trousers

Indeed. The job of government is to shape the economy to encourage companies to start-up, expand and flourish, thus creating the job opportunity conditions you describe. It is also the job of the government to ensure that there aren't any incentives for people to avoid "going out to work unassisted"

Just tried booking myself onto one of Herbie's remaining tours but all sold out

I hesitated before posting as I knew that would be the first response. Yes, of course that's what another section of society does too. But just because criminals are obliged to help out in the community why does that make it wrong for another section of society to do the same? There are plenty of 'non-criminals' who do community work voluntarily already. I thought "whataboutery" was frowned upon on here anyway.... I'd tend to agree with that specific example.

It's a "good idea" that people who are out of work do something "useful" with their time rather than doing nothing. I tend to agree that placing unemployed people into private sector posts is open to abuse and therefore not the best solution. I would rather see people who are claiming out of work benefits doing something useful 'in the community', such as helping out with meals on wheels or panting the local scout hut etc. I know some people do this sort of thing voluntarily anyway but the concept of people doing something to 'earn' their unemployment benefit is a sound concept. In my opinion of course.

So it's not the scheme itself that was deemed "illegal", rather the way it was implemented? Yet another case of a "good idea, poor execution" from the Tories...

Edit: duplicate post (just for a change on this forum...)

*takes cover*

Pants, my arse

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10413005/UK-confidence-rises-to-six-year-high-as-shoppers-become-more-savvy.html

2217: FULL-TIME EXTRA-TIME - Birmingham 4-4 Stoke So, it will be penalties at St Andrew's. Birmingham have played with 10 men since half-time of normal time. They were 3-1 down with five minutes of the 90 to go, and then went 4-3 down early in extra-time. Now they have a chance of winning this shoot-out. - - - Updated - - - 1-0 Stoke Birmingham miss their first penalty 2-0 Stoke 2-1 Stoke 3-1 Stoke 3-2 Stoke Stoke win 4-2 on pens

21:37 GOAL- Birmingham 3-3 Stoke - Peter Lovenkrands ​Wow. Some comeback this for Birmingham. Extra-time beckons after Peter Lovenkrands scores his second goal in quick succession after coming off the bench, again ghosting into the area to get on the end of a cross. FULL-TIME - Birmingham 3-3 Stoke We will indeed need extra-time to separate the two teams at St Andrew's. They are huddled on the pitch as I write this. Stoke looked home and dry too. Enter Peter Lovenkrands, who only came on after 79 minutes. Stoke City 29 Sørensen 05 Muniesa 12 Wilson 08 Palacios 17 Shawcross 04 Huth 07 Pennant (Shea - 76' Booked ) 15 N'Zonzi 10 Arnautovic Booked (Ireland - 71' ) 25 Crouch (Jones - 81' ) 24 Assaidi GOAL - Birmingham 3-4 Stoke - Kenwyne Jones (93 mins) Extra-time has only just started, and Stoke are back in front. Kenwyne Jones, on as a sub for Peter Crouch, goes round Colin Doyle and slots home. Looks like Birmingham have got to mount ANOTHER comeback. 2152: Birmingham 3-4 Stoke A subdued atmosphere at St Andrew's, where it seems Birmingham have run out of steam as we near the end of the first period of extra time. Can Blues boss Lee Clark say anything to rally his troops at the break? 2153: GREAT SAVE! - Birmingham 3-4 Stoke Almost a fifth for Stoke as Oussama Assaidi runs clear but Colin Doyle sticks out an arm to turn his shot round the post. Mind you, the way this game has been going, Stoke will need eight goals before they are safe. 2200: HALF-TIME OF EXTRA-TIME- Birmingham 3-4 Stoke Stoke lead thanks to that Kenwyne Jones goal, which came three minutes into extra-time. The Blues have not created anything of note since.

I'm going for 5 pages on this one. Got £10 on 3-1 at BetFair

Good question. If I come up with an answer you'll be first to know

I've gone to type 'Wanyama' on several occasions but stopped short as I know people would come back with "but we've got Cork". As much as I like Cork as a player I don't see him as a like-for-like replacement for Wanyama. Like you, I think our defensive record this season is as much to do with Wanyama as it is down to Lovren and Boruc, perhaps more so.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/may/18/tottenham-fulham-europa-league

I come on this forum to read repetitive over-reactionary personal jibes, not this rational and pragmatic nonsense thank you very much! FFS.

Everything Cortese's done over the last 4 years or so has been laced with 'arrogance' (aka 'extreme confidence in doing things 'the Southampton way'). What makes you think he would act 'normally' when it comes to considering whether we play in Europe's second rate competition? If Cortese is thinking 'champions league qualification' (which I believe he is) then there's every chance playing in the Europa league could hinder our chances of qualifying for the champions league in the same season. Of course, it could have the opposite effect...who knows... I know this is the sort of 'pie in the sky' post that gets the thought police juices flowing on here, but all I'm saying is that I would not be surprised in the slightest if Cortese stuck two fingers up at the Europa League if we were to qualify. It equally wouldn't surprise me if he embraced it.

If there's one thing I've learned as a Saints fan over the last 5 years its to expect the unexpected.

I always use the 'timeline' view rather than the 'forums' view P.s. And a red and white colour theme... Not too keen on the blue one...

If Manager of the Month is awarded purely on the best set of results, why do they bother coming up with a short list?