by Greater Manchester Police over claims he attacked his former girlfriend.
Gabriela Cavallin claims she was headbutted and punched by Antony in a Manchester hotel room the day after United’s 2-1 victory over Manchester City on January 14 that resulted in a cut to her head and a breast implant being damaged.
Cavallin said she received treatment from an English doctor in her room at the Hyatt Regency hotel in Manchester following the alleged attack. The news is the latest controversy to surround United and comes just a fortnight after the club announced Mason Greenwood was to leave the club despite charges of attempted rape, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and controlling and coercive behaviour against Greenwood being dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service
In an interview with the Brazilian website UOL, which was published on Monday and included photographs and screenshots of messages, Cavallin also alleged that she suffered a cut finger while trying to protect herself after accusing Antony of throwing a glass cup at her.
That incident is alleged to have occurred at a house on May 8, the day after United lost 1-0 to West Ham in London.
Cavallin, 23, who is an influencer and DJ, claims she was subjected to a series of attacks by Antony between June last year and May this year.
She alleges she was first attacked by Antony on June 1 2022 while she was pregnant on holiday and claimed the 23-year-old United player threatened to throw her out of a moving car at speed.
Sao Paulo Civil Police are currently investigating Cavallin’s claims after she filed a report to them in June accusing Antony of “domestic violence, threat and bodily injury”. Cavallin also filed a separate complaint to Greater Manchester Police (GMP).
In a statement to Telegraph Sport on Monday, GMP said: “Greater Manchester Police is aware of the allegations made and enquiries remain ongoing to establish the circumstances surrounding this report. We will not be commenting any further at this time
I work with a lot of Gen Z. I can't say I notice much different in attitudes to any other young generation in history. They all work hard and want to get on, and are professional. Some don't know what they want. Most want guidance and direction. All generally have a good sense of humour, and don't even mind it a bit risqué.
Main difference is they wear (to my mind) very casual clothes and don't see any reason they should vote Tory, but they still listen respectfully to any point of view, including my own, and are perfectly willing to debate reasonably.
Ludlow has at least five pubs dating from pre-16th century ie medieval. I know this coz I just walked past them
The pub I’m in now dates from 1102
1102!!!!
When this pub was built the fields and hovels all around would still have been full of Anglo Saxons staring murderously at the obnoxious new Normans in the shiny new castle. I sense some of them are still staring
“Nothing to write home about”???
FFS
In Ludlow you had better visit St Lawrence Church - a Simon Jenkins *****.
This is one of their ~14C misericord carvings, of a cellar-manager in a monastery.
Yep - big town churches can be as good as cathedrals, but without quite so much clerical establishment for 700 years.
Also Cirencester and Tewkesbury are 5* that way.
Another view is that on the whole town churches, while splendid, lack resonance and atmosphere; and that among the best of all are great buildings in smaller or even very small places. Algarkirk naturally is one such, but also Salle, Whaplode, Walpole St Peter, Sutterton, Torpenhow, Crosby Ravensworth, Ravenstonedale, Long Melford and a few thousand others.
Betjeman's volumes (1950s) listed a total of 4,000 churches. Many of the best are not in Jenkins' 'Thousand best'.
Finally finished my mad week's work; I've done seventy seven hours since the Bank Holiday
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
I said at the beginning if the Russian invasion of Ukraine that encouraging much more onshore wind development would have been a sensible policy response.
This seems both tardy and inadequate, being little more than a consultation about proposals which will barely alter the current de facto ban.
Another point of policy difference between Labour and the Conservatives. ...Labour is promising that if elected next year, it will bring onshore wind entirely into line with every other form of infrastructure development...
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
They level this charge a lot. They also want to force shops to take cash even if none of their customers use it.
To be fair it probably makes for a more popular policy than the government reannouncing the defence of using lbs and pennyweights or whatever every few months.
Finally finished my mad week's work; I've done seventy seven hours since the Bank Holiday
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
I said at the beginning if the Russian invasion of Ukraine that encouraging much more onshore wind development would have been a sensible policy response.
This seems both tardy and inadequate, being little more than a consultation about proposals which will barely alter the current de facto ban.
Another point of policy difference between Labour and the Conservatives. ...Labour is promising that if elected next year, it will bring onshore wind entirely into line with every other form of infrastructure development...
