"... Another returning at Malaga airport today was Shaun Cromber who despite voting for Britain to leave the EU, didn’t believe it would end his Spanish lifestyle, he said: ” Yes I voted out, but I didn’t realise it would come to this, my application has been rejected and we are on our way home – the wife is in tears, she’s distraught if I’m honest and I’m not too happy at the prospect of returning back to the UK. ..."
The most fustrating thing about Brexit to me, is not that the UK now isn't in the EU, it's that it's made UK citizens lose freedom of movement in the EEA, something which most British people (including quite a few Leavers) didn't want.
And we are coming up to the 90 day Schengen limit (assuming Day 1 was 1st Jan 2021) so it might not be just Spain that will be sending Brits back.
In other news, Brexit continues to be a success at reducing exports with figures showing a 40% drop across food and drink sectors.
Now with £5K fines for holidaying abroad, I wonder how the foreign travel sector will do this year? And Brits do love their foreign holidays....
Interesting times ahead for Boris and HMG
(Perhaps I just have missed your posts, but nice to see you back.)
Thanks but I have not been bothering with posting here. Of late, I have found PB a bit too Trumpian for my taste and even tonight there are people posting about kicking people in the face because they disagree with their opinions.
Sure. We all evolve in our thinking. Even the grimmest can hope for uplift. As such I'm hopeful
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
For some people, a boot in the face is all they deserve.
That seems over the top.
It's very, very strange that someone like this is an MP though. She's clearly recommending anarchy. She's also clearly an idiot.
She was parachuted by Corbyn into Leicester East to replace Keith Vaz, strongly objected to by the local party. She has been as useless as expected, and I think likely to be deselected next GE.
To be honest, she comes across as quite thick
Her subtitler is unable to spell "dispicable"
How has the country of Shakespeare ended up with tribunes of the people like this?!
Labour used to be the party of the whip-smart working classes, men and women you could admire, who had fought their way out of poverty, grabbed a great education, and could argue a Tory wanker under the table
Today's Labour is just dispiriting. Mediocrities, at best
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Thanks for the assurance 'dude', I wasn't actually commenting on whether I think it will collapse, or whether he's right or wrong, or whether it should or shouldn't be allowed to 'collapse' in its current form anyway.
Dude is a perfectly normal thing to say, I don't know why you always respond like I'm an alien.
What an odd poster you are.
OK cool - I think a good way forward might be for me just not to respond.
Finally, I wondered when you'd stop. Good riddance.
I have just noticed that re- Hartlepool, Labour has pulled ahead a bit on the betting front - 1.85 with the Tories on 2.14 on S Market. Still pretty close .
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I was thinking the other day, if I am able to ever afford a house, I won't need to really earn any more money to be pretty much set for life. I've saved money over a longish period, I have a good, steady, job. My money is just lost on rent payments at the moment.
Would I really live any differently, earning double? I highly doubt it.
Yes, you probably would. Unless it doubled overnight. You would simply absorb the extra and spend it on a higher living standard. Slowly and gently move upwards....
It is rare to the point of non-existence to find someone who earns £100K and lives as if he/she was on 50k and puts the rest in the bank/gives it to charity.
I live in my salary and save or give away the rest
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
It's an unfair world. On the previous thread you said I should be ignorned because I'm permanently confused. Yet those who employ me consider me worth a hell of a lot more than you.
You come across as the Harvey Weinstein of the advertising world.
@Roger and I have our disagreements from time to time. But accusing him of being like a multiple rapist seems a bit much to me, to put it mildly.
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Thanks for the assurance 'dude', I wasn't actually commenting on whether I think it will collapse, or whether he's right or wrong, or whether it should or shouldn't be allowed to 'collapse' in its current form anyway.
Dude is a perfectly normal thing to say, I don't know why you always respond like I'm an alien.
What an odd poster you are.
Turk Malloy : Watch it, bud. Virgil Malloy : Who you calling bud, pal? Turk Malloy : Who you calling pal, friend? Virgil Malloy : Who you calling friend, jackass? Turk Malloy : Don't call me a jackass. Virgil Malloy : I just did call you a jackass.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
I've skimmed it. But honestly, given people who have read it intensely have engaged in theological disputes around it for thousands of years, not sure that everyone reading it will entirely eliminate misunderstanding. Though some of my relatives do have fun at their bible discussion groups, mostly as while they are very deeply christian and much engaged in good works, they don't seem to have a problem admitting when they don't really get what a part is supposed to mean, or when a part seems to not mean something great.
I can't read what's behind the paywall, but one has a horrible suspicion that this is about inventing a clever excuse to allow millions of people to go to places that are full of Plague, with the Government keeping its fingers crossed that they don't bring back all kinds of nasties.
@Malmesbury come back to me in a few years and ask how my life has changed, if I am earning double by then. Would be interesting to see if you're right.
Our vaccination numbers are going to go behind the USA shortly, they did 3.44 million doses today. Nevertheless we'll reovertake them at some point as their demand is lower.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
I've skimmed it. But honestly, given people who have read it intensely have engaged in theological disputes around it for thousands of years, not sure that everyone reading it will entirely eliminate misunderstanding. Though some of my relatives do have fun at their bible discussion groups, mostly as while they are very deeply christian and much engaged in good works, they don't seem to have a problem admitting when they don't really get what a part is supposed to mean, or when a part seems to not mean something great.
Anyone who literally reads the following books (as opposed to buying them and skimming )
Bible -very odd , perhaps a little dangerous . Not somebody to get into an argument with. Either get patronised or killed.
Bravo Two Zero by Andy McNab - very odd, perhaps a little dangerous .Not somebody to get into an argument with - you wont however get patronised but may get killed (or as they would put it "slotted"
I can't read what's behind the paywall, but one has a horrible suspicion that this is about inventing a clever excuse to allow millions of people to go to places that are full of Plague, with the Government keeping its fingers crossed that they don't bring back all kinds of nasties.
