Flatpackhamster

I hear your pain.

That's exactly right. Don't know when you last looked, but as of 2010 it was running a £100Bn deficit. Latest LGPS deficit forecast challenged | Public Finance It has a positive cash flow, which, the unions being innumerate, moronic liars, they assume means a surplus.

Benefits are cheaper, so I'd choose benefits. Obviously this problem has been around for about 15 years. Back in 2002 youth unemployment was around 7%, which would have been a great time to bring the policy in. But, we're talking about Labour here.

No it isn't. I said too early, not 'early'. By 'too early' I mean that their retirement age is too low. It should have been raised years ago and it should keep going up. If that was the case I wouldn't have a problem. I have a problem because the contributions made by the taxpayer are insufficient to cover the shortfall, and there's a shortfall because the workers themselves aren't contributing enough to their retirement. And, of course, Labour decided not to deal with this, preferring to leave it for the Tories to deal with, because Labour is vicious, evil, hate-filled and deserves to burn.

It appears, just from the photos, as if the £109k one is better maintained. It looks like the £99k one has an original toilet in (judging by the shape of the cistern and pipe) which suggests to me it's an original bathroom (1970s?), whereas the £109k one has all-new bathroom furniture. You'll also notice on the £99k one that there's a fridge-freezer in the living room because the kitchen isn't large enough. The cooker in the £99k one is a very cheap one. In the £109k one you've got a range. The owners may be leaving it but you should ask. Ranges are pricey, and parts to repair them are expensive - it's worth checking the make and model and ensuring that you can still buy parts for that one. But it'll give you a far better cooking experience, assuming that's important to you. Also looks like the alarm system is relatively recent. The contract will be with the owner, not the house, so that would be a further cost to consider. IMO the £109k one has a better interior and is better maintained.

I'm bitter. I'm bitter that Labour scrapped tax relief on private sector pensions, destroying the private pensions system at a stroke. I'm bitter that Labour spent more than they took in taxes every year from 2001 to 2010, buying favours with money that hasn't been earned yet. I'm bitter that Gordon Brown sold half Britain's gold at 1/3 of its current price. I'm bitter that I will never be able to afford to retire while I'm paying for public sector workers to retire much too early. But mostly I'm fed up to the back teeth with naive Guardian readers wailing about how much more money the country should be taking in tax, without even the faintest thought that, if Labour hadn't so much money up the wall, we wouldn't be in this position. Did you know that we pay £60 Billion a year merely to pay the interest on the national debt? £60 Billion is half the budget for the NHS. Did you know that half that national debt was created since 1997? But no, real numbers and facts never matter, it's all emoting and 'boo hiss evul torays' from the hard-of-thinking.

Is that The Rt Hon Lady Hodge, whose family company paid 0.01% tax on its revenues in the UK last year? Thank goodness we've got The Rt Hon Lady Hodge, privately educated daughter of steel magnate Hans Oppenheimer, dealing with this instead of 'Toffy Eton Posh Boy Dave' with his wealthy background and private education. We certainly dodged a bullet there!

I'll give you two now, and fifteen when we reach Alderaan.

I wonder if now the people who said they'd heard from a mate whose dog said his friend had heard that Romney had rigged the ballots would like to reconsider their rumourmongering.

In your view. In your view, those policies were good and helped the American people. In the view of those blocking his policies, they were bad and didn't.

The same argument we saw above, where Democrats are nice and lovely because they're Democrats, whereas Republicans aren't because they aren't. Isn't it handy that all the really clever, clued-up, snuggly kind best people ever are all supporters of one political party? I would imagine their argument was that they wanted to improve America by getting rid of Obama.

This is definitely true. I think it was Churchill that said that America will always do the right thing once it has exhausted all other options. Isn't this the first Republican-controlled congress in 60 years? It's pretty weak, IMO, to blame the Republican congress for Obama's failings. How did republican presidents manage for the last 6 decades?

You want to see evil? Look across the Pacific. There, over a billion people are having their new leaders appointed with no reference to the needs or liberties of those people. Look at the EU. Across the entire European subcontinent, people are losing their jobs, their pensions, their houses, to prop up a system of governance that has no regard for the people it governs. Evil isn't crappy politicians fighting for your vote. Evil is politicians not having to care about your vote.

How about VIIIPLUSI ?

Mmm, but it's not as simple as that, is it: - War against Soviet and Chinese communists War against Chinese communists War against Chinese and Soviet communists War against Chinese and Soviet communists War against Chinese and Soviet communists Insurrection against Soviet-planted puppet leader See above UN-mandated action to liberate Kuwait. UN-mandated action to stop genocide after the collapse of Soviet puppet state. Bit harsh to call this 'warmongering'. Attempt to push out Iranian/Saudi influence (which backfired horribly) from Iraq. Attempt to create pro-US state to replace collapsed Soviet puppet. Do you see the pattern here? US and Soviet activities across the globe were intertwined. Practically every conflict you listed was the US and Communist Russia or China going at it through a third party. Essentially, they aren't. I don't know who would be more offended by that, the Tea Party or the Lib Dems. And the Democrats are, politically, much closer to the Tories. There's no Republican equivalent in the UK, nor is there a US equivalent to Labour or the Lib Dems.

Another way to look at it is: This guy isn't working out, that guy may suck, but he might suck less than this one. Again, if they're both rubbish, why not try voting a different way? What've you got to lose?

I think the biggest problem I have with this argument is the extraordinary disservice it does to thinking human beings. Is it really the case that everyone who votes for Obama is wise and has thought their position out well, and everyone who votes for Romney is ignorant and reactionary? There are just as many reactionary morons who vote for Obama. Since neither Romney nor Obama have a credible debt management and deficit management program, rather more like the equivalent of the UK putting Milipede in to power instead of Cameron/Clegg. It's a shame they can't both lose. Romney is a capable manager of a large company, but that isn't politics. A president needs to be able to build a team around him, not dictate. Romney will be a control freak, and he won't understand the limitations under which a president operates. It's not like a PM in the UK, who has theoretically limitless powers. Obama has already shown himself incapable of recognising the scale of the problems the US economy has. If he hasn't worked it out in 4 years, he's not going to work in out in 8. The US needs to cut spending, and it needs to cut it across the board, including defence. The man is mendacious and hides it beneath a veneer of charm, just like Blair.

I suppose it could be a big storm, or it could just be England in early June.

Well I read the same thing in the Guardian and the Telegraph, so shame on me for not going off and 'checking facts'. Honestly this 'Daily Mail' shit got old about 5 years ago.

I couldn't get on with Dwarf Fortress. Ugly I can live with but ASCII is a step too far. I'll take a look at some of the mods and texture packs.

OK, so why is it that everyone has the impression that the extradition system is so loaded in favour of the US? Odd.

I see where you're coming from. The game is ugly as sin. There's no need for a game to be ugly. It doesn't have to be pretty, but ugly is a problem. However, I tried the game and I'm addicted. Gave myself crippling tendonitis from playing it too much. I don't know why I'm addicted, but I am. It's easy to pick up, easy to put down. I'm having a blast building stuff. Iron-age hillforts, latifundia, Roman temples, all sorts of stuff. I haven't even started on playing with the electrical circuits. Might try some of the anti-ugliness mods to get rid of the fugly.

For me the biggest issue is the asymmetric nature of the extradition agreement with the US. This is basically how it works. Extradition from UK to USA - They make a request, we send whoever they want. Extradition from USA to UK - We make a request, they tell us to take our request and shovel it. I have a problem with that.

I thought it was good. It certainly made me chuckle.

Budget: £0 Users: 180 Computers: 40