Tories upsetting shire supporters by allowing onshore wind development? Not something they'd propose unless a) so far ahead it doesn't matter, or b) they're going to lose anyway so might as well do the right thing.
Announcing consultations seems to be done a lot in lieu of acting though.
Labour has got to make planning reform a pillar of their next time in government.
That means making building houses easier, making building railways etc easier, mobile phone masts, wind turbines, all of that stuff. It is far too difficult at present.
Might be because they had to fork up nearly $800m due to election lies? (Which they will almost certainly repeat next time, but less focused on a particular company)
Granted that was hardly Tucker's fault, he was part of it but it was a company directive.
Labour has got to make planning reform a pillar of their next time in government.
That means making building houses easier, making building railways etc easier, mobile phone masts, wind turbines, all of that stuff. It is far too difficult at present.
And they'd need to do it quickly too. I hope they don't get bogged down in something grand institutionally but of less importance, like Lords reform - that can be done incrementally.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
That's another modern advance you've missed: there are dishwashers these days.
Any cash only restaurant would need to make it very clear before customers order or else they are the ones being *brave*.
Labour has got to make planning reform a pillar of their next time in government.
That means making building houses easier, making building railways etc easier, mobile phone masts, wind turbines, all of that stuff. It is far too difficult at present.
I'm not holding my breath, but if Labour did that they'd deserve (and get) my vote.
Some things are more important than party politics. The way our broken planning system is holding back the country is one of them.
Labour has got to make planning reform a pillar of their next time in government.
That means making building houses easier, making building railways etc easier, mobile phone masts, wind turbines, all of that stuff. It is far too difficult at present.
Might be because they had to fork up nearly $800m due to election lies? (Which they will almost certainly repeat next time, but less focused on a particular company)
Granted that was hardly Tucker's fault, he was part of it but it was a company directive.
So casual misogynist along with being a liar and fascism apologist ?
Ludlow has at least five pubs dating from pre-16th century ie medieval. I know this coz I just walked past them
The pub I’m in now dates from 1102
1102!!!!
When this pub was built the fields and hovels all around would still have been full of Anglo Saxons staring murderously at the obnoxious new Normans in the shiny new castle. I sense some of them are still staring
“Nothing to write home about”???
FFS
In Ludlow you had better visit St Lawrence Church - a Simon Jenkins *****.
This is one of their ~14C misericord carvings, of a cellar-manager in a monastery.
Yep - big town churches can be as good as cathedrals, but without quite so much clerical establishment for 700 years.
Also Cirencester and Tewkesbury are 5* that way.
Another view is that on the whole town churches, while splendid, lack resonance and atmosphere; and that among the best of all are great buildings in smaller or even very small places. Algarkirk naturally is one such, but also Salle, Whaplode, Walpole St Peter, Sutterton, Torpenhow, Crosby Ravensworth, Ravenstonedale, Long Melford and a few thousand others.
Betjeman's volumes (1950s) listed a total of 4,000 churches. Many of the best are not in Jenkins' 'Thousand best'.
I'd call it generally a different "feel", rather than 'lack resonance'. I like light and space.
My list of favourites would include Tudeley in Kent, where all the stained glass windows are works of art by Marc Chagall (he also has a small window in Chichester Cathedral), and it feels like being underwater. I also have a thing for Wren churches, and whitewashed rural churches, even if they do not have much "contents", untouched churches (my church visiting journey started with a day on Romney Marsh in the 1980s), and modern stained glass.
I'm not a huge fan of being overwhelmed with gorgeousness, such at St Giles RC, Cheadle - Pugin giving his all.
In general I'm not a particular Jenkins fan. When he gets into general questions he can be impossibly pompous. But his book is an excellent source for something interesting where ever one happens to be, to which one can add serendipity. His idea of parish churches as a kind of freely accessible and still living museum of cultural history is spot on.
Finally finished my mad week's work; I've done seventy seven hours since the Bank Holiday
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
This is something of an area of expertise for me but I am sure others can pitch in with examples on housing etc.
But we make phone masts a maximum height, even though this height is way below our European neighbours. If we allowed taller masts we'd get better coverage for very little cost. For every 10m higher a mast can go, the coverage radius increases substantially.
I'd also change the rules so masts can be built closer to roads and without needing permission at all, in rural areas if they want to build they should be able to. Alongside railways the same etc.