This is unlikely to end well.
It's a plan from Heathrow airport that I expect has been briefed to the Telegraph after rejection by ministers.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
I've skimmed it. But honestly, given people who have read it intensely have engaged in theological disputes around it for thousands of years, not sure that everyone reading it will entirely eliminate misunderstanding. Though some of my relatives do have fun at their bible discussion groups, mostly as while they are very deeply christian and much engaged in good works, they don't seem to have a problem admitting when they don't really get what a part is supposed to mean, or when a part seems to not mean something great.
The problem is that years of complex and often turgid theological debates have obscured simple truths in the Gospels. Certainly some parts of the Bible are complex, and even contradictory, the bits of the Gospels quoting Jesus are really quite simple to understand.
Sublime. So many deep, near-infinite flavours. You can order the more obscure ingredients online - there aren't many - if you can't find an Oriental supermarket.
Waitrose does a good laksa paste.
The one REALLY tricky thing to find is tofu puffs, but amazon can sort that
Enjoy! It takes about an hour to cook. But not a stressful hour. Lots of time to chill and drink wine
Cheers. I'll give it a go. There's a big Chinese/asian supermarket in Newcastle so I'll give them a try first!
Well worth it. A good laksa is a revelation. One of the tastiest dishes invented by man (or woman)
Do make the laksa chili paste, as a condiment, that she suggests. It is essential, it adds a dramatic dash of red and lots of wowy spice
My best laksa ever was in Darwin, Oz (it has a large, rich Asian-Chinese-Malay population). This version was honestly quite close
Also, once you've bought the pastes (and the weird tofu puffs) it is stupidly cheap. Chilis, chicken drumsticks, noodles, coriander, ginger, garlic. I replaced the beansprouts with spring onions, just personal taste
I can't read what's behind the paywall, but one has a horrible suspicion that this is about inventing a clever excuse to allow millions of people to go to places that are full of Plague, with the Government keeping its fingers crossed that they don't bring back all kinds of nasties.
This is unlikely to end well.
It's a plan from Heathrow airport that I expect has been briefed to the Telegraph after rejection by ministers.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them since they now have money? Hmm...
@Malmesbury come back to me in a few years and ask how my life has changed, if I am earning double by then. Would be interesting to see if you're right.
I would bet on it. No-one sits down and goes - "must spend my salary".
But then the holiday you *want* costs 1k more than the one that's kind of ok - and you could afford the 1k.....
The car with the extra options is frankly better value....
The Miele oven with all the bells and whistles will make cooking so much easier......
I really should read the Koran as well - my father has a really impressive gilded copy, one page in arabic, the other English, which he picked up in Libya in the late 1970s, which he was apparently only provided on the basis that he said he was interested in converting.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I was thinking the other day, if I am able to ever afford a house, I won't need to really earn any more money to be pretty much set for life. I've saved money over a longish period, I have a good, steady, job. My money is just lost on rent payments at the moment.
Would I really live any differently, earning double? I highly doubt it.
Yes, you probably would. Unless it doubled overnight. You would simply absorb the extra and spend it on a higher living standard. Slowly and gently move upwards....
It is rare to the point of non-existence to find someone who earns £100K and lives as if he/she was on 50k and puts the rest in the bank/gives it to charity.
I live in my salary and save or give away the rest
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
I have just noticed that re- Hartlepool, Labour has pulled ahead a bit on the betting front - 1.85 with the Tories on 2.14 on S Market. Still pretty close .
I have just noticed that re- Hartlepool, Labour has pulled ahead a bit on the betting front - 1.85 with the Tories on 2.14 on S Market. Still pretty close .
Couple of more decent national polls since the announcement, and general recognition of their position. Feels too up in the air to be confident about so far indeed.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them? Hmm...
Yes, Jesus was often a little paradoxical. Nonetheless that is what he directed.
Obviously the Queen and the CoE aren't so keen on that bit, so usually skip it.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them since they now have money? Hmm...
Yeah, Heaven is a zero sum game. That Bill Gates shouldn't be allowed to get away with giving his money away.
@Malmesbury come back to me in a few years and ask how my life has changed, if I am earning double by then. Would be interesting to see if you're right.
I would bet on it. No-one sits down and goes - "must spend my salary".
But then the holiday you *want* costs 1k more than the one that's kind of ok - and you could afford the 1k.....
The car with the extra options is frankly better value....
The Miele oven with all the bells and whistles will make cooking so much easier......
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
I've skimmed it. But honestly, given people who have read it intensely have engaged in theological disputes around it for thousands of years, not sure that everyone reading it will entirely eliminate misunderstanding. Though some of my relatives do have fun at their bible discussion groups, mostly as while they are very deeply christian and much engaged in good works, they don't seem to have a problem admitting when they don't really get what a part is supposed to mean, or when a part seems to not mean something great.
The problem is that years of complex and often turgid theological debates have obscured simple truths in the Gospels. Certainly some parts of the Bible are complex, and even contradictory, the bits of the Gospels quoting Jesus are really quite simple to understand.
What? You mean historical debates on things like 'homoousian vs homoiousian' is turgid and complex?
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Zone 1 makes all the money. And it is in deep pain
It's the professional services of Zone 1 that make all the money and that is carrying on but just at home. The collapse of Pret in central London is not calamitous to the nations finances - especially if their activity relocates to the suburbs. Admittedly it will remove the attraction for those living in zone 1 if their surroundings become a ghost land.
No, it is the collapse of central London as a world class centre of tourism, music, theatre, art, gastronomy, and education. Along with that there is an entire elite of billionaires and millionaires paying hefty taxes (and employing thousands) to enjoy this world city. Then add in the infrastructure that supports them all - transport to accommodation
If that goes, we could lose 5-10% of GDP permanently. That is Depression style stuff, along with what we have already suffered. It could even be worse than that. Tourist cities across the UK will shudder :Bath to Cambridge, York to Edinburgh,
This is not "a few Prets", it is a terrible savaging of our economy.
