barny_100

http://i.imgur.com/2F64i.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16239693 And befitting the man he was I think this is appropriate:

Still as good. Had a starter and main recently and it was spot on. I had chicken with a nice simple tomato/peppers/garlic sauce and it was a very good portion size and tasty with it.

Really? And I want a money tree for my garden! They will find a way of avoiding the full independence issue as even they know they can't afford it...I think. If not it will be a rude awakening. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100010146/scotland-would-be-as-bust-as-iceland-if-it-had-been-independent/

That pic going round is a photoshop no official release yet. However do you really think they would claim something that is so easily disproved? Only if you are stupid. Oh and buy an atlas, no ocean for thousands of miles indeed!

This is just a case of people not reading stories they find uncomfortable.

You didn't read the story did you? This isn't their own time. They are being paid by the taxpayer but instead of doing their job they work full time for their Union. Normally under the pretence of "Liason". I'm sorry but any liaison required between employer and Union can be done within normal working hours. A weekly meeting or whatever is perfectly normal and proper, this however is subsidising Unions at the taxpayers expense. A "Nurse" who doesn't Nurse More examples in here (PDF)

This story is about the public sector which is not a business by any definition. Your conflating of the two leads me to believe you don't know about business. Your argument of it saving HR costs isn't based on any facts. I'm fairly sure Sheffield council has just as many people in their HR department as they would anyway. The reps "loyalty" is evidently to their union who's aims are often very narrow and relate to the well-being/conditions of their members. That's fine as long as their activities are self funded. The taxpayer (AKA Customer) shouldn't have to pay so that Union members can spend their time lobbying for better pay and conditions that in turn lead to higher costs for taxpayers!

This has been pointed out before in the right thinking blogosphere but Guido Fawkes digging into a "Nurse" who spends her time getting paid to rabble rouse for her Union has now led to further investigations. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1381739/Hundreds-union-reps-bankrolled-YOUR-council-tax.html Funny thing is the Unions keep saying you can't cut public spending without affecting services. Seems this is the textbook example of how you can!

Arafat refused a deal on more than one occasion because he didn't want it/realised he couldn't sell it to his people as it involved recognising the right of the state of Israel to exist. To pin the blame for the lack of peace squarely on Israel is laughable. Yeh the settlements issue is messy to put it mildly (FWIW I don't agree with building beyond '67 borders) but to say "if you like to kill them at will"? Seriously? There was me thinking if the Israelis really hated the Palestinians they could have carried out an absolute genocide a long time ago. F-16's and F-15's make mincemeat of rocket firers (Over 6 thousand in last 10 years) and stone throwers if it's made a free fire zone. Thus their restraint is to be admired.

If, fairly big if, you do it should be on the basis of the seller paying for Indemnity Insurance. http://www.conveyancingexplained.co.uk/buying-a-house-advice/indemnity-insurance-policy-%E2%80%93-do-you-need-it/

Repeat the truth after me: Government spending is still rising. The reality is the "cuts" are too often being done in blanket fashion rather than by selected areas and this is counter productive in terms of maintaining support for the policy of even slowly balancing the budget. The worst aspect is they are somehow managing to get bad press for "massive cuts" while at the same time spending more. I've rapidly lost any faith I had in Mr Cameron's competency.

Why would that be a worry? Unless you are very childish and only deal in "UKIP are nutters" insults I fail to see anything to worry about. Mild hope for me, By-Elections don't mean much often but it's still nice to see. IMO they are the most rational party on offer for anyone who is seriously informed about the major issues facing this country or what's left of it. That's not to say I agree with every action or policy but the main planks of policy are a hit in my book.

Yeh the billions of English are killing the globe *Awaits link to site showing how 1 English person uses the resources of x number of Africans as if that's an argument in itself* It goes without saying it's a personal choice, and the last thing that should be done for the wrong reasons, but I do find the whole militant anti-children thing rather warped. In the end for me if decent people don't try and pass on something through their children what will be left?

Sounds like common sense but in typical government (Of any colour) style it's not as advertised. The Register points out the records are not "deleted" they are being changed to include a "disregard" flag. Quite different.