glennpickard

Yes they may well have reached the level at which they cannot pass on a consistent basis. Is it big money or we just do not warrant a place in the country's top 20 teams ? I don't think Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton and Huddersfield etc have "Big money." For 17-20 years now we have not drawn top end players and money for top management. The jump from the championship to the premiership is a huge leap now. Can either one do it ? Its so disappointing to see no progression from either club over such long periods

I looked at the most recent financials of Johnson and they have a precarious amount of debt. Many different regional newspapers come under the banner of Johnson. I think to survive L.T., the Star will need to be separated out from the Johnson Group and bought separately . The Sheffield Star has an advantage in that many of the newspapers in the Group are "Small time local" newspapers with a major challenges as a stand alone. In contrast, The Star per se has a potential 500K people in Sheffield and another 500K in and around south Yorkshire. If they got the right product/ingredients together for the Star, and drew 7.5% of this circulation potential, ie. 75,000 people, would investors be able to make things work when advertising revenue is added ?

I believe the persons touring Paradise, Ca, with Mr. Trump and listening to the lecture on "How to rake leaves up," was the present Governor of California, Gerry Brown, and the incoming Governor Gavin Newsom. Both are Democrats and part of the blue wave that just hit the GOP. The latest news I have seen is that Pacific Gas & Electric may have accidentally started the fire

I am not sure there is a "Pot" per se. I believe the agreement was that all NATO countries would spend 2% of their GNP on defence spending, ie. that could be utilised for NATO defence. This could be in the form of weapons, armed forces personnel, R & D, infrastructure etc with the intention the spending is to be for NATO group defence purposes. The UK meets this criteria but many other countries don't, including Germany. Trumps complaint is that "If you want to play, you have got to pay," and this is one of the very few things I agree with him on

The print newspaper business is a tough slog today, competing with the internet. But I don't see a real reason for the Star to close down. I started buying it 55 years ago and it was never a top flight newspaper, with the country's best journalists driving it. But can it be a survivor ? However it was from Sheffield not London which should be of interest to Sheffielders, if the owners could get the content/price right. Agree local news stories alone vs national/international news is a challenge. To survive I suggest the Star must include both, on a timely basis. Include a good combination of local, national, and international news out on a timely basis, with the best proof readers they can find relative to grammar, timing, layout etc. And yes they will have to tie into Reuters etc to get the non local news quickly, which will cost money. If they did that, my estimate is that Sheffield/south Yorkshire people people would buy the product in increasing numbers, if the paper and its advertising are priced reasonably. And probably South Yorkshire investors would need to be searched for to go to the next level. Should it be a morning or afternoon paper is another question.

How far off the mark and ignorant could you be to describe Diana as "A disgrace as a wife and mother." What basis is there for saying that ?

There can be no genuine reason why M. Macron would speak about Europe needing protection from the USA, if indeed he said that. He may have been doing some mischievous "Needling" against a very thin skin. However, the two individuals railing against NATO have little or no support (almost none now in the west/don't believe there will be any). Without NATO a "European" army per se, or ones able to integrate under threat at a moment's notice would be necessary, with a central command as NATO now has. The potential threat, since 1945 in Europe, is not the USA, as the Soviet Union resurrection is attempted. Check with the Georgians, Ukranians or the people of Crimea The US took the lead in protecting western European democracy over 70 years ago, when Europe was in disarray defensively after Nazi Germany. NATO works, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

The description of POTUS by TCH Nov 5 is one of the most appropriate I have seen, it was summed up well "SnailyBoy" you are now seeing how some people are not able to accept defeat and rejection of the present direction, and will try to blame anyone rather than look in the mirror. POTUS said so many times this election was a referendum on him. Now we can all see the results, but some have great difficulty accepting reality. And of note, there are now 100 women in the House, including two of the muslim faith and two native American women, as well as a number of African American women Democrats. A VG start towards major change

"Trump is not doing anything new, he just has the cojones to say what everyone is thinking." Its not what everyone is thinking. He raised this about a week ago, at the same saying "I am introducing another tax break on or before Nov 1." Its Nov 1 today, and Congress is in recess ??? Say what ? Both statements have been released just a few days before the mid term elections, for the "Republican base." Seems only Congress could make a change in this legislation anyway and the leader of the Republican Party, Paul Ryan, has already stated it is not possible to make this change with a Presidential order. I agree this issue is just one more in the US Immigration tangle that needs to be reviewed and debated by Congress, and not driven by politics