Now, you could argue this will be, in the end, a positive thing. A rebalancing away from London. Perhaps so (I reckon it will just be bad). Either way, this is going to be, very shortly, very painful for us all, in terms of the tax take, and our national wellbeing.
Did Central Londons tourism and leisure depend on people working in offices in the centre however - since its getting workers back in their office that Johnson seemed to be advocating.
To some extent it does - it provides critical mass .
Yes, you need the whole ecosystem. And that includes a million office workers flooding in, filling restaurants, going to pubs after work, having lunch and evening meetings. That makes the *buzz* of a world city
Take them away and you lose an awful lot of the buzz and you have a museum town - Venice - except London is not remotely as beautiful as Venice (nowhere is)
Take away foreign students, as well....
London is a precious thing. I know many resent it. But it generates great wealth, like all world cities. We fuck with it at our peril
This is a take from someone that I guess has not done the hard grind of commuting into a cubicle every day from a dormitory town. I don’t know what you think most people that work office jobs in London do, but packing the pubs and restaurants at lunchtime is with a few exceptions, not it. This was for me always the most depressing feature of London working culture and what marks the Anglosaxon business centres apart from pretty much everywhere else in the world. The boots mealdeal culture at your desk was what made me emigrate for a decade.
You need to disentangle the short term impact from a drop off in european and American tourists and students, with the long term impact from increased flexi working and probably permanently fewer Chinese tourists and students.
London will be fine. It may have fewer restaurants and pubs in future. But that’s ok, it has an awful lot of terrible ones. You should also consider that in future, former cubicle dwellers will most likely only come to town for social interaction with colleagues. And I’ll wager that social interaction will happen off campus far more than before.
I have no idea why you think once we’re over the bump, any of this will much impact ticket sales for Les Mis, the Tate Modern or Brixton Academy of whatever it is you’re worried will not be viable due to flexi working.
I really should read the Koran as well - my father has a really impressive gilded copy, one page in arabic, the other English, which he picked up in Libya in the late 1970s, which he was apparently only provided on the basis that he said he was interested in converting.
The Koran is quite hard going. Quite apart from the rather repetitive poetic language, the text is usually presented in a non linear way. Customarily the chapters are in order of length, from longest to shortest, rather than as a coherent narrative.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them? Hmm...
Yes, Jesus was often a little paradoxical. Nonetheless that is what he directed.
Obviously the Queen and the CoE aren't so keen on that bit, so usually skip it.
Maybe they're just good at logic and choose to sacrifice their own chances of salvation by not burdening the souls of the poor with the unbearable weight of their material possessions... thus proving their ultimate unselfishness
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
I really should read the Koran as well - my father has a really impressive gilded copy, one page in arabic, the other English, which he picked up in Libya in the late 1970s, which he was apparently only provided on the basis that he said he was interested in converting.
The Koran is quite hard going. Quite apart from the rather repetitive poetic language, the text is usually presented in a non linear way. Customarily the chapters are in order of length, from longest to shortest, rather than as a coherent narrative.
Salmon Rushdie should have called his book "The Shrinking Verses" then
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
Yes, and it is why everyone should read the Bible themselves (or at least the Gospels) rather than take it second hand from priests.
I've skimmed it. But honestly, given people who have read it intensely have engaged in theological disputes around it for thousands of years, not sure that everyone reading it will entirely eliminate misunderstanding. Though some of my relatives do have fun at their bible discussion groups, mostly as while they are very deeply christian and much engaged in good works, they don't seem to have a problem admitting when they don't really get what a part is supposed to mean, or when a part seems to not mean something great.
The problem is that years of complex and often turgid theological debates have obscured simple truths in the Gospels. Certainly some parts of the Bible are complex, and even contradictory, the bits of the Gospels quoting Jesus are really quite simple to understand.
What? You mean historical debates on things like 'homoousian vs homoiousian' is turgid and complex?
Yes, and I think that Theology is often the enemy of understanding. Priests want to control the interpretation, but the essential Protestant view is that it has to be read by individuals, often then discussed with peers as Bible study.
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Zone 1 makes all the money. And it is in deep pain
It's the professional services of Zone 1 that make all the money and that is carrying on but just at home. The collapse of Pret in central London is not calamitous to the nations finances - especially if their activity relocates to the suburbs. Admittedly it will remove the attraction for those living in zone 1 if their surroundings become a ghost land.
No, it is the collapse of central London as a world class centre of tourism, music, theatre, art, gastronomy, and education. Along with that there is an entire elite of billionaires and millionaires paying hefty taxes (and employing thousands) to enjoy this world city. Then add in the infrastructure that supports them all - transport to accommodation
If that goes, we could lose 5-10% of GDP permanently. That is Depression style stuff, along with what we have already suffered. It could even be worse than that. Tourist cities across the UK will shudder :Bath to Cambridge, York to Edinburgh,
This is not "a few Prets", it is a terrible savaging of our economy.
Now, you could argue this will be, in the end, a positive thing. A rebalancing away from London. Perhaps so (I reckon it will just be bad). Either way, this is going to be, very shortly, very painful for us all, in terms of the tax take, and our national wellbeing.
Did Central Londons tourism and leisure depend on people working in offices in the centre however - since its getting workers back in their office that Johnson seemed to be advocating.
To some extent it does - it provides critical mass .
Yes, you need the whole ecosystem. And that includes a million office workers flooding in, filling restaurants, going to pubs after work, having lunch and evening meetings. That makes the *buzz* of a world city
Take them away and you lose an awful lot of the buzz and you have a museum town - Venice - except London is not remotely as beautiful as Venice (nowhere is)
Take away foreign students, as well....