The system is far too restrictive and is holding us back.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
That's another modern advance you've missed: there are dishwashers these days.
Any cash only restaurant would need to make it very clear before customers order or else they are the ones being *brave*.
For saucepans and frying pans and baking trays? And when the place is busy? Just read Bourdain.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
This is something of an area of expertise for me but I am sure others can pitch in with examples on housing etc.
But we make phone masts a maximum height, even though this height is way below our European neighbours. If we allowed taller masts we'd get better coverage for very little cost. For every 10m higher a mast can go, the coverage radius increases substantially.
I'd also change the rules so masts can be built closer to roads and without needing permission at all, in rural areas if they want to build they should be able to. Alongside railways the same etc.
The system is far too restrictive and is holding us back.
Um, that would have been the case with 4g not so much the case with 5g..
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
I was pleasantly surprised by Barbie. I went accompanying my wife on sufference and laughed most of the time. Not sure what the few children in the cinema got out of it though.
I think I have some sympathy for Gillian Keegan. It isn't altogether her fault.
The DfE, none at all. If they hadn't made a botched reform to academy chains, grossly underfunded them and forced them to pursue expensive short term goals at the expense of longer term sustainability than we might not be in this mess to start with.
You can't tell somebody they're doing a good job and/or getting a grip on something when they're clearly not doing so.
Eh? What have academy chains got to do with it? The problem is Sunak slashing the capital maintenance budget.
That's part of it, though even the unslashed budget was a long way from the necessary.
But academisation didn't help. LEAs had sufficient scale to have in-house access to people who knew about buildings. Standalone academies, and most chains, simply don't.
The evolution of the academy model over the last decade has been to recreate undersized, geographically incoherent LEAs, generally with a more expensive executive layer.
(And heads who liked, and thrived, running their own show have been forced into expanding into turning around difficult schools, even when that's not their skill set.)
Most academies aren't standalones though. Most will run many schools and have as much access to buildings maintenance as alocal authority.
Most academies are in multi academy trusts, but there are still more standalone academies (1251) than multi academy trusts (1188).
And a lot of those MATs aren't very multi; 921 of those have fewer than ten schools, and the average MAT size across the sector is 7.5. There's all sorts of stuff involved in running schools that doesn't scale that small. So schools either buy a service in or improvise locally, even when that's not a good idea.
Several MATs which contain only one school, as well.
In one rather notorious local example, so the then Principal could make himself the Chief Executive which created a vacancy as Principal.
This is something of an area of expertise for me but I am sure others can pitch in with examples on housing etc.
But we make phone masts a maximum height, even though this height is way below our European neighbours. If we allowed taller masts we'd get better coverage for very little cost. For every 10m higher a mast can go, the coverage radius increases substantially.
I'd also change the rules so masts can be built closer to roads and without needing permission at all, in rural areas if they want to build they should be able to. Alongside railways the same etc.
The system is far too restrictive and is holding us back.
Um, that would have been the case with 4g not so much the case with 5g..
It is the same issue with 5G, we need more sites and we need more coverage.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
You're wrong, as legal tender is a next-to-meaningless phrase in this country, so that's moot. Shops, businesses and individuals are under no legal or moral obligation to pay with obsolete "legal tender".
https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/legal-tender-guidelines/#:~:text=Notes:,in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Legal tender has a very narrow and technical meaning in the settlement of debts. It means that a debtor cannot successfully be sued for non-payment if he pays into court in legal tender. It does not mean that any ordinary transaction has to take place in legal tender or only within the amount denominated by the legislation. Both parties are free to agree to accept any form of payment whether legal tender or otherwise according to their wishes.
Any business can demand payment in any way they see fit, only for settlement of debts in courts in exact legal tender is it relevant.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Depends on the coffee.
It would need the strength of Samsung to make the trade worthwhile.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Ludlow has at least five pubs dating from pre-16th century ie medieval. I know this coz I just walked past them
The pub I’m in now dates from 1102
1102!!!!
When this pub was built the fields and hovels all around would still have been full of Anglo Saxons staring murderously at the obnoxious new Normans in the shiny new castle. I sense some of them are still staring
“Nothing to write home about”???
FFS
No mate, when that pub was built (as a house not a pub) Charles II was on the throne. So it's quite old but not C12th.
You've fallen for the guff they put on the food menu. There was an ale house on the site in 1102 but not this one.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Handing over your mobile? !!?
