ECCOnoob

Really? Does it really? Really really say that??? Think your cult needs to drag itself into the 21st century. Some of us dont live our lives under the faux rulings of a mythical sky being. Even for those who do, the reality right here right now on this spinning globe (however one chooses to think it was created) is that some Homosapiens are homosexuals. If gay relationships are "against god" then why the hell did he/she/it create them.

.....and you will have to find something else to blame than the simplistic response of blaming the Tory government and their cuts. I ask you again. What do you think throwing money at the Police would have done to change this crime. You have criminals who will not engaged in any so called Community Policing tactic. You have Police who cannot stop and search, cannot profile and track people, cannot monitor people's internet movements, cannot spy on people's phone calls and texts and cannot (no matter how much money you throw at it) be in every single part of the world at evey single second of the day. You have a society who recoil in horror as soon as the words surveillance and police security are mentioned. You have human rights campaigners, lobbyists and lawyers ready to block any form of random stop and search, screening or monitoring and a wider public who would whine and moan if every single time they entered a public venue they had to have a security search and bag check. Jesus, there is enough moaning goes off when people have to do it in an airport. So, I ask again. How would the police budget increase and a million and 1 extra officers out on the streets magically fix it. You can argue all you want, but you are not going to change my position that upbringing has a lot of impact on a person's behaviour. Parents out working just aint gonna cut it. Both my parents work as did a huge majority of others. They worked in the days before flexible hours, work from home, shared parental leave and a 1001 other benefits modern day parents have. Them being out at work didn't stop me and the rest of my siblings being raised properly.

You too clearly need to read my post. Why dont you address the issues I have raised. What exactly do you think throwing more money at the police would have done to change this incident? What more do you think the police would have done to prevent it given the numerous restrictions I have listed. YES I do blame the parents. They have a major if not the biggest influence over their own brats. That is why I say they are also a CONTRIBUTOR to this clear social problem. They have the responsibility for upbringing and they have the control. If they fail in their duties and their offspawn turns into a thuggish lout carrying weapons and contributing to violence on the streets who else do you think should be blamed??

Why dont you read my post. PARENTS That is the key word. I am not blaming the internet. Its a tool. A very useful one. A knife is also a tool. A very useful one. Its control, boundaries, discipline and PARENTS which are factors in an offspring's attitude, social behaviour and outlook. Enough with the easy excuse.. Waaaa its all the government's fault. Waaa its out of touch tories. It isnt.

Its all easier said than done. Its all well and good getting bobbies on the beat engaging with the community roots but the online social media world is where most of these yoof are. The little fetuses carrying their knives and stabbing each other are hardly likely to be the kind of people who will willing engage in community interactions with their local plod. Their world is a life glued to their smartphone and plugged into the Matrix. That is where the target needs to be focussed and a big majority of it starts in the home under the responsibility of thier own parents. Blame the police cuts, blame the lack of bobbies on the beat, blame the government is just a cop out (no pun intended). PARENTS needs to step up to the plate too. Give your little dahling a smart phone at age 8, hook them up to the internet, get them on social media and then what... Sit down and let Nanny Google take care of the rest. Where is the boundaries. Where is the discipline. Where is the control. Who is asking the questions. Who are they interacting with? What are they signing up to? Who are they networked to? What are they watching and listening to? Who do they hang around with? What activities do they seem to be drawn towards? What are they wearing? Who are their heros? Where do they go? The above are all obvious signs which can be monitored, picked up upon and dealt with long before they fall into the wrong crowd. I am sure lots will disagree but in my opinion PARENTS (or often complete lack of proper parenting) are just as much a contributor to this social problem as any austerity. For all the protesting, the fact is clear. Incident happened, police investigated, arrest made 12 hours later. Really, what more do people expect the police to have done? Without madatory stop and search on every citizen (which do gooders protest about) Without mandatory security scanning on entry to every public place (which do gooders would protest about) Without police powers for advance observations and profile building of every potential criminal element (which the human rights brigade would implode about) Without mandatory screening, listening and observing of every internet process, transaction, text message and phone recording upon every profiled and suspected citizen (which the privacy brigade would seek to block) .....what exactly would have stopped this incident from happening?? From the inital reports we seem to know that fight started, fight out of control, person used weapon, person fatally injured. From the current reports this does not seem to be some random attack on an innocent victim minding their own business. When people fight, there is a high chance they get hurt. Stabbed maybe wholly extreme, but that all goes onto the points I raise above.

