spilldig

Yes, I am pleased to say that the shoe situation has got better over the last 10 years or so. It did seem at one point to be nothing but trainers.

Agreed. It is a fact that you have to laugh, otherwise you would cry.

Well as I understand it we are not allowed to name retailers on the forum in a derogatory way, so I can't name and shame, as it were, but unless the situation has changed very recently. I mean from about two years ago. For a long time, many years in fact, I have noticed in American films that things like coats always seem to be far better than ours. Some very good clothes also in places like China, Japan, Brazil. To give a perfect example, about ten years ago my wife wanted one of those blue denim coats with a white fur collar that was fashionable in the usa. Could we get one here. You bet we couldn,t not even on line. On holiday in New York you could get everything you wanted virtually in the first store you went in. I do think in some respects things are better than they were about ten years ago, namelly with shoes. It had got to a point where you could not get mens shoes, just trainers. In fact shops stopped saying they sold shoes at one point, because they were all trainers they started advertising footwear.

A C Consultancy one does put Denmark at number one.

Obviously you have different standards. For instance, coats are a good example, even the ones at a couple of hundred pounds are shaped like upside down binliners.

R I P.

We have had two flyers through the door both from the greens, and none others, but the second one was already too late for anyone who voted by post, as we did.

I have looked at another one which also says similar to that one.

I agree. If Debenhams does go you will have to travel to London or Manchester to get descent clothes. In the past with a favourable exchange rate we have even shopped in New York to get descent clothes at about one eigth the price here. though not so much worth it these days. As to John Lewis I could not see a coat I liked there in spite of the prices.

I have no idea, but if The Netherlands can do it then we should be able to as well, if priorities were right.

That's the way I interpreted it, but anyway let's have a look about this business of bankrupting the country. Well perhaps if they had thier priorities right. Croatia give 129% of earnings, so if the same was applied here every pensioner would get £33,862 per year. The Netherlands and Turkey are ext at over 100%, then India, Portugal,Italy Austria,Argentina , Hungary, Bulgaria,luxombourg, Slovakia,China, Cyprus, Spain,Denmark,Brazil,Iceland,Israel,France,Lithuania,European u,nion 28 countries,Belgium,Indonesia Saudi Arabia,Finland.Oecd, Czech Republic,LatviaEstonia,Slovenia , Sweden,Greece Canada,Rumania,Germany,USA,Norway Korea,Switzerland,New zealand,Australia,Ireland,Malta,Chile,Japan,Russia,Poland Mexico, and then, in a disgusting 49th place comes the UK on 29%. As i say, the government should be ashamed.

In post number 33 .

So, on that basis, a working person who is single would receive less pay than a working person with a family ? Any working person who is fortunate enough to own their property should receive less pay for the same job as a co-worker who rents their property ? As for free bus passes, with strings attached , the government should hang their heads in shame for treating elderly people like second class citizens rather than paying a state pension commensurate with a civilized country.

I'm sure that if OAP's got £328 per week they wouldn't mind paying the same stoppages as everyone else.