Not sure william has quite understood how this works.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Depends on the coffee.
It would need the strength of Samsung to make the trade worthwhile.
Ludlow has at least five pubs dating from pre-16th century ie medieval. I know this coz I just walked past them
The pub I’m in now dates from 1102
1102!!!!
When this pub was built the fields and hovels all around would still have been full of Anglo Saxons staring murderously at the obnoxious new Normans in the shiny new castle. I sense some of them are still staring
“Nothing to write home about”???
FFS
No mate, when that pub was built (as a house not a pub) Charles II was on the throne. So it's quite old but not C12th.
You've fallen for the guff they put on the food menu. There was an ale house on the site in 1102 but not this one.
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, [edit] railway ticket offices, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
The sad thing in that is Mission Impossible. The franchise depends on having long legs and historically has done so, but Barbieheimer sliced its legs off. If Cruise had opened earlier or later he'd've had a chance, but...well, luck has its place.
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
I think its very disrespectful to the old to suggest they're somehow incapable of paying via contactless.
Indeed not having to make unnecessary trips to the cash machine, or fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
Paying electronically is an extremist belief? Not in this day and age.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
You're the one being unreasonable. Cash is legal tender. Some mobile phone isn't.
Paying with mobile phones is like a regression to barter, and it’s not much use for small value items. I’m not handing over my phone for a coffee.
Depends on the coffee.
It would need the strength of Samsung to make the trade worthwhile.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
The sad thing in that is Mission Impossible. The franchise depends on having long legs and historically has done so, but Barbieheimer sliced its legs off. If Cruise had opened earlier or later he'd've had a chance, but...well, luck has its place.
Eh, there was only going to be one more in the franchise, and they've already filmed most of it, so no harm done.
I wanted to see Sound of Freedom, which has done gangbusters in the US, but it was only airing once a day at 9.00pm, and I'm not in the mood then. I don't even remember Insidious coming out.
Of the top 20 Dungeons & Dragons was the biggest positive surprise (but has flopped so no sequel there).
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
I think its very disrespectful to the old to suggest they're somehow incapable of paying via contactless.
Indeed not having to fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
My mother-in-law thinks that paying by mobile awesome.
There’s plenty of evidence that a big chunk of the elderly are enthusiastic adopters of technology.
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
I think its very disrespectful to the old to suggest they're somehow incapable of paying via contactless.
Indeed not having to make unnecessary trips to the cash machine, or fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
Some are: many are not. It's your general attitude that is the problem - that everyone has tdo conform to your narrow perceptions of the world. Instead of keeping the options open.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
I think its very disrespectful to the old to suggest they're somehow incapable of paying via contactless.
Indeed not having to make unnecessary trips to the cash machine, or fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
Some are: many are not. It's your general attitude that is the problem - that everyone has tdo conform to your narrow perceptions of the world. Instead of keeping the options open.
Nobody "has to" do anything.
People are free to make choices, both customers and businesses.
Businesses will typically (but not always) try to make choices that win it the most customers.
If people decide cash is more trouble than its worth, that's their free choice. If businesses decide the same, theirs too.
I'm all for free choice. I don't think I or you should make anyone else's decisions for them.
I'm just reflecting on the number of people on this site who are only too happy to see the old and the poor and the disadvantaged and the disabled dumped by the side of the road of what they see as progress - cash, bank branches, internet access, all of that sort of thing.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
I think its very disrespectful to the old to suggest they're somehow incapable of paying via contactless.
Indeed not having to fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
My mother-in-law thinks that paying by mobile awesome.
There’s plenty of evidence that a big chunk of the elderly are enthusiastic adopters of technology.
Some are, but many are not. It was a *huge* problem with my elderly father, getting some things done in the modern era.
Finally finished my mad week's work; I've done seventy seven hours since the Bank Holiday
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
ps $13,300 per bottle is in Argentinian Pesos, not US dollars. About thirty quid
This wine is seriously good
It's lightly oaked, and extremely fruity; almost like a near neat plum and red berry cordial. The fruitiness completely covers the tannins, and the 14% alcohol. It has a slightly treacly aftertaste
If you're someone who would pay thirty quid for a bottle of wine, get this
It is worth watching what happens to the government over their solution to the 'nitrates' issue that has been 'blocking housebuilding'. Their idea is to selectively disapply the EU Habitats directive which it can do as a 'Brexit dividend', IE scrap european environmental law. But of course it always promised that it would never do that, and it is also doing it at a time where there is massive controversy over the conduct of utilities companies and pollution. I can't see this working out well for them.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
That list is so depressing.
