hycus-flange

Good luck with it,  I snapped my quadriceps tendon 6 weeks ago, operation to reattach went well, but I’m now into week 6 of 12 to 15 of having my leg locked into a straight position,only allowed to bend it in 3 reps of 10 every day to 30 degrees at the moment, moving to 50 degrees in 2 weeks time and then 10 degrees more every week until I get to 90 degrees.

its the worst injury I’ve ever had because of the massive and uncomfortable recovery time, if I had a choice then the knee is the last thing I would damage.

5 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Then they are probably safely looking after themselves at home, rather than taking the unnecessary risk of wandering around Lidl during a pandemic that is mainly impacting people like them.

Some don’t have the choice of hiding away from a 99.95% survival rate average death age of 82 years deadly plague

17 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

I'm the opposite.

When I see someone behaving like a selfish word removed I ALWAYS think I'm better than them.

Even if they are exempt?  And if they are how would you know.  This is the holier than you wet wipe attitude I’m objecting to

2 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

This can be used both ways when the "tolerate right" can't even tolerate wearing a mask despite evidence showing it can help reduce the spread of a virus.

Now which one is more pathetic?  Not doing as you've been asked?  Or moaning about someone moaning about someone not doing as they've been asked?

You often don't see the brick falling on your head on a building site, but it's still there.  Wear a hard hat.  Problem solved. 

Never said I don’t wear a mask. Just objected to the condescending attitude of the better than you wet wipes

2 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said:

It's because their minds can only process 1 thing at a time

Aahhh, the tolerant left. 

1 minute ago, Genie said:

The important word with mask wearing is “reduces”. Nobody claims they kill the virus or stop it’s transmission.

Wearing a mask reduces the amount that the virus spreads. The science supports it. If nobody wore a mask the transmission and prevalence of the virus would be much higher than it is.

I’m glad you think they are working, maybe you could let boris know, he might remove this latest lockdown

1 minute ago, Seat68 said:

We went through these arguments. 

If the disease is still relevant then surely the arguments are too

1 minute ago, Genie said:

Yet you’re superior to the scientific evidence that says wearing them reduces transmission. Where did you get the information to form the judgement that they are useless? I’m genuinely interested. 

I never said I was superior to anything

1 minute ago, Seat68 said:

They are idiots though. Idiots is the least offensive term for them. Its not about confrontation or minerals as you put it, but having some consideration for others. We went through this March to July though. 

Went through masks in March to July, pestilence is still prevalent, ergo masks are not doing the job that we are told they should be doing, as I said, a piece of cloth;/ paper isn’t a good enough barrier for people to get on their high horse to try to shame others to comply.

16 minutes ago, It's Your Round said:

I’m not getting into a debate on what’s meant to be an amusing thread. However, mask wearing does reduce the likelihood of aerosol transmission. By exactly how much, is not as clear. But better to err on the side of caution, no? 

Or am I just a virtue signalling prole that should wake up and see that I’m being manipulated by the new world order? 

Here, read this aerosol transmission of COVID 19

 

It was your use of “idiots” that riled me, (as if you are superior) noticed how you said you only stare at them “Roy Kane style” from behind your ill fitting piece of cloth though,  but don't say anything as you probably haven’t got the minerals for a confrontation.

btw, you’re the one who has bought up conspiracy theories

23 hours ago, It's Your Round said:

https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/The-Mask-Goes-Over-Your-Nose-by-thattaragirl/51532368.9G0D8
 

£9! But worth it for the look on the idiot’s faces as you stare at them Roy Keane style. 

I know that we all have to wear a piece of cloth/ paper over our faces, I also know they are basically useless for the job they are trying to do,  i do it because I don’t need virtue signallers who indulge in compliance thinking they are morally/ mentally superior to me because they acquiesce to the man. Bet you’ll be front of the queue for the miracle jab as well.

54 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

I've had barely anything else on but CNN for about 75 hours now.  The music when they cut to and from ad breaks will live with me forever.

So you’re getting fair and balanced reporting of the issue then.

