colhint

not sure that idea would work though, there is enough fiddles on VAT as it is, when Governments make things more difficult to administer, it often results in 2 things, the cost of administering it outweighs the return and the fiddles increase.

VAT increased on fuel, fuel rise affects every good, most goods increased in price as a result of VAT increase whether zero rated or not which the peas in a pod line apart its perfectly allowable for the fruit and veg to be in picture. This also means it isn't just 2.5% rise I presume thats the logic anyway I know what you mean, but even if you added the 2.5% on fuel to that on some foods. Even if everything you bought in a weeks shop had VAT. (ridiculous to think people don't buy most of their shop VAT free) that would only be 5% increase which would still mean the average shopping bill would be about £175 a week. That does seem somewhat unlikely.

Am I missing something here. If vat increased 2.5%. and that 2.5% increase amount to £450 a year. Doesn't that equate to an average annual shopping bill of £18000 or a weekly bill of about £350. We don't spend anywhere near that, you lot must all be rich.

I have been reading a lot of G A Henty novels. He was a prolific writer in the Victorian era. His main thrust was historical novels. Quite a bit boys own stuff really, and mainly armed conflict. I suppose he was the equivalent to Bernard Cornwell only 150 years earlier. The thing is he wrote so many books. I spotted the first as a freebie for the kindle, I think most of them are free. Anyway he has enlightened me on historical stuff a bit more off the beaten track, like the wars of succession or Captain Cochrane or the siege of Gibralter. Anyway I like them

well he was rubbish first half

He's probably done better with a transfer kitty than any of our previous 3 managers

whats he going to tie his kangaroo down with then?

Oh and dysentry on the march from harfleur accounted for more lives lost than at Agincourt

Spot on. One of the more common remedies for severe cuts was wrap it in horseshit and pray hard

Good

Is their a hierarchy of what is acceptable and what's not. And who sets the rules? I'm not defending anyone here, but it does seem as though its open house on some abuse and not on others. Racism is just vile, but on VT and in life you will find jokes about women, disabled people, most nationalities, bald people and ginger haired people. There will be stuff about different religions and most people won't bat an eyelid. There are crude remarks about different football teams and their fans, even what job people do. So what are we meant to think of a Villa fan who works for an investment bank or property speculator , compared to a SHA teacher or nurse. I think loads of people have some form of bigotry one way or another. Their just doesn't seem to be any rules

I agree.

Presuming you wouldn't want people from other countries to become parasitic pension tourists here, Doesn't that sound like a ukip policy? Only let in people you want.

what language do footballers speak. I mean if you go to Spain for example, teams will probably have Germans, Italians British and maybe some from Africa, They can't all be up to speed in Spanish. So what's the word for far post, or one two and the like. Is there a universal language for key words?

But didn't the population also increase when GDP was falling?

I don't think Nzog could have played more if he was out for the season

That's just it though. You say take out a few key players. What if those players now were Bent, Given, Hutton and for the first 6 months Ireland, That might be close to £10m a year on wages. I'm sure you could have had 2 or 3 £6m plus players and the wages wouldn't be an issue.

My Take on Lambert is this. I think his brief was along the lines of, we are a big club, but in a poor state. As things stand you will have about £20m each year to spend, but currently the wages are far too high. You need to get that down to, and I'm guessing here, about £50m per year. So about £1m a week. Which is more than reasonable for a club not chasing European cup slots at the moment. The trouble is, We had Dunn, Collins, Warnock, Ireland, Bent, Given, Hutton and to some extent Nzogbia. who took up half of his spend. I think he looked at that lot and decided, they were either, not good enough, disruptive, or not commited. So his task was immense. He took to getting rid, whichever way he could. At this point he has got rid of half of them, and had part of the wages paid by other teams. Obviously not Nzogbia. I don't necessarily put Nzog in the Bomb squad, I just think he new the injury was likely to keep him out for the year. I don't think this was Just Randy getting ready for a sale, I think the economy crash and his divorce had a major impact. But I do think Lamberts brief still stood. So he took the view to scout cheaply and pad out where he could, whilst keeping us up. I think what has really knocked him this year is injuries. Having overhauled the squad with lower priced players, he tried to strengthen key positions this year with better quality. I think Kozak and Okore were his big signings this year in terms of quality. Okore because I think he will be really good and Kozak so Benteke didn't have to play every match. Now when I look at our injury list, I'm wondering how Southampton would be doing without Lambert, Rodriguez Loven and Cork. Or Newcastle without Collocini, Tiote, Remy and Goufran. Or equally How about Liverpool without Suarez and Sturridge I still think Lambert should be here next season, he is part way through a project, and if he is replaced, the next guy will still get the same constraints, £50M wage bill and £20m a year to spend. Well that's my take on it