So they should. I really must be missing something here. When I was going to school back in the early 90s I used to TAKE the basics like pens, pencils, rulers, compass, calculator, note books. School trips and outside school activities all had a charge. My mum used to give me a cheque each Monday morning to pay for the school dinners. Every Easter and Christmas my parents would contribute to the collections/bake sales/charity drives. The School would be running bi annual fundraising galas, sponsored challenges or events to pay for say a new mini bus, computers or infrastructure. What I seem to read now is people moaning that such are not provided and horror of horror they have to PAY for their own children's resources. Instead of taking a good look at themsleves its just all the Government's fault init. Children are a financial burden and a great responsibility. Always was and always will be that way. Some parents need to realise that. Do we really have a school funding crisis or do we have parents unreasonably expecting the state to provide all and everything? Do we really have schools so destitute that they cannot afford books or is it just financial incompetence by their heads and administrators?

WOW! Some serious hard evidence there Anna. A four year old report about an "opinion" of an unnamed head of an unnamed bank and two blog posts from a couple of think tank/campaign organisations. Hardly verified factual evidence is it. A 10 second google you would have at least been able to find the 2018 results from the reguarly quoted Tax Justice Network campaign group and the UK is not even in the top 20. In fact we are 23rd in the list with places such as Canada, Japan, Germany, the Netherlands and the USA well above us. https://www.financialsecrecyindex.com/introduction/fsi-2018-results Even taking all those figures I have provided they still simply boil down to the minipulated statistics of a campaign group with their own clear agenda to show whatever they want. Some of their narrative about how the uk's ranking does not reflect its true major influence over the tax avoidance world blah blah blah is just absolute desprate nonsense. They must have wet their knickers when Mossack Fonseca closed.

What do you mean "properly". This happens all the time with companies and people choose to pay for what they choose is right for them. Often it is more than just core product. Its more about convenience, choice, quality, service, style, ingredients. I concede that a "brand" in reality means nothing when you take a little look beneath the surface to note who owns what. I think a lot of people would be very very surprised. People who choose to stay in Ibis Budget hotels over a Mercure Hotel are actually giving money to the same "company". People who choose to eat in cheap and cheerful Toby Carvery whilst others splash out and go to a Miller and Carter steakhouse but they are still giving money to the same organisation. Trendies buy bottles of Vitamin Water because they dont like to think what goes into all those sugar filled cola drinks, but whoops wouldn't you know it, its all the same company - as is, by the way, kia-ora and Roses cordial. As for Nestle well.... there are just too many to list.

People seem to be talking about Chapeltown Asda like if its some new thing plonked in the middle of the village and ruining the local shops. Asda has been there nearly 40 years so I hardly think it can be sole blame for the recent downward spiral of trade in the local businesses. At the time of its building the traffic, housing positions, footfall and purposes were very different. Its building allowed for some of the 'local' shops to exist by creating additonal units on its lower floors and also brought the railway station platforms closer to said shops, the old station being much further away from the shopping streets. Whilst I would agree that to modern day eyes the access to car park is not ideal, there is very little else they could do. Better to have cars going up Suffolk Road than trying to get HGVs up there! Where else is would it be possible to put the loading bays? As for direct access to the store - I doubt its that easy to cut a hole in the roof and install escalators/lifts without losing major amounts of what is already tiny sales floor space. Old fashioned as it may be, the store was built in a different era before the modern day layouts, entrances, moving walkways and giant trolley size lifts customers would expect these days. As far as the original design was concerned there is sufficient pedestrian access between shops and the store through its long ramp or its entrance from the Southbound rail platform or its stairs which lead straight down to behind the Lloyds Bank. Given there are houses and businesses all over one side and a mainline railway track on the other, there is very little they can do to change it. TBH, I was surprised it kept open at all once Parsons Cross Asda and Morrisons opened. Maybe one day they will do another purpose built one out at Throncliffe or some empty land near High Green. Risk is, that would draw more people away from the Market and 'local' shops.