I was disappointed Cocaine Bear did not make it into the top 20 too.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
The sad thing in that is Mission Impossible. The franchise depends on having long legs ..
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
That list is so depressing.
I was disappointed Cocaine Bear did not make it into the top 20 too.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
That list is so depressing.
Why?
I've seen three on that list at the cinema, which is more than I've seen at the cinema in a year since my kids were born. Relatedly there's a theme to the three I've seen: Barbie, Super Mario Bros and Little Mermaid.
All 3 were pretty good. None were what I'd have chosen myself, OK maybe Super Mario Bros, but the girls enjoyed them all.
I don't see anything depressing in having multiple options for families to watch - and they're not all family movies either.
Besides, family movies tend to come out over the summer and be bigger summer blockbusters. Horror movies are often more October anyway. There's still a few months left.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
The sad thing in that is Mission Impossible. The franchise depends on having long legs and historically has done so, but Barbieheimer sliced its legs off. If Cruise had opened earlier or later he'd've had a chance, but...well, luck has its place.
Eh, there was only going to be one more in the franchise, and they've already filmed most of it, so no harm done.
I wanted to see Sound of Freedom, which has done gangbusters in the US, but it was only airing once a day at 9.00pm, and I'm not in the mood then. I don't even remember Insidious coming out.
Of the top 20 Dungeons & Dragons was the biggest positive surprise (but has flopped so no sequel there).
"Last in the franchise" is always dependent on money. I know Cruise planned 7 and 8 as the last because he's now 60 and can't be Superman no more, but if MI7 had grossed 2billion there would be a 9 if they had to nail him to a wheelchair.
And yes, I too was disappointed by D&D flopping. It deserved more, but "deserve" don't count... ☹️☹️☹️
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
For those who don’t know what a passbook is here is mine from 1985 which my mother found the other week in some of my late old man’s belongings as an illustration.
And this is what we are expecting banks to maintain?
I've heard it all now.
What the hell is the frigging point of one of those in this day and age?
Seems even more pointless than chequebooks.
Never had one.
Its an age and wealth thing.
None of my kids carry cash, I carry cash and cards. They slag me off for carrying cash, bur very so often they get caught short and I dont.
The better off are likely to use e payment, the less well off less so.
Cash will probably have its day but until we have covered access to all I see no reason to accelerate it,
Do parents these days give their teenage kids pocket money as a bank transfer?
Any money my son earns through doing work around the house gets paid by bank transfer. He has even asked gifts to be paid by BACS (from relatives etc) as cash just burns a hole in his pocket. He's found saving much easier since we abolished cash entirely.
That's interesting, I always assumed that the problem is the otherway round. You have much less of a feeling how much you are spending when paying with a card or an app, which i would have thought easily leads to overspending. I was in the UK last month and it was annoying how many barstaff would hold the card reader with the amount being charged facing them, so I had to stand on tiptoes, lean over and read the price upside down.
I guess the reality is some people have more of a problem overspending with cash in the pocket and others more of a problem overspending with cashless payment.
I think my kids are a similar age to OLB's - and their issue with cash is keeping it in one place. Inevitably some of the abrogate the responsibility and hand their money over to me to keep in my wallet until they want to spend some of it, which inevitably gets muddled with my money, and I have to keep a running mental tally of how much of each daughter's money is mine. And that's without all the money scattered around their room in various piggy banks, money boxes etc which they have acquired over the years. It was a great relief when they started using cards.
Another big problem with cash, right there. It really is a deeply flawed mode of tender.
Cash isn't 'deeply flawed', just as a notepad and pen isn't deeply flawed despite the presence of word processing software. Cash, cards, phones (I guess) - all have their advantages and drawbacks. Despite the inconveniences above, I'm not going to be giving my 8 year old a bank card, because she will lose it.
It is deeply flawed, that's why lots of people simply stopped using it many years ago and have never looked back.
Electronic payments: The buyer taps his phone, the money goes straight into the retailer's account.
