ECCOnoob

Spot on.

Possibly right. But at least he is actually an elected politician and doing an actual job. Greta is just playing at being one.

What the hell are you talking about. This is not some competition. It is a discussion forum. I don't win a prize. I could not give a flying fig whether people think I'm right or not. I have a strong opinion and I'm setting out. You can either take the time to give some counterpoint or simply move on I really don't care..

You can make all the silly jokes you want. I could not give a toss if you think of me as some grumpy old man. I have a different opinion which you can take or leave. I don't see Greta as some glory child, beacon of hope that we should all be admiring.... I see her as some completely fake, deluded, hypocritical individual caught in the Cult of celebrity.

Deluded. There are plenty of environmental protesters and active campaigners, they don't get the fan mail and loved up media attention. There are plenty of far more educated and qualified individuals who could give some real practical solutions but they dont get a smidgen of the access to high-profile politicians that she gets. She is a celebrity cult. Pushed along by her equally egotistical and influential parents and don't you believe for a second she is not reaping the rewards and benefits of her fame. Just where exactly do you think she is getting all this access for these multi-million-pound yachts to "greenly" take her around the world.... Just where is the money coming from for this uneducated school dropout to be travelling around preaching to the converted..... How exactly is she the one that gets all of this high-profile access when there are millions of other people campaigning and protesting. It's not by accident. It is a fickle world of celebrity and I hope to god hers will burn out soon, even more now she no longer has the cutesy child sthick to carry her.

Well you better go tell the NHS who describe how this thing whatever you want to define it as requires clinical diagnosis or perhaps go argue with the Oxford English Dictionary which defines it as a mental disorder in its first sentence. It is still completely irrelevant to her complete failure in answering a simple question from a journalist at a press conference that she chose to be on the panel of.

Fine. Disorder then. Condition then. Disability then. Call it whatever you want. Regardless of whatever definition, the point is that she cannot be using it as some pathetic excuse for her failure to answer a simple question. She was at a bloody press conference. She chose to go to this event and play politician. She reaps the rewards of her fame and notoriety by getting access to these very high-profile figures and events. She chooses to put herself front and centre. She's the one who chooses to preach to the masses and claim that she is the voice of the unheard. She failed. It was an embarrassment. It was a clear insight into her naivety, fragility, delusion and worthlessness. I have some sympathy for the girl, she clearly has been manipulated throughout her childhood by her equally delusional, egotistical and hysterical parents and clearly has a warped view of the realities of the world and her status within it . However, it is blatantly obvious to all that as soon as you choose to enter the public profile you better be prepared and toughen up.

Horse crap. Illness is just an excuse. She chooses to be there. So she should be expected get prepared. As for the celebrity culture and fame, you must be joking. It's what her and the entire family thrive on. She's been pushed into there by her parents. She's a money making machine for the family. She's 18 years old so could drop it all tomorrow but clearly doesn't. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen as they say. She wants to play politician - well it's blindingly obvious as you're sitting on a panel in front of lots of journalists they will ask you questions. Time for her to grow up.

I don't think people are denying it Anna. Westernised countries like ourselves have been "doing things" for years. The issue of climate change has been on the agenda for decades before that. However it is always going to be weighed up against the practical realities. Morons like Greta and the insulate roadblocking mob may sit their preaching but as soon as they are pushed to give any genuine realistic practical solution about how to solve the problem they suddenly fall silent, storm off or get busted for being hypocrites. The fact is that Mouthpieces like Greta don't have any solutions. They just thrive on disrupting, shouting, attention seeking and enjoying the fame that comes with it. They preach and preach and preach but when questions are asked about how exactly they expect things to happen, suddenly it's pass the buck onto somebody else or ridiculous over dramatic statements like the old "how dare you" debarcle. The YouTube video posted above proves how worthless she and all of her type are. Just what exactly is she doing there? How on Earth did this uneducated, manipulated, disturbed mouthpiece getting involved on such a panel in the first place? What exactly does she bring to the table? She sat there playing it Mr Big but as soon as a simple question about what exactly "her messages is" she's stunned into silence, desperately trying to to get help from the real Grown Ups and expecting her chaperones and minders to protect her from those nasty question asking journalists. Like I said earlier, the cutesy child is gone. She's becoming a grown adult and it will not be long before more and more of her deluded fan girls and fanboys see right through her.