London is a precious thing. I know many resent it. But it generates great wealth, like all world cities. We fuck with it at our peril
This is a take from someone that I guess has not done the hard grind of commuting into a cubicle every day from a dormitory town. I don’t know what you think most people that work office jobs in London do, but packing the pubs and restaurants at lunchtime is with a few exceptions, not it. This was for me always the most depressing feature of London working culture and what marks the Anglosaxon business centres apart from pretty much everywhere else in the world. The boots mealdeal culture at your desk was what made me emigrate for a decade.
You need to disentangle the short term impact from a drop off in european and American tourists and students, with the long term impact from increased flexi working and probably permanently fewer Chinese tourists and students.
London will be fine. It may have fewer restaurants and pubs in future. But that’s ok, it has an awful lot of terrible ones. You should also consider that in future, former cubicle dwellers will most likely only come to town for social interaction with colleagues. And I’ll wager that social interaction will happen off campus far more than before.
I have no idea why you think once we’re over the bump, any of this will much impact ticket sales for Les Mis, the Tate Modern or Brixton Academy of whatever it is you’re worried will not be viable due to flexi working.
You emigrated for a decade. You might not be representative
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
More of a young person thing? It was relatively common while I wat Uni, I assumed due to us growing up on american TV where it would be more common, and I do hear it from time to time from colleagues in their 20s.
As someone in their 30s, it throws me a little, but not as much as people in their 60s calling me 'mate' in a professional capacity.
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
I really should read the Koran as well - my father has a really impressive gilded copy, one page in arabic, the other English, which he picked up in Libya in the late 1970s, which he was apparently only provided on the basis that he said he was interested in converting.
"The proposed ban on incitement to “religious hatred” makes no sense unless it involves a ban on the Koran itself; and that would be pretty absurd, when you consider that the Bill's intention is to fight Islamophobia." - Boris in the Daily Telegraph, 21 July 2005.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them since they now have money? Hmm...
Yeah, Heaven is a zero sum game. That Bill Gates shouldn't be allowed to get away with giving his money away.
He's been doing it for years yet his wealth never seems to go down much - just how wealthy would he be today if he hadn't be doing anything charitable I wonder?
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
Thou shalt not play golf until the 100th day of the year 2021
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
They are just an edited down version of the 42 "Negative Confessions" of ancient Egypt. Bear in mind that Moses was brought up as an Egyptian.
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Zone 1 makes all the money. And it is in deep pain
It's the professional services of Zone 1 that make all the money and that is carrying on but just at home. The collapse of Pret in central London is not calamitous to the nations finances - especially if their activity relocates to the suburbs. Admittedly it will remove the attraction for those living in zone 1 if their surroundings become a ghost land.
No, it is the collapse of central London as a world class centre of tourism, music, theatre, art, gastronomy, and education. Along with that there is an entire elite of billionaires and millionaires paying hefty taxes (and employing thousands) to enjoy this world city. Then add in the infrastructure that supports them all - transport to accommodation
If that goes, we could lose 5-10% of GDP permanently. That is Depression style stuff, along with what we have already suffered. It could even be worse than that. Tourist cities across the UK will shudder :Bath to Cambridge, York to Edinburgh,
This is not "a few Prets", it is a terrible savaging of our economy.
Now, you could argue this will be, in the end, a positive thing. A rebalancing away from London. Perhaps so (I reckon it will just be bad). Either way, this is going to be, very shortly, very painful for us all, in terms of the tax take, and our national wellbeing.
Did Central Londons tourism and leisure depend on people working in offices in the centre however - since its getting workers back in their office that Johnson seemed to be advocating.
To some extent it does - it provides critical mass .
Yes, you need the whole ecosystem. And that includes a million office workers flooding in, filling restaurants, going to pubs after work, having lunch and evening meetings. That makes the *buzz* of a world city
Take them away and you lose an awful lot of the buzz and you have a museum town - Venice - except London is not remotely as beautiful as Venice (nowhere is)
Take away foreign students, as well....
London is a precious thing. I know many resent it. But it generates great wealth, like all world cities. We fuck with it at our peril
This is a take from someone that I guess has not done the hard grind of commuting into a cubicle every day from a dormitory town. I don’t know what you think most people that work office jobs in London do, but packing the pubs and restaurants at lunchtime is with a few exceptions, not it. This was for me always the most depressing feature of London working culture and what marks the Anglosaxon business centres apart from pretty much everywhere else in the world. The boots mealdeal culture at your desk was what made me emigrate for a decade.
You need to disentangle the short term impact from a drop off in european and American tourists and students, with the long term impact from increased flexi working and probably permanently fewer Chinese tourists and students.
London will be fine. It may have fewer restaurants and pubs in future. But that’s ok, it has an awful lot of terrible ones. You should also consider that in future, former cubicle dwellers will most likely only come to town for social interaction with colleagues. And I’ll wager that social interaction will happen off campus far more than before.
I have no idea why you think once we’re over the bump, any of this will much impact ticket sales for Les Mis, the Tate Modern or Brixton Academy of whatever it is you’re worried will not be viable due to flexi working.
You emigrated for a decade. You might not be representative
Perhaps not. But it’ll be fine. Big employers seem to telling staff to expect a 3-2 or 2-3 split. A big night on a Thursday paid for by not commuting on Tuesday & Wed. Followed by a Fri WFH, rather than the unpleasant office hangover day where every trap in the building was ruined by 10am.
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
BoJo seems to think those of us working from home don't actually do any work, we just bunk off. What an arsehole
I think he's desperate for London not to collapse.
I live in London dude. I can assure you that telling people that working from home is taking "days off" is not the way to resolve the issue of central London collapsing.
Zone 2/Zone 3 will do absolutely fine.
Zone 1 makes all the money. And it is in deep pain
It's the professional services of Zone 1 that make all the money and that is carrying on but just at home. The collapse of Pret in central London is not calamitous to the nations finances - especially if their activity relocates to the suburbs. Admittedly it will remove the attraction for those living in zone 1 if their surroundings become a ghost land.