On 23/10/2020 at 16:46, ferguson1 said:

FAN-DABBY-DOZY

On 13/09/2020 at 13:44, mjmooney said:

Still don't know if what the wife and I had - persisting right through December, January and February - was COVID or not. She certainly lost taste and smell, I didn't notice that so much, but I had a big loss of appetite, and felt generally awful. 

Wish my missus would loose her sense of taste,

Just now, bickster said:

There were systematic failures at Heysel, its just that everyone seems to remember Liverpool Fans rioting, the official verdict was a bit of a whitewash

I'm not saying Liverpool fans were completely blameless either but

The ground should never have been used, it wasn't safe. A wall actually collapsed

Why were so many Italian fans in the Liverpool End

It wasn't liverpool fans on the pitch with a shotgun

It's still a tragedy that people died at a football match

I never mentioned the nationality of the rioters, just that the rioters were scumbags and that that disaster could t be compared to the one at Bradford 

21 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

And Heysel was just a couple of weeks later... 

But you can’t compare this event to scumbags rioting and killing.

4 minutes ago, Nigel said:

I know you have to play everyone but its unlucky to have to play nearly all the top sides over a brutal Christmas schedule!

Yes, but they have to play us too!!

1 hour ago, omariqy said:

 

Most workplace pensions are money purchase/defined contribution schemes. Meaning that money can pass down to your family tax efficiently. If you were to die before the age of 75 then that pot of money goes tax free to your beneficiaries. After 75 and they can in effect take on the pension for themselves and draw down from the pot and pay income tax at their own rates.

You would be silly not to max your contributions in line with what your employer will match them up to. It is free money. Obviously you don't have to rely only on pensions for retirement but it is a great place to start. 

The point I was trying to make was that for 40+ years my dad paid into pensions for HIS benefit after he retired.

He died 11 months after retiring,  therefore he got no benefit at all from 40+ years of having less money in his take home pay, a double whammy of shit for him, and when my mom pops off whatever is left will disappear never to be seen again.

18 hours ago, ender4 said:

yes, agreed, its not special.    

Just to clarify - its not a final salary scheme, but a defined contribution/money purchase scheme?

Its still better than not putting the money into the pension - if you had put that in a bank/under your mattress, you'd only have the equivalent of £1,478 per year, rather than £2,500 per year.

You're basically £1,000 per year, or £25k in total better off by putting into the pension. 

You are assuming that the op will live to 85 years, which in all probably he won’t,  my dad paid into work pensions all his life, retired at 65 and dead 11 months later,  he got no benefit from all the money he paid in, could have not bothered and had extra cash every week and enjoyed it rather than loosing a chunk of his take home every week.

If you are doing ok why would you take that other persons means to support his/her family?

There's obviously enough work for both of you, you could run it as you are, if their customers come to you over time because you offer a better service then that's the way to go, to knowingly destroy their business for your own gain is greed and greed has been turning reasonable people into c#nts for centuries 

3 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

tbf I don't think Eddie Stobart is going to be smuggling refugees , terrorists ,IS Oil and  drugs out of the UK into the EU in quite the same levels as the Turks

 

That's only because Stobarts can't undercut the rates the Turks will do it for

The good old neck pains holiday fund, getting you to Spain since 1974.

3 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Not sure,  It's gone way past "arrogance".  I am starting to think she might be mentally ill.  To strive for something that will damage you and all those around you at any cost must have a medical name.  The pathways between reality and a Shortbread based future seem to have a configuration problem for the wee Krankie.  I truly believe she is losing it.

Drunk on power and seeking infamy, just like Salmond before her

16 hours ago, Jimzk5 said:

As a self employed person this is a joke, no holiday pay, no sick pay and now more deductions from my pay. 

Then go Ltd, pay yourself £7k pa + dividends and a nice end of year tax free bonus, pay no personal tax, no NI and just stump up the tax on the profit of your company.

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

I still maintain the opinion that in a better side he'd be a brilliant player. If he went into a side like Arsenal I think he'd shine. We're just not in a place where we can let him express himself.

I think all he'd shine at Arsenal would be the first teams boots, and possibly a seat on the subs bench if they were desperate.