Cash: The buyer takes his card to a machine, converting perfectly functional, electronic money into slips of paper and shards of metal that he now has to carry about his person. These odd scraps of material are then offered to a retailer who has to find more scraps of material to give back to the buyer as change. If the retailer lacks the correct composition of material, the transaction fails. Assuming he has the correct composition, the retailer now has to store these scraps of material in a secure place, at cost and risk to himself, before finding additional time in his working week to transport said scraps of material to a place, probably several miles away, so he can given them to a lady in a pin-striped skirt who doesn't want them either. Said lady has to them put them in a secure place, at cost and risk to her own business, so they can be transported at even more cost to her business to an even more secure place, at which point she is able to convert them back into electronic money for the retailer, who could have just been paid directly in electronic money in the first place.
Electronic payments: reliant on thr tech working. Cash: not reliant on the tech working.
Fake news.
I was left high and dry in Southeast Europe recently because the only ATM in the resort I was staying in had conked out, and the restaurant I was eating in took only cash (like lots of the places there, it was a real step back in time). It was a right palaver, which required me to ask a taxi to park illegally at the next resort while I literally legged it in 30c heat to another cashpoint. Cash is an antiquated system that – ironically – relies far too heavily on machines.
You want to ban cash based retail when the business and their customers are happy with those restrictions?
Er, nope.
I have said on here several times, probably dozens of time, I wouldn’t ban cash nor cash based retail.
Do I need to say it yet again FFS?
Ban was your word not mine. But you are happy to "restrict", as you said above.
Wrong. You said I wanted to ban cash - a lie. I have said repeatedly otherwise.
You introduced the word ban. I didn't.
I'll leave it there
You said I wanted to ban cash. You wrote that. It’s a simple lie.
You had a meal in a restaurant without checking if it conforms to your extremist beliefs, or that you had enough cash for a sensible period of time? That's *brave*. Seriously ****ing insane. You could have been washing plates till 5 am.
What on Earth are you talking about? This was before I even got to the restaurant, the morning of. I’d checked and they said it was cash only, as are lots of places there. Yet the only ATM in the town I was staying in was kaput, so I had to take a cab to the next town, purely to go to a bank machine!
Finally finished my mad week's work; I've done seventy seven hours since the Bank Holiday
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
ps $13,300 per bottle is in Argentinian Pesos, not US dollars. About thirty quid
This wine is seriously good
It's lightly oaked, and extremely fruity; almost like a near neat plum and red berry cordial. The fruitiness completely covers the tannins, and the 14% alcohol. It has a slightly treacly aftertaste
If you're someone who would pay thirty quid for a bottle of wine, get this
They only made about ten thousand bottles of it
What is it? Your description leaves me not knowing if I’d like or loath it. I love bright, berry-fruity reds (the description sounds like a Cabernet or Merlot) but I hate jammy tasting over-alcoholic tongue burners. Which of those is it?
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
That list is so depressing.
Franchises and incel-focused superhero movies have basically killed the film industry.
Nah, it's a great film, with genuine laughs and an entertainingly perky cast and plot.
It's...fine. Probably as good as you could have done with a Barbie movie, it had a few decent laughs in it, but it only had two basic jokes/points, repeated over and over.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
Comments
I'll leave it there
Also Cirencester and Tewkesbury are 5* that way.
I was told YouGov got the sub sample weighting right yet they are the pollsters with the lowest Conservative share - what to make of that?
https://twitter.com/Dorianlynskey/status/1698758656576180372/photo/1
Gabriela Cavallin claims she was headbutted and punched by Antony in a Manchester hotel room the day after United’s 2-1 victory over Manchester City on January 14 that resulted in a cut to her head and a breast implant being damaged.
Cavallin said she received treatment from an English doctor in her room at the Hyatt Regency hotel in Manchester following the alleged attack. The news is the latest controversy to surround United and comes just a fortnight after the club announced Mason Greenwood was to leave the club despite charges of attempted rape, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and controlling and coercive behaviour against Greenwood being dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service
In an interview with the Brazilian website UOL, which was published on Monday and included photographs and screenshots of messages, Cavallin also alleged that she suffered a cut finger while trying to protect herself after accusing Antony of throwing a glass cup at her.
That incident is alleged to have occurred at a house on May 8, the day after United lost 1-0 to West Ham in London.
Cavallin, 23, who is an influencer and DJ, claims she was subjected to a series of attacks by Antony between June last year and May this year.
