Whitey Grandad

We shall have to get used to it, this is what it is going to be like from now on no matter who is in office.

What would happen if we did?

The lino has a flag but the ref has the whistle.

If mining coal was so wonderful why doesn't anybody raise some money and start digging again?

I've been out of touch for a couple of weeks. Has anything happened?

Some irony in there. If the protesters didn't protest it might cost less? Edit: Snap!

Mmm, I'm agreeing with everybody. Should I be worried?

As Barry Humphries said, 'The trouble with doner kebabs is that you don't know who the donor was'.

I asked the question because many on here have been advocating building houses and lending them to the poor, which is what Clinton encouraged. We have limited finances available to stimulate the economy and putting them into the property market is not necessarily a brilliant idea. Economists will be debating for decades the causes of the credit crunch and will will not come to an agreed answer. To blame any one sector of the economy is very simplistic but there are enough candidates for everybody to find a target for their personal prejudices. (Incidentally, a major part of the problem in America was that american mortgage rates can only be negotiated downwards)

Very true.

That's because she didn't.

You won't be doing the west coast of spain from Calais in two days unless you drive non-stop through the nights. We've been towing the caravan down to the Costa Brava or Perpignan for over twenty years and the travel time from Ouistreham/Le Havre has dropped from 17 to 12 hours for about 690 miles but you are looking at about the same time again, at least, I would say. Calais to Paris is three hours on the road. I would recommend choosing somewhere a bit nearer.

Why is the keeper going for the ball with his hands in that photo?

He's just jealous.

Now now, did I say that it was all down to one person? My question was to raise a serious debating point, not to stir up prejudices.

She turned the country around and I, for one, am grateful.

If she can't avoid tripping over a kerb then what the hell is she doing in the police?

Certainly it's no profit, no dividends. Salary is another matter.

That's not the case in every company. You cannot just increase your wage bill and expect that your customers will pay more for your products. There are many companies that are struggling to make any sort of profit at all, whose directors and shareholders have had no returns for several years. Would you drive those out of business and put their employees back on the state to support?

But it costs less to give them benefits than it does to employ them in meaningless jobs. The answer, of course, is to reduce the amount that is paid out in benefits.

Nobody committed any crime, it was all legal. The whole collapse started in America after Clinton had persuaded the banks to give mortgages to poor people who couldn't keep up the payments when times got tough. Was he wrong?

I would prefer to choose how to invest my earnings (personal and business) myself rather than let the government take it off me and pour it down the scuppers of the public services. I need to invest in new products and designs and new sales efforts but if the government takes my moneys then there's not enough left for all that.

I don't know anybody who relies on inherited money.

Raising the top rate from 40% to 50% resulted in less revenue. Raising above 50% would only reduce it even more.

Yup, they were all in it together. Labour's obsession with the City to the exclusion of all the other sectors of the economy was always bound to end in tears.