aintforever

You can get promoted spending peanuts, but if "you don't want to contemplate not getting promoted THIS season" and your team is currently the 9th best in the division, you have to throw the cheque book at it to stand a decent chance.

What's the point of going to uni when you can get 44K a year by driving a ****ing train. When I was 10 I actually wanted to be a train driver as well, ****ing ****s, **** off.

We just need to spend sh!t loads of money in January, that's the only way to stand a good chance of promotion. 2 or 3 players who walk into the side.

I can't believe he has been locked up, the charges against him are daft. So so corrupt.

I earn decent money so you don't have to feel sorry for me, my mates who earn more all have their own companies. The elitist thing is fine, I agree, just don't think it should be decided by wealth.

So would I. All i know is that if I had just finished my A levels now, I wouldn't go to uni. When I went it was free, I received a grant, my parents helped with the rent, I also had a job - and I still ended up in debt. After 3 years of living like a scumbag and hard work I got a good degree and now earn decent money doing a job I enjoy but many of my mates who didn't go to uni still earn more. It was hard enough spending 3 years living like a tramp watching my mates earn decent cash, but to do so knowing I would be upto 50K more in debt than them at the end of it - no way. Don't forget being a student you now have the fees debt piled on top of your living costs debt (real debt), overdrafts (which the bank call in), credit cards ect

I think you will find they qualify for a grant at the moment, I'm not sure. Give me an example...

It's still a debt regardless of how you pay it back, and either students will be put off or they won't, you seem to contradict yourself.

So companies including Pricewaterhouse Coopers, Deloitte and KPMG know students who can't afford it will be put off going to Uni, yet the same retards on here think no one will be put off with a 50K debt.

I was merely responding to the title of the thread, I'm sorry it it came across as condescending, I really don't have anything against you uneducated types.

My mate from Uni did film studies and we all took the ****, now he's earning **** loads making TV programmes. Not really an interesting fact but shows how not all film graduates work in the film industry. I wonder how big the UK philosophy industry is, maybe we should scrap all those courses? Universities are about furthering knowledge, they are not job training schemes. I think the less educated on here fail to understand that concept.

We could still win the league easily, the important thing is to spend some cash in January. Adkins has had to work with another manager's team judge him after he's had a chance to mould his own.

I think there's no point dicking about, we need to spend some serious cash in January if "we don't want to contemplate not getting promoted".

It's already been scientifically proven that liberals are more intelligent, it makes sense if you think about it (go on, give it go)... A study by Dr Kanazawa, published in Social Science Quarterly in March, based on the same data showed that young adults who identified themselves as "very liberal" had an average IQ of 106 while those who identified themselves as "very conservative" had an average IQ of 95. "The ability to think and reason endowed our ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for which they did not have innate solutions. As a result, more intelligent people are more likely to recognise and understand such novel entities and situations than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations are preferences, values, and lifestyles," Dr Kanazawa said. Humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends. Being liberal and caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals.

According to Wikipedia again the country with the 2nd best standard of living is Australia who have a minority labor government. That's the first and second best countries with left wing governments, case closed I think.

According to Wikipedia, Norway has the highest standard of living and it is run by The Red-Green Coalition which is a centre-left coalition of Norwegian parties, formed by the Labour (Ap), the Socialist Left Party (SV), and the Centre Party. Another one to the left...

Left wing for America though, and that's where they govern.

left wing government though, you try again...

Isn't Barrak Obama considered left wing in the US - I nominate the USA. Now you give me a more sucessfull right wing country....

You can have left wing Capitalist countries, no one on here is saying we should be like communist Russia - like Dune and his little nazi brain would have you think.

Name a successful facist country then Dune...

i would get rid of Scheiderlin and bring in a new midfielder, bring in a replacement for Puncheon and probably offload Connolly and get two new strikers.

If it was written somewhere by someone it must be true. That's how it works, if you write something it instantly becomes a fact.

Why are you banging as if I was there, I've never been on a march, part of civil disobedience or been in a union in my life. I don't consider myself right or left wing. I think you have got your wires crossed somewhere. All I was saying was that there is only so much you can know about what went on by watching the TV. For what it's worth I think this government will bring itself down, the Lib Dem's natural alliances lie with Labour, they will have to jump ship before the next election to save their party IMO.

You have just proved my point you muppet - watching the news shows you what is happening but doesn't show why or put it in any context.