That's just the sort of moronic response as people who say that women who dont want to be sexually harrassed should stop wearing short skirts and low cut tops. Ask yourself why should the victim of abuse keep off social media. What exactly have they done wrong to deserve being self barred from a very useful and ever increasingly popular form of communication and media. Dont you perhaps think that it is the bullying scumbags dishing out abuse who should be the ones penalised???? As for your police officer acquaintance who is "sick of" dealing with all these reported incidents, well perhaps they need to have a reconsider about whether they are suitable carrying on doing such a job. Hate crime is still a crime. Online Bullying is still bullying. Online Harrassment is still harrassment. Its completely irrelevant whether a victim is absued by means of verbal, physical, handwritten, online posting or a message stamped on the back of a elephant's backside. Its still a crime and it needs to be treated as such. Just like the huge drop in house robberies being replaced with online fraud, now harrassment has moved on from verbal abuse face to face to keyboard warriors spouting their bile from behind their sticky keyboards in their dank basements. As the world changes the Police need to evolve with it. We too as society needs to evolve with it and start taking these incidents seriously. Its not just about being called nasty names on facebook. Do a little research before spouting off and you might realise that.

If computers really went belly up, with respect, "your" generation would be able to do diddly squat with your mental arithmetic and problem solving. Lets not pretend that this is some new concept and there is some generation of society in the dark about this brave new world. Its nonsense. Computers have been touching our lives and moreover controlling them far far longer than just the default assumption of 90s and 00s generation of yoof. Whether you like to admit it, all those allegedly superior educated OAPs are already part of that world too. It was a computer that cracked the codes in WWII. It was a computer that kept the calls between the US and UK encrypted and secure from Natzi listening posts. It was computers that have run our telephone system for over half a century. Direct dialing has been in existance since 1958 when most of our "OAPs" were still children. It was computers who controlled our power, water and utilities since post war. Self driving computer controlled train operations were running as early as the 1960s. It was computers that were running our offices, calculating our wages, totalling up our bank transactions, sorting and collating data, sending and recieving messages, engineering our infrastructure, testing our science, keeping hospitals functioning and keeping planes in the sky. Just because they were not the familiar visual of a monitor and mouse does not make such equipment less of a "computer" nor less of an influence on "your" generation's life than our modern day PCs and smartphones have on our generation. Even if we take what is the default perception of the "digital age" that is not a new thing either. Home computers have now been mainstream for over 35 years, mobile phones for nearly 30 years. Even Google is now 20 years old with the first apple Iphone now 11 years old. That's half a lifetime for some of our OAP generation and a significant number of them will have highly likely used or owned some part of that digital technology for the latter years of their working lives let alone still use such technology post retirement. Whether its a good or bad thing that such power is in the hands of the machines is a debate for another time. But, lets be very clear here. If the red button was hit, old or young generations would ALL be just as stuffed. No amount of perceived superiority in maths and problem solving will change that.

What a strange stance to take. IMO more fool them. As you should know Doctorates can apply to medical, research, accademia, sciences, engineering or even law. If I was in such position, just because the masses automatically assume Dr = medical it would not stop me from using my well earned titlement nor dumb down my qualification to suit other people's assumptions. If people can pay £9.99 on the internet and become a Lord I certainly see no reason why any qualified profession would choose to ignore their applicable title.