Equally then are you saying that no victim of sexual crimes can't in fact turn out to be a completely lying gold digging slapper. For every high-profile celebrity "brought down" as you say, there are cases of many a so called victim bringing opportunistic nuisance lawsuits, without any evidence against the rich and powerful thinking them to be a soft target for easy money. It works both ways. The facts are simple. Currently, this woman has brought a rather dubious civil compensation lawsuit, through a convoluted and dubious jurisdiction system, decades after the alleged event, with little to no evidence, against a high-profile accused who has never ever been charged (let alone convicted) of any crime. You can throw around all the silly speculation and rumours and jokes you want. The basic facts don't change. Innocent until proven otherwise. Courts of Law dispense Justice not morons on Twitter or the desperate hacks producing their bile and venom for the Daily Mail.

Good. I would much rather be part of the ambitious, elevated, progressive, forward-thinking "this lot" than part of the backward thinking, rose-tinted, delusional, inverse snobbery filled "your lot" Is there an audience for it? Big city is very different from small town. Unlike many of the other locations mentioned, the city already has dedicated antiques, second-hand, vintage shops scattered around including a whole row of them in a long-standing area at London Road. There are even dedicated places springing up in Kelham Island so question has to be asked if there is any business case for further saturation by including it around the markets when there is already supply in better and more permanent locations.

What are you talking about. From West bar roundabout, up the hill to the traffic lights turn left and boom you are on Rockingham Street... From Charter Row, follow the road up the back of the Moor until you reach the traffic lights, turn left and boom you are on Rockingham Street... If you're seeking to get to the surface car parks in the middle then yes there is an extra step of following the one way loops around either Carver Street or Division Street turning left or right as appropriate to the relevant part of Rockingham Street you require. But so what? Just takes a little thought and glancing at a map. But hardly "completely inaccessible" is it. You can try and dismiss comparisons with other cities all you like, but the simple fact is when people are moaning and making ridiculous pathetic comments about allegedly how bad Sheffield is and how impossible it is to drive around comparisons ARE relevant. It is completely common for a competent driver to expect all cities to have some form of traffic control or restriction. To make out like Sheffield is some complete anomaly which is just totally impossible for anyone to understand and completely unreasonable for any driver to deal with is just stupid.

I'm sorry but I'm just not buying it. Sheffield market is also compact and a mix of indoor and outdoor, old and new. I really not sure how far back you are going in time with these tales of a Harry Edwards juggling his crockery but face facts. The old market was a dump. Rundown, disgusting, breeding ground for vagrancy and in the totally wrong end of town when it was obvious that the new retail areas was going to be at The Moor end in line with the overall redevelopment of the city. I can't deny the handful of empty stalls and don't have any figures to compare what Barnsley market has in terms of occupancy level - but all I can say from my own experience and observations is when I was in on Tuesday and Friday lunchtime this week Moor Market was buzzing and you could barely get a seat in the the cafes area which was absolutely packed. "Just awful" really seems like a complete overreaction to me. Perhaps it's another excuse for reminiscing about the so-called good old days. Sheffielders don't like change.

I am at a loss to understand what these ideas are that are so vastly different. What exactly makes places like Barnsley and Doncaster allegedly so much better? Let's take Barnsley for example, so they have a newish indoor mixed goods Market Hall, located on its primary shopping street in the centre of town with a small number of outdoor more temporary market stalls on the precinct. Last time I looked at the Moor Market in Sheffield that is exactly the same scenario, Only difference was our new improved Market being built several years earlier. That pretty much goes with the rest of the alleged "better ideas" that keep being thrown around. Newly renovated tidier shopping precinct....tick Newly built increased car parking... tick Newly built and cleaner Market Hall...tick Newly built additional shop units...tick Newly built leisure and cinema facility...tick Newly built additional restaurant/cafes...tick Quick look at the time frames and and I'd think it pretty obvious who is leading and who is following. Whose to say it's not Barnsley etc copying our ideas.