No, it is the collapse of central London as a world class centre of tourism, music, theatre, art, gastronomy, and education. Along with that there is an entire elite of billionaires and millionaires paying hefty taxes (and employing thousands) to enjoy this world city. Then add in the infrastructure that supports them all - transport to accommodation
If that goes, we could lose 5-10% of GDP permanently. That is Depression style stuff, along with what we have already suffered. It could even be worse than that. Tourist cities across the UK will shudder :Bath to Cambridge, York to Edinburgh,
This is not "a few Prets", it is a terrible savaging of our economy.
Now, you could argue this will be, in the end, a positive thing. A rebalancing away from London. Perhaps so (I reckon it will just be bad). Either way, this is going to be, very shortly, very painful for us all, in terms of the tax take, and our national wellbeing.
Did Central Londons tourism and leisure depend on people working in offices in the centre however - since its getting workers back in their office that Johnson seemed to be advocating.
To some extent it does - it provides critical mass .
Yes, you need the whole ecosystem. And that includes a million office workers flooding in, filling restaurants, going to pubs after work, having lunch and evening meetings. That makes the *buzz* of a world city
Take them away and you lose an awful lot of the buzz and you have a museum town - Venice - except London is not remotely as beautiful as Venice (nowhere is)
Take away foreign students, as well....
London is a precious thing. I know many resent it. But it generates great wealth, like all world cities. We fuck with it at our peril
This is a take from someone that I guess has not done the hard grind of commuting into a cubicle every day from a dormitory town. I don’t know what you think most people that work office jobs in London do, but packing the pubs and restaurants at lunchtime is with a few exceptions, not it. This was for me always the most depressing feature of London working culture and what marks the Anglosaxon business centres apart from pretty much everywhere else in the world. The boots mealdeal culture at your desk was what made me emigrate for a decade.
You need to disentangle the short term impact from a drop off in european and American tourists and students, with the long term impact from increased flexi working and probably permanently fewer Chinese tourists and students.
London will be fine. It may have fewer restaurants and pubs in future. But that’s ok, it has an awful lot of terrible ones. You should also consider that in future, former cubicle dwellers will most likely only come to town for social interaction with colleagues. And I’ll wager that social interaction will happen off campus far more than before.
I have no idea why you think once we’re over the bump, any of this will much impact ticket sales for Les Mis, the Tate Modern or Brixton Academy of whatever it is you’re worried will not be viable due to flexi working.
Hmm, London life isn't cubicle offices though. Any company that doesn't have a fully open plan office and executive team members in the open plan is living the the dark ages of London corporate life.
One of the reasons London will do better than other cities is because we don't work in cubicles, our offices are extremely social and the workforce is much younger than most other cities and most of these younger people live in shared flats and houses where WFH space is at a huge premium. We've sent out our "return to the office" survey and over 90% if our people want to work in office for at least 3 days per week and over 70% 4 days per week and 60% will do full time in office.
The handful of people who have said full time remote work have, IMO, sabotaged their careers at this company. It's a completely stupid decision.
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
They are just an edited down version of the 42 "Negative Confessions" of ancient Egypt. Bear in mind that Moses was brought up as an Egyptian.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
It's an unfair world. On the previous thread you said I should be ignorned because I'm permanently confused. Yet those who employ me consider me worth a hell of a lot more than you.
I thought you made your living letting out properties?
That doesn't surprise me. Someone as full of their own importance as you is unlikely to see tings outside a very narrow window
Leaving aside the spelling errors and the truly awesome lack of self awareness, the other hints on this thread suggest you also work in advertising. Or possibly sexual procurement, but I will assume advertising.
I can imagine you would be well suited to it. Confusion, muddle headedness, rudeness, an inability to deal with facts and a total refusal to engage in a meaningful way with others would presumably be de rigeur.
So I’m not altogether surprised if it earns you a large income.
I’m just puzzled as to why you think it shows you are in some way more valuable than people who do useful work.
I assume -- from his random comments on women -- Roger makes ads like these:
Wow! It sounds like I’ve missed a whole PB saga here! Is that the sort of thing he talks about when I’m out at work? I assumed he just made random weird insults about people he didn’t approve of, I.e. most people - like SeanT but not funny. But clearly there’s more to it than that.
He thought that the women involved in the #metoo saga should just shut up and accept that it was part of learning the ropes in the creative industries
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
"Have you got your ticket there, pal?" said to me by a ticket inspector on a ScotRail train west of Glasgow. But he said it in a friendly way!
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
Black country, perhaps, thinking of the people I know who use it. Not a middle class word, either.
For some people, a boot in the face is all they deserve.
Wow. Just wow.
Be careful. One day it may be your face that the police decide they don't like.
Almost certainly not, unless he decides to take up rioting as a hobby.
He already has other hobbies which are almost as bad - compulsive lying and shagging multiple women whilst supposedly in a committed relationship.
Are you quite sure that we're talking about the same person?
Johnson?
I was thinking that while SeanF and I don’t agree on too much, that was a rather strange non-sequitur. I’ve never seen him discuss his private life, and again, I was wondering what I had missed.
But apparently you thought we were referring to the esteemed First Lord of the Treasury.
1. The Dutch allowed 5,000 supporters in to watch their win over Latvia. This may turn into an interesting epidemiological study into the risk of letting fans back into stadiums. The Netherlands' per capita Covid case rate is over twice that of Germany (a little over 400 per million per day) and is closely tracking the upward trajectory seen in France 2. Republic of Ireland 0, Luxembourg 1
Aren't the Dutch conducting a series of events under scientific conditions to assess the risks of various activities/behaviours? Recall reading about a rave where there were 6 categories of attendees limited in what they could and could not do. Maybe this was one? If so. It is to be applauded, even if it is "brave" in the circumstances.
... Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
Yes I can. The first five are a load of **** since they say nothing except how not to annoy the tantrum-toddler-in-the-sky. At least the next 5 deal with people, but even then there are curious omissions. Murder is out, but killing is OK. Perjury is out, but lying is OK
Jesus was nearer the mark with his message of love and tolerance. As a code for living "Be nice to people and help when you can" is about as good as it gets.
Pointing to the fact that the French government owned the majority stake in Eurostar, he added: “It’s primarily a French lead, but we’ll be as helpful as possible.
The UK government has announced that it is selling its 40% stake in the cross-Channel train operator Eurostar to an Anglo-Canadian consortium for £757.1m.
Chancellor George Osborne said the stake had fetched "far more than people expected we'd be able to sell it for".
He added: "This is a very good deal - it means we can cut the national debt, it means we can invest in our national infrastructure and it's fantastic value for British taxpayers. It's all part of our long-term plan to secure Britain's future."
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
yeah like its a good idea to literally stick with the old scriptures - maybe make a sacrifice of the first born as well will help? I am not a massive Christ fan but the modern interpretation is far better than basically saying accept your lot on earth . Even Christ went berserk with the moneylenders so he must have thought the poor needed less exploitation
The context in this case was a rich man who was unwilling to set his wealth aside to follow Christ
It’s a meditation on priorities, not a call to action or a shrug of the shoulders
I assume this will be Novavax doses where we're set to have a 30-35m surplus starting in June where we'll be producing millions more per month than we can use. I also hope we send them to Canada, Australia and NZ. After seeing what the EU has done with exports we should definitely help out our allies. Previously I'd have sent them to the developing world but watching them have their paid for doses stolen by the EU gives us both an opportunity and a moral obligation to help our friends.
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
Does Carnforth mean bab? I grew up in Brum and you heard 'alright bab' all day long.
I assume this will be Novavax doses where we're set to have a 30-35m surplus starting in June where we'll be producing millions more per month than we can use. I also hope we send them to Canada, Australia and NZ. After seeing what the EU has done with exports we should definitely help out our allies. Previously I'd have sent them to the developing world but watching them have their paid for doses stolen by the EU gives us both an opportunity and a moral obligation to help our friends.
Are you confident that domestic production numbers from Novovax will be that good?
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I was thinking the other day, if I am able to ever afford a house, I won't need to really earn any more money to be pretty much set for life. I've saved money over a longish period, I have a good, steady, job. My money is just lost on rent payments at the moment.
Would I really live any differently, earning double? I highly doubt it.
Yes, you probably would. Unless it doubled overnight. You would simply absorb the extra and spend it on a higher living standard. Slowly and gently move upwards....
It is rare to the point of non-existence to find someone who earns £100K and lives as if he/she was on 50k and puts the rest in the bank/gives it to charity.
I live in my salary and save or give away the rest
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
Does Carnforth mean bab? I grew up in Brum and you heard 'alright bab' all day long.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them? Hmm...
Yes, Jesus was often a little paradoxical. Nonetheless that is what he directed.
Obviously the Queen and the CoE aren't so keen on that bit, so usually skip it.
He directed it to the wealthy young man in the story. The way I read it, the story goes that the wealthy man refuses the chance to be a disciple of Jesus because he cannot contemplate giving up his wealth. That mentality, common in the very wealthy, is, I think, what Jesus is noting.
I have different ideas about wealth than I had years ago. I think its about flow - those of us who are blessed financially should make sure that wealth in turn flows to others - yes by gifting, but also by buying, employing, etc. If you horde it under a mattress (or its equivalent) you are really quite a bad repository of wealth.
That's pretty exciting - would deliver a green-left majority (unless the Greens decided they preferred the CDU, but I doubt it). In a way the Green leadership might prefer a slightly less good result, to keep the CDU option open - if there's a centre-left alternative, their supporters would kill them for opting for the CDU.
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
Bud is brummie vernacular for mate, but horribly condescending elsewhere.
Is it? I grew up in and around Birmingham and nobody ever said "bud".
Does Carnforth mean bab? I grew up in Brum and you heard 'alright bab' all day long.
Bingo. I was thinking "bub".
In London, everyone under 25 now says "bro" or "bruv"
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
They are just an edited down version of the 42 "Negative Confessions" of ancient Egypt. Bear in mind that Moses was brought up as an Egyptian.
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
It seems pretty clear to me that it means redistribution of wealth. The line occurs in this context (KJV):
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
So according to Jesus the virtuous thing is to give away all your wealth to the poor, thus making it much easier for you to achieve eternal bliss in heaven, but also much harder for them? Hmm...
Yes, Jesus was often a little paradoxical. Nonetheless that is what he directed.
Obviously the Queen and the CoE aren't so keen on that bit, so usually skip it.
He directed it to the wealthy young man in the story. The way I read it, the story goes that the wealthy man refuses the chance to be a disciple of Jesus because he cannot contemplate giving up his wealth. That mentality, common in the very wealthy, is, I think, what Jesus is noting.
I have different ideas about wealth than I had years ago. I think its about flow - those of us who are blessed financially should make sure that wealth in turn flows to others - yes by gifting, but also by buying, employing, etc. If you horde it under a mattress (or its equivalent) you are really quite a bad repository of wealth.
Must admit that getting called "dude" in real life is a little disturbing and annoying . "mate" is fine most of the time unless the caller is trying to sell me something (then it just sounds false) but never "dude" or "bud"
More of a young person thing? It was relatively common while I wat Uni, I assumed due to us growing up on american TV where it would be more common, and I do hear it from time to time from colleagues in their 20s.
As someone in their 30s, it throws me a little, but not as much as people in their 60s calling me 'mate' in a professional capacity.
Yes, I have a couple of young female colleagues who call everyone dude (it's not gender-related if it ever was).
Hang on - 3.7 million SPARE Covid jabs? I mean, the rationale is obvious enough - I've managed to decipher the first paragraph by squinting hard, looks like it's partly to help bring NI out of lockdown safely and partly an olive branch to the EU - but is there really that much slack in the rollout, or has the Government decided to slow Phase Two down?