I am hearing complaints from Republic supporters that the debt now being accumulated will increase the US national debt by $1.5 trillion over the next 5 years. But its already up $938 billion since a year ago ! So people rejoicing today about the low unemployment rate, don't understand that the present economic circumstances are only supported with billions of borrowed money, that future generations will have to pay for. The huge tax savings have gone to the wealthy few, Adelson ($1.2 billion in annual savings), Kochs etc, and Trump himself, although he is still concealing his tax returns from the public. I saw a survey this week of all the profitable companies that have benefited from the huge tax break they were given, and they were asked to list how many new jobs were being planned. You guessed it, hardly any

To my knowledge the Royal family are a mixture of English, German, Greek, Scottish, and soon to be American (via Harry and Meaghan), a commendable background. There may even be some French or Spanish blood in there from centuries past, but we would need an expert Royalist to assist in this regard There is normally a specific separation of powers between a Head of State and a Prime Minister, which allows both positions to participate in managing government without being overwhelmed. The Queen and her family carry many duties that a PM would have trouble fulfilling, and often, but not always, the Head of State's role is more ceremonial than political. Both the French and the Irish Republic have a head of state with split powers. I prefer the system.

You seemed to have missed the point completely. You were not being told of illegal happenings. You were being advised, step by step, of the progression and inciting of violence that has been promoted from the bully pulpit. Then you would need to connect the dots to today.

As I understand it the lineage goes back to William the Conqueror (a Norman) in 1066,but there have been a few breaks along the way eg. the introduction of the Hanoverians in the 1700s to keep a male line intact. But my point is that the UK has been a good custodian of what happened historically, why, and the consequences (good or not so good). And transitioned to a successful constitutional monarchy. The country has learnt a lot by this and the Queen, despite the naysayers, embodies all that experience and knowledge and is respected for this. I don't support throwing that away. Also the institution has value to many people in the UK, because foreign visitors want to see the most successful monarchy for themselves, bringing in millions of pounds to small businesses, the country's largest employee group. Could it be wishful thinking when you say "Only 30% of the people care about the monarchy?" From my review of support for the Monarchy it appears significantly higher, but I don't know the exact number. And you may have a point in that many people are apathetic. But try to remove something of national value, and they will come alive quickly

I have just read that the support for the Monarchy in the UK is around 75%, whereas you state "Only about 30% of the people" etc etc. At the end of the day I believe people will act on two things: a) do we want to keep the lineage that goes back a 1000 years, and tells us historically where we came from and what happened along the way ? Or discard all that ? (someone said France and German did that so why should n't we ?) That's a reason ??? b) is the Royal Family a value to the UK and the Commonwealth ? If not then people will follow the naysayers. From everything I can read and watch, it appears that it is still a valued asset and impossible to duplicate That is not to say that some changes cannot be made to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. Some may complain, but in the final analysis, it will stay, as it is such a crucial part of the country's DNA

yes I was sorry to see Hibbert's go, I bought all my George Cunningham framed art pieces and his book there. There is not a great deal of profit in the lower level art business today, so no surprise that they would have trouble with increased taxes. Although Hibberts did not have to be in the city's high rent district, but to keep them in the city, the council should have tried to get them into an alternate location within the city's boundary. Should there be a different tax bracket for company's in the art business, ie. encourage them to come to Sheffield ??

TCH yes I knew about and saw the response to Diana's passing, and the negative response. I think the Queen/Royal Family paid for that with the average person, not only in the UK but worldwide, wondering why she had showed minimal concern. A major faux pas no doubt. If not already, there needs to be a firm policy for travelling/security/accommodation expenses when Royals travel, and the policy approved by Parliament. I believe when they do travel it is usually connected to areas such as the Commonwealth, charity, diplomatic relations, opening major events, so there is usually a government connection ? But if private business or holidays, then the individual should pay 100%. The security for same probably has to be provided by the government, unless there is a policy for senior versus minor Royals

From the French Accident report I saw, they were victims of a drunk driver, the chauffeur,and had nothing to do with the Queen and the conspiracy reports that were subsequently concocted