We did. At great length including JRF's very dubious definition of "poverty" and their fag packet mathematics on what THEY deem to be some minimum income level that everyone should demand. However, it never stops the regulars on there beating that same old drum. Round and round it goes. JRF publish some report, the papers snip out the jucy bits and publish those and then is trickles down to this forum where posters snip out the headline figures only and state it as fact to suit their agenda. YES. Some people are struggling more than others. YES. Some people earn little whilst others earn a lot..... but "POVERTY". I am not convinced. Spilldig's earlier comment is absolutely valid. Take a look around at what the majority of the population are doing. Even the so called lowest earners. Take a look around your average shopping mall or superstore on a weekend. They are not all high rollers with their gucci store cards and jimmy choos. Take a look around your sports stadia, cinemas, restaurants, pubs and clubs. They are not all balllers popping the champagne corks. Look at the traffic. Look at the trains. All packed with people going about their day. Someone is putting money in the tills and its not all about those nasty disgusting evil "rich" people. Said before and will say again. People need to pull their head out and take a look what real poverty is. This country is nowhere close. With the extreme exceptions of the phyically and mentally disabled through no fault of their own, nobody has a right to scream the word "poverty". Those to do need to take a long hard look at thieir own failures. We have an NHS. We have a minimum wage set in law. We have a universal welfare benefits system for all citizens. We have statutory instruments to provide a bed to sleep in and a roof over someone's head for the night even if they are at their most desprate state. Countries around the world (including some of the richest and most westernised) could only dream of that level of assistance.

What a load of crap. "Look as thought they could mug you or start on you" Look like but didnt right? Think that says more about you than them. Maybe you had better not ever leave the house. The bogeyman might get you.

Says who?? Once again you see everything as black and white. Once again you do the over simplistic reactionary response. Once again you never think about the bigger picture. Not every "beggar" on the street is destitute and has no money. Not every "beggar" on the street is homeless. Not every "beggar" needs to and should be there. ---------- Post added 03-09-2018 at 13:07 ---------- Could not agree more.

The BBC nicely sums it up.... "...Rather than using customer deposits as the source of funds to lend out to homeowners, it borrowed in the international money markets. When the sub-prime crisis hit America, those markets took fright, and stopped lending to anything that looked like it might be over-exposed to the housing market. Northern Rock was an obvious first casualty..." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41229513

His deluded followers certainly think he is. Man could murder puppies in front of infants and his merry band would support him. Absolute cult. Its the Trump effect happening on our own shores. Get enough drinking the kool-aid, push the biased media agenda hard and fast, spin spin, twist information, bring in the 'alterntive facts' and before you know it, you become the chosen one. The one who can never do wrong in the eyes of your disciples.

Another angle to the story... https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12105572 Verbal abuse of an official? Refusal to comply with instructions? Breaking rules of filming an official in a secured area? Causing a scene? She can whine and moan that it was all about the alcohol, i aint so sure. Either way the authorities have taken a PR savvy decision and she is released and back now. Maybe Dr Entitment-Syndrome will learn a lesson from this.... Or maybe she will keep playing victim and get a few more ££££ from the papers.