Hang on - 3.7 million SPARE Covid jabs? I mean, the rationale is obvious enough - I've managed to decipher the first paragraph by squinting hard, looks like it's partly to help bring NI out of lockdown safely and partly an olive branch to the EU - but is there really that much slack in the rollout, or has the Government decided to slow Phase Two down?
Olive branch? The second paragraph says it's a "poke in the eye for Brussels".
Discounting employer pension contributions (add a further £9000) my income this financial year will be somewhere around £44,000.
Which apparently puts me in the top 7% of earners in the country.
It’s probably actually higher than that in terms of disposable income, as I live alone and in a very cheap area.
I must admit a bit like Leon’s friend, I find it hard to get my head around that. I don’t feel like one of the wealthy elite - certainly I don’t think I live like them - but it does occur to me that I have more money than I need, a decent house and access to pretty much anything I want, and I seldom have to back off from a project on financial grounds. I think the only thing I’ve had to rethink is buying an electric car, and that wasn’t solely due to money.
And however you look at it, that makes me pretty fortunate.
I get quite angry at people who don't realise this basic truth. Most people don't earn large amounts, by definition. Median household income in the UK is around £28-30k
That is enough for a decent life, of course, and we are a safe, wealthy country. But it means you don't have to go much higher than this to be obviously wealthy to MOST people, even if you don't feel it. Such as you
Someone with a personal net income of £50k a year is RICH. They will furiously deny it, they certainly won't believe it. But they are. To most of the country
Why do they deny it? Doesn't make sense to me.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
The trouble is modern day Christians have turned the meaning of that line upside down. They interpret it as "we must stop people being poor". But the original meaning was "don't worry about being poor - you're going to heaven".
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Pretty sure I've seen 'Jesus is Good' on many church signs before.
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
The answer to @kle4 is that comparisons with the perfect are great as inspiration, or humour.
I am sure tennis racket guitarists compare themselves to Jimi Hendrix, John Williams or Suzi Quatro. 99.9999% will never get close, but it should not stop them trying.
I assume this will be Novavax doses where we're set to have a 30-35m surplus starting in June where we'll be producing millions more per month than we can use. I also hope we send them to Canada, Australia and NZ. After seeing what the EU has done with exports we should definitely help out our allies. Previously I'd have sent them to the developing world but watching them have their paid for doses stolen by the EU gives us both an opportunity and a moral obligation to help our friends.
Are you confident that domestic production numbers from Novovax will be that good?
Not so much that as the extra 10m Pfizer doses and 17m Moderna doses which we'll take delivery of from April. That covers 13.5m people, we will only need around 15-17m Novavax doses and that assumes we essentially stop AZ for under 50s because if the inconvenience of the 12 week waiting time. The stuff I've seen from Novavax says they will do 15m doses per month from their UK production site from June onwards, even with a ramp up in April and May that covers a lot of what we need from them meaning we will end up with spare doses.
I also think the government will use Novavax for the winter booster single dose, it's a reliable production process and very easy to edit. It also doesn't need a new vector that might need a new safety trial.
This is very sudden (and I'm guessing another announcement not made first to Parliament) but I vaguely recall weeks ago reports that the administration of the green homes grant voucher scheme was failing badly.
Hurrah. Good news for ROI, and the right thing to do.
Why? They hate us. See ALL their media coverage of the UK since the Neolithic era.
On the other hand, this will infuriate them AND humiliate them, so yeah, let's do it. But they won't thank us
I don't think it's as simple as that. And I think they will be quietly thankful - I don't expect or want weeping and people strewing rose petals in Boris's path.
It is also true that Britain as an entity has been responsible for a great deal of hardship in Ireland over the years, and whilst I don't hold any personal shame for that, this does feel like a bit of poetical restitution.
straight question as I have never thought of this before but are "god" and "good" related in some way in terms of language? Was to be good at one point to be God like?
I would not have thought so. Most Gods, as described by their followers, seem to have the tantrum-like temper of a 2 year old. Even the first 5 Commandments are about what you need to do to Him happy and stop him visiting vengeance on you and all your future generations ....
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
But the majority of the Commandments are actually incredibly wise rules for society - especially a society that is nomadic and trying to survive living by their wits passing through hostile territory. Right down to not eating shellfish or pork, which are more likely to have pathogens. Whether you believe God gave them to man, or whether man invented God to give them to man, you can't deny their inherent worth.
They are just an edited down version of the 42 "Negative Confessions" of ancient Egypt. Bear in mind that Moses was brought up as an Egyptian.
For some people, a boot in the face is all they deserve.
Wow. Just wow.
Be careful. One day it may be your face that the police decide they don't like.
Almost certainly not, unless he decides to take up rioting as a hobby.
If police brutality was just limited to rioters then you might have a point. Sadly we are far beyond that point and both Sean and yourself need to remember that when the police start acting as if they are our masters, rather than our servants, no one is safe.
Hang on - 3.7 million SPARE Covid jabs? I mean, the rationale is obvious enough - I've managed to decipher the first paragraph by squinting hard, looks like it's partly to help bring NI out of lockdown safely and partly an olive branch to the EU - but is there really that much slack in the rollout, or has the Government decided to slow Phase Two down?
There's no date given that I can see, I don't think they'll be doing it until June. There isn't a surplus in April or May. To give that many away we'd actually have to start dipping into the second dose reserve.
Hang on - 3.7 million SPARE Covid jabs? I mean, the rationale is obvious enough - I've managed to decipher the first paragraph by squinting hard, looks like it's partly to help bring NI out of lockdown safely and partly an olive branch to the EU - but is there really that much slack in the rollout, or has the Government decided to slow Phase Two down?
Olive branch? The second paragraph says it's a "poke in the eye for Brussels".
Did we offer ROI a place in our vaccine scheme last year, I wonder? Perhaps we should have done.