I believe she is discouraged publicly from pronouncing position on politics , history despots etc. I agree with the policy in that it may provide a contrast to the PM's office. But I am sure she has a private position that some will hear. Yes both the Duke and Charles have expressed opinions that may be termed as being outside the boundary, but they can look at things from a different perspective. With all the charity work that the family undertakes incl. the Queen, ie. current eg. Harry and the disabled games, I just don't see them as ruthless

A meritocracy definition says people advance on only ability, not social position or money. Its somewhat utopian, but good luck in finding what what you're looking for. One thing I would point out concerning ability in leaders in the UK's democracy. The Queen has in my opinion, an extraordinary ability to deal with situations and people from all walks of life, and does it so well. That's why I consider her to be a very significant asset to the UK and the Commonwealth, and part of the glue that holds the program together for us all. Should she be excluded from the country's asset list because she was born into wealth as you advocate ? I don't believe so. Some one mentioned that the "Monarchy has its history dripping with blood." Not the generation she represents, but if you want to tag her with all with the wars, torture, beheadings, actions going back to Richard lll, Henry Vlll etc, that happened centuries ago, you may have a case. But not so relevant in the 21s t century. Incidentally that happened with all States centuries ago, it was how business was done and disputes were settled in those days Poland and Auschwitz/Birkenau ? People are there because it is the best example to see today for States/countries of what not to do. Same with the "Model" plantations that have been preserved in the USA. They go there to remember history and be part of the group that says "Never again" when the despotic dictators reappear, which they are doing now. Quite the opposite of why they come to Buckingham Palace

I would be happy to send in a cheque for 69 pence, or 70P as the case may be. I don't believe its so much about the excess income over expenditures that the country gains from Royal and historical tourism, but which is positive for many in commerce. Its about the stability and background that we provide as an example, and why Commonwealth countries(and others) see this as real and workable in such a turbulent world. Change takes place in the UK, not from the barrel of a gun, but from persuasive arguments and the ballot box, which equals stability domestically, and dependability to allies

I agree that the financial support of so called "Minor royals" needs to be reviewed and in some cases, taxpayer contribution costs pared down. The wedding of Prince Andrews daughter may be a good case in point, whereby he should have shouldered the lions share of the cost. There will always be a class system in every country you can think of, including China and North Korea, with their "We are all equal" politics etc. The class differences are driven by birth, economics or preference. Its been this way since the Egyptians built the pyramids 4,500 years ago, and a "Republic" does not remove or dilute the issue. In fact it often works in reverse, if the Republic leadership determines that there will not be a middle class. "I don't know what the Queen does all day" Jomie asked. Well she carries out a "Head of state" agenda, quite often set by government mandarins, in meeting foreign diplomats, communications with other Heads of State and the British Commonwealth institution, setting up general visits for meet and greets, and rewarding UK citizens for a job well done, amongst many other things.(Similar to some of a CEO's duties). In my view she is tireless in the work she does carry out on behalf of the state. The Queen is an integral part of the UK government, providing respect, value and longevity And when very senior foreign politicians come to the UK, their number one hope and priority is a visit to meet the Queen at Buckingham Palace. They understand the continuance and permanence of the Royal Family, which most of them do not have.

WW1 was when many of the European Royal families disappeared, not WW2. To be followed by the likes of Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler etc, very poor replacements most would say. The UK has had a dual political/Monarchial system that has worked for hundreds of years because all the players know what is expected of them. And yes since 1952, the Queen has worked as hard as any politician to further the interests of the country, its peoples, and the stability of its institutions. Her income has been an investment for the country And she was one of the guiding lights, along with her father, to transfer the Empire into the British Commonwealth of nations, of which 53 still want her to be retained as their Head of State. Having been to and worked in many of the worlds nations, I don't believe there is a head of state with higher worldwide respect than the Queen of England. Nor should the EU's mandarins ever be in a position to affect the position of the British Monarchy

Halibut you may be right with your adjectives, but keep in mind for many, they are obviously part of the draw.

yes I will watch it but at 18.00 my time today, 23.00 yours, so it will not be live for me. I agree that the taxpayer should not be footing all the security bill, Andrew should with maybe some help from the Queen. If there is a significant draw for tourism, then maybe the Gov't should chip in something

A 20% pick up ? I just saw a report that said that in the last general election 94% of women of colour voted for the Democrats, the the highest percentage for one party of all the racial groupings, and African American men males were behind them at 70%. The Caucasian base that makes up most of the 28% base may stay with him, but there appears to be a very significant drain away coming with Independents