She alleges she was first attacked by Antony on June 1 2022 while she was pregnant on holiday and claimed the 23-year-old United player threatened to throw her out of a moving car at speed.
Sao Paulo Civil Police are currently investigating Cavallin’s claims after she filed a report to them in June accusing Antony of “domestic violence, threat and bodily injury”. Cavallin also filed a separate complaint to Greater Manchester Police (GMP).
In a statement to Telegraph Sport on Monday, GMP said: “Greater Manchester Police is aware of the allegations made and enquiries remain ongoing to establish the circumstances surrounding this report. We will not be commenting any further at this time
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/09/04/man-utd-antony-police-investigation-ex-girlfriend/
Main difference is they wear (to my mind) very casual clothes and don't see any reason they should vote Tory, but they still listen respectfully to any point of view, including my own, and are perfectly willing to debate reasonably.
Betjeman's volumes (1950s) listed a total of 4,000 churches. Many of the best are not in Jenkins' 'Thousand best'.
"Barbie overtakes Super Mario Bros to be 2023's biggest box office hit"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66705597
I'm going to do precisely fuck all tomorrow
I don't even have to walk the dog as my folks are away (in Sandbanks, with the dog) .. (I don't ever have to walk the dog, I just always do in the morning on days off. My Dad pays me in fine wine)
I'm having a bottle of this this evening
ps $13,300 per bottle is in Argentinian Pesos, not US dollars. About thirty quid
Probably part of an international conspiracy, Elon ?
This seems both tardy and inadequate, being little more than a consultation about proposals which will barely alter the current de facto ban.
Ministers to announce moves aiming to allow building of onshore wind turbines
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/04/ministers-to-announce-moves-aiming-to-allow-building-of-onshore-wind-turbines
Another point of policy difference between Labour and the Conservatives.
...Labour is promising that if elected next year, it will bring onshore wind entirely into line with every other form of infrastructure development...
Announcing consultations seems to be done a lot in lieu of acting though.
That means making building houses easier, making building railways etc easier, mobile phone masts, wind turbines, all of that stuff. It is far too difficult at present.
Discussing his firing, Tucker said he always got along with the Murdochs, but now it is “a company run by fearful women.
https://nitter.net/RonFilipkowski/status/1698769189652062331#m
Might be because they had to fork up nearly $800m due to election lies? (Which they will almost certainly repeat next time, but less focused on a particular company)
Granted that was hardly Tucker's fault, he was part of it but it was a company directive.
Any cash only restaurant would need to make it very clear before customers order or else they are the ones being *brave*.
Some things are more important than party politics. The way our broken planning system is holding back the country is one of them.
Top bloke.
My list of favourites would include Tudeley in Kent, where all the stained glass windows are works of art by Marc Chagall (he also has a small window in Chichester Cathedral), and it feels like being underwater. I also have a thing for Wren churches, and whitewashed rural churches, even if they do not have much "contents", untouched churches (my church visiting journey started with a day on Romney Marsh in the 1980s), and modern stained glass.
I'm not a huge fan of being overwhelmed with gorgeousness, such at St Giles RC, Cheadle - Pugin giving his all.
In general I'm not a particular Jenkins fan. When he gets into general questions he can be impossibly pompous. But his book is an excellent source for something interesting where ever one happens to be, to which one can add serendipity. His idea of parish churches as a kind of freely accessible and still living museum of cultural history is spot on.
/nitpick - Long Melford is a Jenkins 5*.
I'll see you outside.....
But we make phone masts a maximum height, even though this height is way below our European neighbours. If we allowed taller masts we'd get better coverage for very little cost. For every 10m higher a mast can go, the coverage radius increases substantially.
I'd also change the rules so masts can be built closer to roads and without needing permission at all, in rural areas if they want to build they should be able to. Alongside railways the same etc.
The system is far too restrictive and is holding us back.
If a firm only wants to take payment by cash, or only electronically, then they should say that up front nowadays. If they do and its not the one you want, then don't dine their. If they don't, then its a bit late afterwards and they might need to be flexible to get their payment, eg accept a BACS transfer if no card machine.
