ads36

here's the difference : 'Preppers' want, maybe even yearn for the end of the world. I pay house / car / holiday / etc. insurance, but i never ever ever want to need any of it. Preppers, are desperate for the fall of civilisation, so they can stop working 9-5, clicking on spreadsheets, and start shooting raiders/ go raiding/ shooting deer/ etc. (which does all sound like a lot of fun)

You have to ask what the owner *does* want to do with the building? 'knock it down and build flats' - would seem a likely answer these days. oh, it's listed, can't do that then. unless, by some act of total chance, it conveniently burns down...

you'd get more people using this hypothetical tram from Meadowhead, if it went down Chesterfield road, more or less directly to the City centre. the 'herdings extension' makes pragmatic sense, but would be a *much* slower route = fewer people would use it. in this future world, cars would get a nice direct route to Sheffield, Trams would have to go all the way to Manor Top before finally heading towards Sheffield. this mindset, of pushing the alternatives out the fringes, so as not to inconvenience the important car drivers, is exactly why we've become car-dependent. we're either interested in change, or we're not. (fwiw, i don't think the trams will be coming to meadowhead, ever. If they do, it will be via Herdings Park - it *is* the pragmatic choice)

i know HR Managers working for not-well-known companies earning more than that.

the problem with extending the Herdings line to Meadowhead, is that you'd be sat on the tram for 20 mins, and still be no nearer the city centre, so what's the point?

SCC have a balanced budget for the year ahead. i'm sure some will dismiss it, but they've achieved the near-impossible.

this is no argument for not improving public transport. which will reduce car use making *your* car journeys a little easier.

an estimated (?) £2billion will be added to the nation's food bill at the end of April. even the telegraph are telling us about it now Jacob Rees Mogg, of course, is moaning : "These checks are an unnecessary act of self harm that will increase prices in an era of inflation".

so more or less meaningless. 'services' ? i'll save the champagne till i hear more details if you don't mind.

i'm sure we'll never really know, but i'm increasingly wondering how much of this mess is rooted in the closure of the surestart centres.

that idea is something you've invented - so that you can complain about it. better public transport doesn't solve *all* our transport needs, but it's close. (added benefit - better public transport results in fewer people driving, easing congestion a bit)

here's the great news - more or less everything that we need to do to reduce our contribution to climate change is stuff we need to be doing anyway. better public transport, home insulation programs, more nuclear power, more renewables, etc. where's the hardship? (China are the world leader on increasing their supply of renewable power)

expected to complete a rigorous certification process later this year. it seems they already have a dozen (?) orders/reservations.

we live in a very benign climate - here in Britain. it's rarely too cold/hot/dry/wet to live and grow crops. If it gets a bit warmer/colder/wetter/drier, we could be forgiven for not really noticing. hundreds of millions (billions?) of people are living more exposed lives, in places closer to the limits of viability. yeah, sure, humans can adapt. but when the driver is climate change, that adaptation will means hundreds of millions of people moving somewhere less hostile to farming/agriculture.

these still aren't real.

which evidence is dubious - and why do you doubt it? and i'm sure you wouldn't mind sharing a few examples of these many rules and restrictions...?

there's lots of commercial sense. South Yorkshire has a strong (and growing !) reputation for high value manufacturing/engineering. An active airport would make an excellent hub for relevant businesses/activity.

i have asthma, i've on the same low dose of cheap meds for decades now, it's fine. But every 6 months my prescriptions are frozen, and only made available again after i've had a 'review'. so i've got to phone up for a review - which takes 45 mins to get through. then i wait, for my prescriptions to unfreeze, which doesn't happen, so i have to phone up again to remind them, another 45mins. then i can request the medication, except they forget to send it to the pharmacy. so another 45mins on the phone to remind them to send the order to the pharmacy. anyone keeping count? ... 135mins on the phone to order a couple of inhalers. every 6 months. (i did try and order a few more, to stock up, but they didn't like that - froze my prescription, and made me come in for another review) so the next time you're waiting on the phone, remember that they're forcing people to phone up. - they clearly want a long phone queue. maybe in the hope it'll put people off - reducing overall demand. i dare say this probably works...

we've more or less closed down all of the ... conventional (?) routes/methods.

fantastic, just reading those names made my stomach rumble! i've not really got much of an idea of what to expect from 'Homeland' or 'Baity', but i intend to correct that as soon as possible!

to be fair, this isn't a terrible idea. something in excess of 25% of UK farmland is used for occasional sheep grazing. (ie. it's grass) we don't really eat much lamb, we don't really wear much wool, those breeds that tolerate our climate really aren't very productive, sheep farming is incredibly hard work, =Sheep farmers lose money on every sheep. They only survive due to subsidies. Why on earth should we continue paying farmers to maintain massively high numbers of largely unwanted sheep? - especially considering the huge cost of endlessly building more and more flood defences for cities and towns downstream that have to deal with flooding that results from our uplands over-grazed inability to hold back water? if we're going to pay farmers to do something, why not include tree planting ? - it'll reduce flooding, increase habitat for wildlife, etc. it's one of those ideas that pays for itself, without any real drawbacks. we're getting dangerously close to potential *actual* benefit of leaving the EU - we don't have to negotiate with 27 other countries when we want to change an out-dated, and damaging, system of farming subsidies.

i'll watch with interest how the few remaining Brexit-fans will spin this : Food import charges from the EU - due to Brexit.

Imagine driving along an A road that gives way (stops) at every side road... You say "between Brighton and Lewes", which sounds great, but this cycle route doesn't reach either Brighton or Lewes. Instead, it runs between Firle, and the outskirts of Polegate - with little more than a few small villages in-between. It's not a significant route, we can't expect significant numbers to use it. . And as predicted, it's shared use, and bi-directional, and too narrow. . It doesn't go anywhere, and it's not built to the recognised standards.

without looking (i promise!) - i'm going to make a few predictions... it doesn't connect to anything. anyone using it has to give way to side roads. it's shared space. it's bi-directional. it's too narrow for the 2 points above to work.

here's the point : build cycle lanes properly, and you don't need to worry about 'forcing' people to use them, they just will. build them badly* (which is clearly our chosen standard), and people will, for the most part, just choose to drive instead. (*or not build them at all)