badgerx16

Obviously not been "stalked" enough recently. ( And that's me well into double figures )

Able bodied and capable people should wherever possible be better off in work rather than out of it. This can never be an absolute as geographical and economic factors impact on such things as wage levels and housing costs, but in the main benefits should be a means to lift people up to a minimum level of income, rather than facilitating a non-productive "alternative" lifestyle.

I have 9 on the first page.

This from the Torygraph last year; "Generous welfare payments allow some London households to cash in, analysis suggests A family living on benefits in London can be financially better off than a household earning £70,000 a year, analysis suggests. Increasingly generous welfare payments mean non-working families are able to claim tens of thousands of pounds of Universal Credit, Council Tax Support and Child Benefit, and benefit from discounted social housing, while many working families must pay full-rate rent and income tax. Analysis by the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) and The Telegraph shows that the combined value of these benefits and discounted rent in some locations can add up to more than £50,000 – more than a sole earner on £70,000 would get after income tax and National Insurance. While this will apply in only a few places, it illustrates the size of the benefits packet on offer. " ( Highlighting by me ) I think using London as an example in any such discussion distorts the argument. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/families-benefits-better-off-earning-70k-london/

Conglomerate

Trying to generate revenue trhough speeding fines.

M K Dons, Swansea, Southampton : there is a certain symmetry to the defensive records of RM teams.

It's to stop the players surreptitiously applying it to one side of the ball to aid in inducing reverse swing.

This is a very important point. The EHCR is an important foundation of the UK's Civil Rights legislation, not just a few bits of paper that clever lawyers use to keep migrants from being moved on.

"Forty minutes into Rangers' mortifying night at Ibrox, Djeidi Gassama won a corner at the Broomloan Stand end and his manager, Russell Martin, applauded on the sideline. The sound of one man clapping was deafening. Rangers trailed 3-0 at the time, there had been multiple outbreaks of booing and scores of people had already headed home. When Ibrox turns on its own like this, there's a temptation to put in the earplugs and don the crash helmet. It ain't pretty. It's as visceral as it gets; loud and vicious, words coming like blades, capable of cutting their target in half. A corner might have done it for the manager, but it wasn't doing it for the masses.".….…..... "Could Rangers afford to give up so many chances to Brugge, a club that has sold around £70m worth of talent this summer but an outfit that retains enough slick operators to punish slapstick defending? No, came the answer after three minutes when Nasser Djiga - back to life after playing dead in the build-up to Alloa's first goal in the League Cup last weekend - downed tools and let Romeo Vermant away from him to brilliantly lob Jack Butland."....... "No, came the answer again after seven minutes when Jorne Spileers, untroubled by a blue jersey in his midst, side-footed home from a corner. These were the kinds of moments that Rangers survived in previous games. Not now." "And no came the answer again after 20 minutes when Rangers failed with two attempts to clear their box, a hesitancy and incompetence that saw Brandon Michele rifle a third past Butland. At that point, the only prayers that could have been offered up on Rangers' behalf would have given thanks to the man above that this team was not going any further in this Champions League. " https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cwyekw4x1gno

Australia

Fuck knows. Putin may not have got the regime change he wanted, but he has enough to spin a victory and justification for murdering tens of thousands of Ukrainians and of his own people.

Perhaps, but true.

So Putin's aggression is rewarded.

Not for Vlad at any rate, Donnie's been played. Looks like you backed the winner.

Item 3 of Article 257 of U.S. Law No. 115-44 Quote: "This is U.S. policy – to never recognize the illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation or the separation of any part of Ukrainian territory through the use of military force." This law was signed in 2017 by U.S. President Donald Trump.

On the commentary - "He won't mind if he fails his GCSEs after getting Rory Burns out".

HappyOldGit

Comprehensive.

Delivery

Brave Israeli settlers battling terrorist farmers https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cewy88jle0eo

Trump only cares about being the 'peace maker'. If Ukraine don't agree to what he proposes then he will walk away and say "at least I tried". Don't forget, he made the peace 'deal' with the Taliban in Afghanistan - look how that worked out. He also sponsored the January ceasefire between Israel and HAMAS. Perhaps he is hoping for 'third time lucky'?

I get the feeling that what has been implied in the media is "The Deal"; In return for agreeing to cease hostilities and freeze things on the current front lines, Russia gets to keep Crimea and gains that small part of Donetsk it does not currently occupy. Ukraine gets "security guarantees", ( which will hopefully prove worthwhile this time around ), but cannot join NATO. I don't think Putin will have agreed to give up anything he currently controls. Marco Rubio has said that "both sides must make concessions, if only one side does then that is surrender". I suspect that Russia's 'concession' is to agree to the security guarantees - Would it really indicate 'surrender' if Russia were to agree to withdraw from some of the occupied territories ?