So what you are saying is using the system introduced by labour, that have been in place for nearly a decade, it's good news. Labour changing the stats to suit themselves

ha ha brilliant

So today York under 11's festival. We, Ionians are quite a good side. We can't compete at the moment with the public schools. The only reason is public schools all play Rugby. This means they have a school team and play for a local team. So they are training once a week with the local team and twice a week at school. Our lads get no rugby at school. But next year at big school, they will, so the gap closes. Anyway we are the best of the rest. We can't play a league, RFU rules don't allow it for a couple of years. So we play friendlies and festivals, the festival is like a cup all in one day. We won the festival last week. So this is a big one. The teams are drawn out into two groups, totally fairly, except the home team York, get drawn in the weakest group you could imagine. We thrashed everyone in that group last week. And we end up in the public school group. OK So we beat the weakest school first. Then we narrowly beat the next team. Now for the big one. This team have won this trophy for the last three years. No doubt they are a good side, very good. But dirty as buggery, they know every trick in the book, offsides when the ref can't see. Sliding in with knees when the second man in the ruck. etc. They really push fair play to the limit. So first half, we are up hill and against a strong wind. They score an early try. A minute later a second, quite clearly offside on the blind side so the ref couldn't see. Next move our number 10 clatters their number 10. Great tackle. Then three of their forwards knees in on our lad to retrieve the ball. Penalty to us. We don't score from the play. Our opponents are angry, you don't tackle us, you don't hurt us we're great we are, we do that to you. They were, not great sports. So my lad make a crunching tackle near our line, takes their lad into touch. On the ground he kicks my lad in the neck. As he gets up he swings a punch into the back of the head of our winger. The ref was miles from play, but caught up just in time to see the winger smack their lad a good 'un in the nose. Down he goes crying. The half time whistle blows, our lad didn't get sent off, I think a neutral parent must have told the ref it was 50 50. We are angry now. Wind behind us and down hill. Straight from the kick off, we are in their face. Within 2 minutes two of their lads are down crying, all legal hard tackles, remember these lads are just used to winning. So the next open play, our winger makes a drive, two of their lads take him into touch, right by where their parents are standing. This time a knee in the back and another punch while he's on the ground. George had had enough. He just decked this lad. The parents, obviously missed the knee and the punch to George Only seeing him punch. Now the dad, who's lad got the smack. Grabbed our lad and threw him, he must have gone back about 10 foot. Georges Dad was straight in their and had this bloke by the throat, saying that's an 11 year old your assaulting. Now the Giles and Charlotte's were screaming, don't you touch our Hugo's and Tarquins. Our lads were over in support for George, were were ready for them. What happens, the ref abandons the game. We have never been a dirty team, we have been undone before by teams with more nous, those who push fair play to the limit. But as parents, we new some team was going to push it, and we would fight back. We may have lost the match, but those public schoolboys will know we are never to be pushed around again.

Can't agree with that Peter, she should be sacked Actually if the want to have the title honourable, she should resign.

I see Ed has said, Farage shouldn't be at a debate with himself, Cameron and Clegg. Whether he is right or wrong, it does appear to make him look as if he is running scared, He probably should have kept quiet. Personally I'd like to see a second tier debate with probably the Greens UKIP and maybe respect. Whoever wins that debate to go through to meet the others in the second debate. With maybe one from the first tier dropping out

that's an interesting link. Didn't you post earlier that it was sold so a few rich people got a whole lot richer. Now you post a link showing that Lansdowne got and extra 27,000 customers on the back of the royal mail sale. When you said a few rich people, did you mean 27,000.

Ahh, OK. As long as the public sector get them, that's alright.