Unbelievable Jeff

If it helps people to judge him more, he is apparently a ****ing díck.

Of course, but if they fancied her, they're single, she's single, she looks more than old enough, then why can't they without a fear of the consequences? It seems your gripe is more with promiscuity in society...

I don't think it's to those extremes though, although I am sure *some* girls lie about their age to sleep with older men.

Behave, if a girl looks 18, is in a club, and says she is 18 then although guilty of sleeping with an under 16 year old, the intent is not there, and they'd be found not guilty.

If he based it on this forum I think he would be far harsher...

Classic bull**** from the Echo. The paper is just the ****tiest rag.

Have to wait and a see...I am interested as to how they met though - if in a club or similar and she lied he may get away with it - guess it will be a case of if he really believed she was 16 or over.

Ah, but Batman said money. I have no doubt about the hours, stress levels etc, but that's not what was said.

So you think we'd be overstuffed with British doctors and nurses if it weren't for these agencies then? Also where have I said they are lacking 'British ethics'? The issue is they have British ethics, ie get paid more for part time work in an industry where a public run health service is struggling, and that when staff are overworked mistakes happen and people DIE. I would have thought people that went into this industry went into it to help people, based on the thought that they'd work for the NHS. Instead, they decide they don't want to work for the NHS as they can earn the same money doing half the work. All I have deduced from what you have said is that agency workers are lazy and greedy.

Of course they don't do it for free, that's a ridiculous notion. So what you're saying now is we have an excess of supply for British doctors and nurses?

It's there, less work for more money. You say that nurses would prefer to work half the time for the same money. Fine if you work in IT or construction or whatever, but when these people trained I am sure they wanted to help people, as you don't go into nursing for the money. Therefore, half the time they're sat at home not helping people cos they're greedy.

So how do we explain the last 30 years of declining numbers then? As a doctor, I hope they would be more intelligent than to let the student tax put them off. If not I'm not sure they should be going into medicine.

Yep, so what do you propose the NHS do, pay these moneygrabbers £75 an hour? Or import. There is a shortage due to classic British ethics and morals, less work for more money. Effectively they're trying to hold the NHS to ransom, in an industry in which if the job isn't done properly, people die.

The debt thing just isn't true, we haven't been training enough doctors for the last 30 year.

And why won't they work for the NHS? If people want an NHS, without any private intervintervention, then we have to pay sustainable wages. The fact that some people are lazy and have no morals when it comes to an industry that is there to help people then thats up to them, and we'll have to import people to do their jobs.

You can't force people to go into an industry they don't want to.

Which means their is still an undersupply of British doctors. If demand is higher than supply, whether that be private or NHS, then there is still a lack of supply.

Doctor's aren't underpaid though, certainly not in relative terms.

Does it make any difference that he looks about 12?

How's your leg btw? Everything go alright?

Course they would, education costs a **** load of money.

We have had a significant lack of medical personnel for years, it's not the £9k per year that's suddenly putting people off being doctor's. If we weren't able to import our medical staff the NHS would have gone ******** up a long time ago.

Sounds wholly plausible to me.

This.

I'm only responding to what you posted: "Even then Erwin was a fine attacking midfielder who scored a lot of goals, even Sammy lee weighed in with a few in his time (not sure about Jan Kleitenburg whose footballing career was cut short by injury, don't know where he used to play). Really don't think an attacking coach is a real need, considering Ronald as a defensive coach is really a bit of an insult." So by that you are saying we don't need an attacking coach, because we have Ronald, and some players who scored some goals in their career? I reckon that it is bull**** to say that just because someone had an eye for goal and could hit the ball well that it means he'd be a good attacking coach, especially when that player spent most of his time at CB. It's like having George Boyd as a defensive coach because he averages top 10 in tackles this season.