I had similar a few months ago when I had my MOT done. New garage I'd never been to before, needed a new clutch and other work so I'd found it online and it was by far the cheapest for all the work needed. Booked it, had the work done, then surprise, surprise the card machine was "broken". Great, well I don't carry cash let alone £570 of cash with me and no I'm absolutely not going to the bank to withdraw it. So I offered a BACS transfer, I said there was not a chance I was going to pay cash because of their "broken" machine, the guy working there was clearly disgruntled about having electronic records of the payment.
Guess now I know how they quoted so cheap, but seriously WTF?
Same with Super Mario Bros too - that was a good movie, much better than the 90s adaption which is a by-word for bad computer game to movie adaptions.
Don't see any qualms with family films being the year's biggest box office hits. 🤷♂️
In one rather notorious local example, so the then Principal could make himself the Chief Executive which created a vacancy as Principal.
Weirdly, that job went to his wife...
https://www.royalmint.com/aboutus/policies-and-guidelines/legal-tender-guidelines/#:~:text=Notes:,in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Legal tender has a very narrow and technical meaning in the settlement of debts. It means that a debtor cannot successfully be sued for non-payment if he pays into court in legal tender. It does not mean that any ordinary transaction has to take place in legal tender or only within the amount denominated by the legislation. Both parties are free to agree to accept any form of payment whether legal tender or otherwise according to their wishes.
Any business can demand payment in any way they see fit, only for settlement of debts in courts in exact legal tender is it relevant.
I congratulate the filmmakers on their success, and for getting people out to the cinema, but I confess to being a bit baffled how it became such an event movie (Oppenheimer to a lesser degree the same, being a decent but overlong biopic, so again pretty standard).
Then again Super Mario Bros and Avatar 2, two other massively successful films, are also very forgettable movies (the latter far worse written though). And much of the rest of the top 20 are a lot worse (I've seen 15 of them).
It would need the strength of Samsung to make the trade worthwhile.
You've fallen for the guff they put on the food menu. There was an ale house on the site in 1102 but not this one.
https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1220623?section=official-list-entry
Almost none I imagine.
One day, they will be old (one hopes, i.e, not dead) and perhaps poor, incapacitated, and unable to cope with the changes of that time. Then they will realise why people such as I think their attitude is fucking callous and selfish.
Indeed not having to make unnecessary trips to the cash machine, or fiddle with coins while you're in your 90s and arthritic and being able to just tap a payment makes things easier for my grandparents, not tougher.
I for one welcome that progress that makes things easier for them.
I wanted to see Sound of Freedom, which has done gangbusters in the US, but it was only airing once a day at 9.00pm, and I'm not in the mood then. I don't even remember Insidious coming out.
Of the top 20 Dungeons & Dragons was the biggest positive surprise (but has flopped so no sequel there).
There’s plenty of evidence that a big chunk of the elderly are enthusiastic adopters of technology.
People are free to make choices, both customers and businesses.
Businesses will typically (but not always) try to make choices that win it the most customers.
If people decide cash is more trouble than its worth, that's their free choice. If businesses decide the same, theirs too.
I'm all for free choice. I don't think I or you should make anyone else's decisions for them.
It's lightly oaked, and extremely fruity; almost like a near neat plum and red berry cordial. The fruitiness completely covers the tannins, and the 14% alcohol. It has a slightly treacly aftertaste
If you're someone who would pay thirty quid for a bottle of wine, get this
They only made about ten thousand bottles of it
I've seen three on that list at the cinema, which is more than I've seen at the cinema in a year since my kids were born. Relatedly there's a theme to the three I've seen: Barbie, Super Mario Bros and Little Mermaid.
All 3 were pretty good. None were what I'd have chosen myself, OK maybe Super Mario Bros, but the girls enjoyed them all.
I don't see anything depressing in having multiple options for families to watch - and they're not all family movies either.
Besides, family movies tend to come out over the summer and be bigger summer blockbusters. Horror movies are often more October anyway. There's still a few months left.
And yes, I too was disappointed by D&D flopping. It deserved more, but "deserve" don't count... ☹️☹️☹️
https://www.the-numbers.com/market/1973/top-grossing-movies
staying in was kaput, so I had to take a cab to the next town, purely to go to a bank machine!
Yes, insane - cash really is!
Oh well.
Killers of the Flower Moon will be out soon,
There is so little reason to use cash, the PB Cash Fetishists now resort to just making stuff up!!
https://www.the-numbers.com/market/1982/top-grossing-movies
https://www.the-numbers.com/market/1991/top-grossing-movies