Whitey Grandad

Perhaps he's worried what level bail will be fixed at?

Worth his place, although not yet up to last season's standards. Perhaps we expect too much from him, but I'm sure that as the games progress he will get back more to the Rickie we know and love.

I saw that. He seemed very pleased with himself (rightly so) because he stayed showing the 'advantage' signal for quit a time after the goal. Yes, a good performance, always in control, quite words where necessary. Worth an email to the FA? We're quick enough to complain when they are rubbish.

What happened with Swindon Town? Weren't they effectively relegated two divisions for financial irregularities?

There's no tea in Yorkshire. Not unless you spell it Yortshire.

Watford Gap. Northerners have no sense of humour. Not like us, anyway.

Was Leicester the match that was almost called off and they were sweeping water down the drains right up to kick-off?

It's the employee that gets the money. What would happen if the government (we taxpayers) did not pay this money? The workers would stay at home and expect their 'benefits' anyway. This is the part that is wrong. I agree, it is crazy to tax people with one hand and then give them money back from the State with the other. The same applies to all these so-called 'tax-credits'.

Leicester? Oh, Many Happy Returns.

But what about exports? You may be willing to pay more but the rest of the world isn't.

You are making the assumption that there is a great big profit margin on the product. The taxpayer is paying for people to stay at home and sit on their backsides. Who is receiving a subsidy here? The converse of your argument is more cogent. The combination of the minimum wage and the fact that it is more beneficial to stay at home on benefits means that prospective employers cannot find workers willing to do their work.

Has it moved?

Yes, I saw that. It struck me as an early example of spin doctoring, and who can blame them?. There are lots of place names ending in 'by' and they all tend to be in the northern 'Danelaw' part of England, such as Rugby, Whitby. We in the south have the saxon 'burgh's. (Grimsby is, of course, in Lincolnshire and not Yorkshire but is far enough oop north to count as being virtually the same thing) (This offering is intended solely to stimulate discussion and no offence is meant either by accident or otherwise)

This is an absolutely crazy suggestion. How can that possibly be a subsidy? The employer does not get the money. I was talking about investing in roads, rail, regional airports, bridges, and not discouraging small businesses by taxing them when they invest in new machinery. The extra money spent on the Health Service has almost all been wasted. And before anybody starts, you do not subsidise an activity by not taxing it. You might just as well say that the government is subsidising the air that you breathe by not charging you for it.

Doesn't 'Grimsby' originate from 'devil's village'? (no offence meant)

Samhain seems right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween Apparently it's a celtic thing and the name is from Old Irish and means 'summers end'. Most of these festivals seem to be christian conversions of old pagan festivities. e.g Easter for Eostre, (or Astarte/Ishtar which go back to the Babylonians), and Christ was almost certainly not born on the 25th December. Historically there have been periods of 11 days or so of feasting at the end of the year. http://romanology.blogspot.com/

I don't use them. I find that having grapes lowered into my mouth by a Nubian slave whilst reclining on a couch in my triclinium far more appealing, to be honest.

A parisian colleague of mine once said: "I like italians. They're like a frenchman but with a sense of humour".

Yorkshire? Pah! They're welcome to it. Not enough trees.

Reasonable debate is perfectly ok. I cannot understand why some people find it necessary to resort to pointless name-calling, the miserable little sh!ts. (only joking!)

I'm not wishing to get into a political slanging match because as far as I'm concerned they are al pretty much as bad as each other, but the gap between 'rich' and 'poor' has become wider since Tony Blair came to power.

This is a fair point, but there has to be a proper balance. What the previous lot did wrong was to pay subsidies and call it 'investment'. 'Investment' in Health, 'investment' in schools, 'investment' in the Police, do me a favour! If a fraction of the money that was poured down the gullets of the public services had been spent on our infrastructure and manufacturing base then at least we would have had something long-lasting and worthwhile for our money.

Not at all, this is fundamental. There is no point producing goods at a price that will not sell. The punters will merely buy those goods from a cheaper supplier. Forcing an employer to pay a higher wage will increase the price of the products and lead to a drop in sales, and in many cases it only takes a small price rise to lead to a complete loss of market.

My friend Keith and I used to receive funny looks in Toronto when we ate hamburgers with a knife and fork. I can't think why. We even left the knife and fork in the 12 o'clock position when we had finished eating.

But the employer does not receive the money, and if they had to pay more there would not be a job anyway. You are not subsidising the employer, you (we) are subsidising the individual person.