They dont necessarilly "deem it illegal". Its not as black and white as that. The Foreign Office has this advice on their website and I have highlighted a key point.... Liquor licences are not available to non-residents, but it is possible for tourists and visitors to buy and drink alcohol in licensed venues, such as hotels, restaurants and clubs. However, you should be aware that it is a punishable offence under UAE law to drink or be under the influence of alcohol in public. British nationals have been arrested and charged under this law, often in cases where they have come to the attention of the police for a related offence or matter, such as disorderly or offensive behaviour. I am not saying that this woman fell into that category. BUT what we do know is that she was stopped, she allegedly had invalid visa documents, she was told that she would have to return, she committed another obvious offence by filming an immigration official, she was asked about alcohol consumption and she said something (albeit we dont know what) in reply to that question. Maybe the offical and authorities in question were totally in the wrong by arresting her. Maybe the airline is totally in the wrong by serving alcohol knowing the likely risks faced by customers at the destination. Maybe she is unjustly persecuted for her innocent actions. On the other hand, maybe she had far more than "one" drink that she claims. Maybe she was a bit too vocal in her reaction to being told of her visa issues. Maybe she didn't quietly accept that she was forced to return. Maybe there was heated exchanges with officials which are the real cause for her arrest. Like I said earlier, there is far more to this story than is being said. Why this woman? Why this specific incident? We cannot ignore that plenty of other people fly in and out of dubai every day without problem. Emirates have done and still serve drinks on their planes every flight seemingly without incident. Something has happened which is clearly not being said.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/10/woman-held-in-dubai-with-daughter-for-drinking-glass-of-wine-on-flight "...She was taken into custody after an immigration official questioned her about her visa and asked if she had consumed alcohol..." "....After landing, she was questioned by an immigration official, who said her visa was invalid and she must return to London immediately, the group said..." I too think there is a lot more to this story than is being said. Its certainly not as black and white as being "arrested for having a drink" # Its claimed that they were initially denied food but further in the article it says that "...The food [we were given] smelled like rotting garbage and neither Bibi or I could face trying it..." Its claimed that they initially had no toilet access and her daughter had to use the floor of the cell but further in the article it states that "...she was told to clean toilets and floors..." Something does not add up.

Errm. Millennials have been around since the early 80s. By the time the financial crisis happened in 2007 many of them were in their 30s and already "established". I repeat. They have had better financial support, better education opportunities, better work opportunities, better healthcare, better freedoms in the early stages of their lives than any of the baby boomers in the 50s + 60s would have dreamed of. "Born the brunt" my backside. What I will concede is that the changes in expectations has had some dramatic effect. That I feel has been primarilly caused by the pressure selling of university attendance and changing it from being a thought out and considered ability/job benefit decision to what is seen by most of the younger generation these days as some routine right of passage.

Oh for hevens sake Anna get a grip with the basics. You know full well why funeral expenses have increased over the years just like everything else. Wages form part of a businesses' overheads. Increase one element and it has an impact on everything else. That then has an impact on the overall costs of the goods or service supplied which in turn has an impact on the base costs of goods and services that other businesses are required to purchase to make / sell / provide their own product and services.... ...that then has an impact on the total price us consumers have to pay for the goods and service we want to purchase. We consumers bemoan that we are not getting as much for our money and demand pay rises.... ...round and round and round it goes. As for millenials being "angry" - For what exactly? The majority of millenials have had a better start in life with better financial support, benefits, healthcare, education, lifestyle choices, freedoms, scope to travel and advances in technology that those nasty evil greedy Baby Boomers could only dream of. I think the real queston to be asked is what exactly has changed? Is it really a dramatic distopian vision of even increasing "hardship" against our poor old young folk OR is it simply a disease of entitlement syndrome with a side dose of "unrealistic expectations" The answers are far more complex than what will be set out in your (very carefully selected) opinion piece. Its a very old saying that the only thing guaranteed in life is that you are going to die. Sensible people plan for it and prepare for it. Its that issue of taking responsibility again.

Insult? Since when has a 3.26% pay increase been insulting. Its a damn sight more than many other people would get. Think you need to get in the real world.

Yes I agree it was very depressing. Very depressing to see so many people failing to take any responsibility for themselves. Very depressing to see so many grown adults looking for excuses and blaming everyone and anything for their own failures. Very depressing that another emotive and sensationalised programme has been made desprately trying to find some tenuous link between self inflicted conditions and poor lifestyle choices and so called "poverty". What a paradox. in the third world poverty is people starving to death with no money and no food. 50 years ago families deemed on the "breadline" were people who hardly had enough scraps in the pantry to prepare a meal of bread and dripping. Cut to 2018 and "poverty" is allegedly someone who manages to buy 50 cigs a day, 2 bottles of spirts and enough food for them to be declared clinically obese. Not buying it. Too may other factors involved creating this world of alleged "poverty" than has been shown in this tabloid level woe is me broadcast.

Thank you. 3 pages in and we finally have the source. This one then..... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5995205/Households-spent-900-earned-2017.html