Yes but this is the point. Who you're thinking would be more suitable, could wildly vary from the man down the road or the woman on the bus or the tweenager glued to their Instagram account whilst propping up the nearest burger bar. Like I said, be careful what you wish for. The monarchy was abolished once before and how did that turn out again...

God almighty what a horrible thought. President Piers Morgan, President 'Nige' Farage, President Kerry Katona..... basically anyone who morons think best out of some popularity contest. We have all seen multiple times how democracy doesn't always lead to the best results. There are plenty on here bellyaching right now about the electorate winning choice of Prime Minister or the results of a public decision made over 5 years ago on whether we leave our nearest and largest trading Bloc. There is a lot to be said about the stability of a monarchy and, despite what the critics say, they still have a great power, influence, respect and prestige on the world stage that some other elected heads of state could only dream of. Looking at some of the alternatives around the world I'm personally quite happy to stay as we are.

Yes president Boris Johnson. How would you like that?

Blimey, is it that time of year again? I'd be more shocked the day they are not considering strike action.

What rubbish. Difficult.... yes. Takes a bit of planning... yes. May take longer than expected.... yes. But a competent driver would expect the same sort of challenges in every big city. Let's not get silly and pretend that one ways, restricted access and priority traffic is some unique phononema to Sheffield and totally beyond comprehension.

Not at all. I am looking through them.

No I don't think that simplistically.

Ok Mr pedantic I'm talking free as the same as ours is supposably "free". I was trying to find comparisons away from Europe to something that closer aligns our own model given that apparently France and Germany are so much different and so much better. I was trying to find some independent source similar to our own model to see whether they have the same levels of hysterical and over dramatised press, constant crisises, government criticism and deluded fan worship who think the service can do your wrong. Nice to see things from a different angle sometimes.

That 30% doesn't sound too far from our own health system. Unless you have strict exemptions most of us pay for our own prescriptions, dentistry and optical.

As long as the the treatment for the end patients remains free or heavily subsidised source, most people don't really care whether the back-end machine is wholly operated by the NHS or subcontract to a private company. Government controlled operations run by bullying unions, dinosaur civil servants and stubborn institutionalised staff are hardly exactly a shining example either. Still doesn't detract from the fact that despite the continual wailing and hysteria from left-wing mouthpieces and certain aspects of the press, this whole notion of "our NHS" disappearing has been thrown about for the last 40 years totally unfounded. It's even worse come election time when the hysteria level goes off the chart. People wonder why the public don't become engaged. Absolute boy who cried wolf syndrome, the NHS has always been in Crisis, the NHS is always on underfunded, the NHS is always understaffed, the NHS is always short of resources, the NHS is always on the brink of collapse, the NHS is always involved in some scandal, the NHS it's always involved in some negligence, the NHS is always involved in a data leak, the NHS is always under threat........allegedly. Just Google how far back the same dramatic repeated headlines have been and keep coming up month after month year after year. blah blah. heard it all before. I certainly don't know the German system to give feasible comparators but what about something on the other side of the pond. Canada has free healthcare and yet in the minimal amount of international press I read doesn't seem to have half of the crisis or drama that are Healthcare system has. What lessons can we be learning from that side. How does a cost compare, how does funding compare. Maybe it's time we really need to look outside of constantly what Europe is doing.

Seems a bit of an overreaction. Put another way, that means that 80% of the staff are medical or health functions staff. You do realise that doctors and nurses don't sit typing out letters or go round fetching and carrying supplies or stand there cooking the meals. Such work doesn't happen by some magical pixie that nips in overnight. Just like any massive organisation it needs teams of back office and operational staff to run it. In turn, those teams of staff need management to organise and direct it. It really doesn't seem like such a shocking high figure to me. I would have thought it about right if not slightly less than expected.