Hang on - 3.7 million SPARE Covid jabs? I mean, the rationale is obvious enough - I've managed to decipher the first paragraph by squinting hard, looks like it's partly to help bring NI out of lockdown safely and partly an olive branch to the EU - but is there really that much slack in the rollout, or has the Government decided to slow Phase Two down?
Olive branch? The second paragraph says it's a "poke in the eye for Brussels".
To be fair an olive branch would work well for that!
Comments
Virgil Malloy : Who you calling bud, pal?
Turk Malloy : Who you calling pal, friend?
Virgil Malloy : Who you calling friend, jackass?
Turk Malloy : Don't call me a jackass.
Virgil Malloy : I just did call you a jackass.
I can't read what's behind the paywall, but one has a horrible suspicion that this is about inventing a clever excuse to allow millions of people to go to places that are full of Plague, with the Government keeping its fingers crossed that they don't bring back all kinds of nasties.
This is unlikely to end well.
Our vaccination numbers are going to go behind the USA shortly, they did 3.44 million doses today. Nevertheless we'll reovertake them at some point as their demand is lower.
Bible -very odd , perhaps a little dangerous . Not somebody to get into an argument with. Either get patronised or killed.
Bravo Two Zero by Andy McNab - very odd, perhaps a little dangerous .Not somebody to get into an argument with - you wont however get patronised but may get killed (or as they would put it "slotted"
Do make the laksa chili paste, as a condiment, that she suggests. It is essential, it adds a dramatic dash of red and lots of wowy spice
My best laksa ever was in Darwin, Oz (it has a large, rich Asian-Chinese-Malay population). This version was honestly quite close
Also, once you've bought the pastes (and the weird tofu puffs) it is stupidly cheap. Chilis, chicken drumsticks, noodles, coriander, ginger, garlic. I replaced the beansprouts with spring onions, just personal taste
But then the holiday you *want* costs 1k more than the one that's kind of ok - and you could afford the 1k.....
The car with the extra options is frankly better value....
The Miele oven with all the bells and whistles will make cooking so much easier......
No exactly a poster child for "Good"
Obviously the Queen and the CoE aren't so keen on that bit, so usually skip it.
You need to disentangle the short term impact from a drop off in european and American tourists and students, with the long term impact from increased flexi working and probably permanently fewer Chinese tourists and students.
London will be fine. It may have fewer restaurants and pubs in future. But that’s ok, it has an awful lot of terrible ones. You should also consider that in future, former cubicle dwellers will most likely only come to town for social interaction with colleagues. And I’ll wager that social interaction will happen off campus far more than before.
I have no idea why you think once we’re over the bump, any of this will much impact ticket sales for Les Mis, the Tate Modern or Brixton Academy of whatever it is you’re worried will not be viable due to flexi working.
We'll take our chances.
As someone in their 30s, it throws me a little, but not as much as people in their 60s calling me 'mate' in a professional capacity.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1375934015136534530
A list of SNP names signing for Alba. That list might be fun to read.
- Boris in the Daily Telegraph, 21 July 2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maat#42_Negative_Confessions_(Papyrus_of_Ani)
One of the reasons London will do better than other cities is because we don't work in cubicles, our offices are extremely social and the workforce is much younger than most other cities and most of these younger people live in shared flats and houses where WFH space is at a huge premium. We've sent out our "return to the office" survey and over 90% if our people want to work in office for at least 3 days per week and over 70% 4 days per week and 60% will do full time in office.
The handful of people who have said full time remote work have, IMO, sabotaged their careers at this company. It's a completely stupid decision.
I have not been wroth.
I have not acted (or judged) with undue haste.
I have not pried into matters.
Oh gods, I'm screwed
I have not multiplied my words in speaking.
Recall reading about a rave where there were 6 categories of attendees limited in what they could and could not do. Maybe this was one?
If so. It is to be applauded, even if it is "brave" in the circumstances.
Edit: Found it.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/07/dutch-clubbers-dance-study-easing-lockdown-music-event-coronavirus
Jesus was nearer the mark with his message of love and tolerance. As a code for living "Be nice to people and help when you can" is about as good as it gets.
Pointing to the fact that the French government owned the majority stake in Eurostar, he added: “It’s primarily a French lead, but we’ll be as helpful as possible.
One of George Osborne's smarter moves...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31721334
The UK government has announced that it is selling its 40% stake in the cross-Channel train operator Eurostar to an Anglo-Canadian consortium for £757.1m.
Chancellor George Osborne said the stake had fetched "far more than people expected we'd be able to sell it for".
He added: "This is a very good deal - it means we can cut the national debt, it means we can invest in our national infrastructure and it's fantastic value for British taxpayers. It's all part of our long-term plan to secure Britain's future."
https://twitter.com/sandieshoes/status/1375906570236747786
It’s a meditation on priorities, not a call to action or a shrug of the shoulders
On the other hand, this will infuriate them AND humiliate them, so yeah, let's do it. But they won't thank us
I have different ideas about wealth than I had years ago. I think its about flow - those of us who are blessed financially should make sure that wealth in turn flows to others - yes by gifting, but also by buying, employing, etc. If you horde it under a mattress (or its equivalent) you are really quite a bad repository of wealth.
Still all within 1-2%...
Damn!
I am sure tennis racket guitarists compare themselves to Jimi Hendrix, John Williams or Suzi Quatro. 99.9999% will never get close, but it should not stop them trying.
I also think the government will use Novavax for the winter booster single dose, it's a reliable production process and very easy to edit. It also doesn't need a new vector that might need a new safety trial.
It is also true that Britain as an entity has been responsible for a great deal of hardship in Ireland over the years, and whilst I don't hold any personal shame for that, this does feel like a bit of poetical restitution.
I have not uttered curses
I have not acted with undue haste
I have not lain with men
I suppose at least I've not slain god's cattle. That has to count for something?