Rupert_Baehr

Perhaps a political solution would be better than military action? The Americans could send Obama, The Brits could send Hague and The French could send Hollande. They could go on long-term loan ... I'm sure each of the countries would be prepared to do without them 'for the greater good'.

You pay less than people in a number of other countries pay. The government doesn't collect enough from the various sources to run the country and pay the interest on all the money it has borrowed.

That's 24 subjects. If the school day is broken into 6 50 minute lessons, then each subject gets 50 minutes per week and 6 lucky subjects get 100 min per week. If exam results plummet, how are you going to explain to a group of irate parents that their children failed their exams because they didn't do as many lessons in most subjects as they used to do? The pass rates in numeracy and literacy are low enough already. Do you really want to reduce them further?

If you want to put First Aid into the school syllabus, what are you going to take out to make room?

That is one way of looking at it, I suppose. - The 'Harold Wilson Way' : "Light up a Camel, sit on your asses, this is the promised land." If you sat on your arse for long enough, somebody would probably give you a job (and if you were lucky, give you a council house, too.) Those who decided to fend for themselves got better jobs (better paid, too) bought better houses and became more affluent. At that time, "working to better yourself' was the norm. Nowadays, perhaps the state will look after you? It depends on what you expect out of life, I suppose. If you think the world owes you a living, you will probably get one - but it may not be as good as the one the guy next door (who works for his living) gets. You can always blame the fact that he has more than you do on Maggie. (Particularly if you live in the People's Democratic Republic of South Yorkshire, where Maggie is to blame for everything.)

It's a bloody sight harder not to if you can't get a council house and you're paying £600 a month rent on a 3-bedroomed house where the only insulation is the bits of plastic on the wiring. Rents are high in Sheffield - but standards are low.

Wash your mouf out wiv soap!

Since when? Nobody found houses or jobs for people 40-odd years ago (when I started looking.) Back then, the most you could borrow was 3 times your annual salary (and if you were married, the bank wouldn't even consider your wife's income - she might give up work to have a child (which would make it even more difficult for you to pay the mortgage.) In the mid 1970's, it was not uncommon for people to have to put down £10k (or if you lived in an expensive area even more) deposit before the bank would consider you for a mortgage. It's not easy to get started now - but it wasn't easy back then, either.

LIfe's too short too valuable to waste being annoyed with people. (That doesn't mean I'm not going to claim to be annoyed ) but really, if something annoys me, the answer is simple: Go elsewhere or do something else.

So can you! "Moving Abroad' is probably not cheap, so you might not save as much as you thought you would ... it's not cheap for them, either. There is, however, no law, rule or anything else which prevents you from 'doing a Branson' and starting an amazingly successful company. Nor is there a law which prevents you from setting up as a sole trader in the UK, paying your fair share of taxes and becoming very wealthy. (Very) many people have done just that. - But they had to work to become successful. Nobody owed them a living and nobody gave them a fortune.

Absence makes the heart grow fonder.

Or pay a very large person to be your 'friend'.

It has been for at least the last 40 years ... before that, I couldn't say.

So the case should be thrown out?

Syria is a part of Russia's 'soft underbelly'. Do you think they want a bunch of Islamic extremists crawling around it?