[Archived] Extra ! Extra ! Read All About It !

[VinjayV4]

I think it was William Bancroft that arranged that.

Quite certain I saw a programme from the late 70's with pics of her visiting Ewood. Whether Bancroft gave her the honorary position then I'm not sure but he was chairman in 77-78. Seen other suggestions elsewhere (probably online) that Fox did. This is from Mick Pickup's site.

Chairman: WH Bancroft; Vice-Chairman: DT Keighley.

Directors: AL Fryars; WI Hubert; D Brown; W Fox and Dr M Jeffries. Secretary: JW Howarth and Manager: JM Smith.

Speaking of honorary positions wasn't Bancroft stripped of his "presidency" about 10 years ago? Because he said something the main execs didn't like?

How come nobody seems to refer to the "main men" prior to the 70's? The chairman at some point in the 60's for instance was a guy called D.Hull I know absolutely zero else about. Surely there was a main spokesperson (well maybe the manager was) not just a bunch of faceless directors? When people mention the 1960's FA Cup Final ticket fiasco there's no particular individuals mentioned just "the board". Before Jack took over I've seen the club referred to as "community owned." Presumably the directors owned the largest stakes while ex directors (like Hubert who made a significant profit by selling shares when Jack took over I believe) and fans made up the rest. I know the board in the 70's and 80's were not exactly pumping money into the club. Though there must have been times they put a little bit in to help keep things afloat.

Not sure if there's any truth in this but didn't the board try to resist Jack's offers for a while? Its unusual too that Jack's name seems unspoken of (at Rovers because those who recognised him must have known he was wealthy even before he sold Walkersteel) other than Clayton and Whelan saying they knew him. Before the materials were donated for the Riverside (he didn't pay for the WHOLE lot there was a fund at the time too) its really surprising there's seemingly no note of other donations as part of fans fundraisers, etc. I know he was extremely busy running Walkersteel (and couldn't attend every match) but its just surprising...and obviously its certainly not a criticism! Unless he made small contributions in the 70's and early 80's which were completely private knowledge? (Therefore nobody on here would probably know about it)

[Al]

Why criticise the government for foreign aid when they just cut taxes for those who didn't need it, costing the country 500 billion?

I find criticism of giving to the poorest people sickening when we all know what some businesses in this country get away with, but that's just me.

There is something wrong with the logic of somebody who would prefer to send money abroad rather than cut taxes. The distribution of the money saved is an entirely different argument.

[Al]

Why would anybody think the way forward is "less" mouths to feed? Surely the way forward is portion money and service better so 99% of the worlds wealth isn't owned by 1%.

.

That will not change until 99% of the population produce the world's wealth not 1%. Nor should it or there is no incentive to produce wealth if it is taken from them.

[ABBEY]

Have you heard of the Geneva Convention?

Sanctioned indiscriminate attacks by Western States on Civilians has happened once in recent history - the bombing campaigns of WWII. That was in the face of a genuine existential threat to Western Europe and Pacific Rim states from a Japan and Nazi Germany who had killed hundreds of thousands of people.

What you are advocating is the murder of families and neighbours of terrorists merely for being proximite, all justified on the basis of very low numbers of people actually being killed in terrorist attacks in the West. Far more people have been killed in the US by school shootings than muslim terrorists since 2001.

We are losing our grip on sanity here.

Losing a grip ? Tell that to the victims families who have been thrown off buildings , hung , beheaded , raped , forced to fight ,

Isis isn't a case of losing grip it's a case of fighting to to save our freedom .

Anyone who goes to Syria then their family should be booted out of uk and anyone guilty of any terrorism in going to fight for the devil should be hung on there return for treason .

The middle class isn't being eroded in emerging economies - in fact, China, India, Brazil, Russia and southeast Asian countries have a ballooning middle class that will be the biggest spending sector in the global economy over the next few decades. The mc in the west is certainly being squeezed by stagnant wages over the past 20 years or so.

Trump and Farage are populists, not radicals. Corbyn comes across as a voice of reason compared to the strident tones of those two.

Corbyn can kiss my arse with his IRA support and voting against banning al quaida from entering uk a few years back . Total tosser . I won't be voting for anything to do with Tories or Corbin

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Why would anybody think the way forward is "less" mouths to feed? Surely the way forward is portion money and service better so 99% of the worlds wealth isn't owned by 1%.

The "rich aren't taxed" argument SHOULD be failing but unfortunately it holds true. Look at Amazon and Google, then remind yourself of how those with a spare bedroom had to pay more. Corporations like the foreign banks make absolutely billions in this country, but pay a pittance in levy.

Why be so obsessed about right and left? Wouldnt democracy work better if it is about people choosing what they think? Rather than what colour tie they have on? We all have views that cross the centre line.

IS in full retreat? It's not a war on an army, how could you think that? Their intentions are terror, not to amass land or develop. They are mostly unorganised as a group but work in smaller cells, dropping bombs just gives their chief brainwashes more rhetoric. You do realise that those bombs which cost millions each (of pounds yoda, what did you think I meant? Republic credits?) have made little if no difference to stemming attacks in the west? It's made no difference to people fleeing borders and it's certainly not helped to clean up country completly destroyed by their own Government in Syria.

Well overpopulation has been discussed at length before and I don't expect to convince anyone the second time round, but in my opinion long-term it will lead at best to total societal collapse and at worst to an unhabitable planet and the death of every species on it. This:

is not sustainable, its insanity.

Whether the rich are taxed or not isn't the argument, its whether taxing them more would benefit the poor or not. As I said, Sturgeon has just decided it doesn't by backing down on the 50p top tax rate. Maybe more could be done on tax evasion/avoidance, corporation tax or what the top tax rate could be, but every time its squeezed we risk companies and the wealthy moving abroad, which is worse for everyone.

Course its a war on an army. IS have an army that have been fighting the Iraq government, Syria government, Kurds and rebels for years now. They're just an army that bomb civilians indiscriminately in non-war zones as well as wage conventional combat. The attacks in the west are a miniscule part of the overall damage by IS and our bombs have driven them back from the gates of Baghdad and control over the vast majority of Syria, to a point where they hold few key cities. And long-term it will make a difference to people fleeing the borders because we're defeating the thing that's making them flee. That is of course if you actually think they're fleeing, its a curious phenomenon that involves men running from death and leaving their wives and kids right where they are. Basically the exact opposite of what the people of this country did in our darkest hours.

[JBiz]

You are aware of the burden currently being placed on our natural resources as it is and the consequences of unchecked population growth?

I'd love to hear your explanation of just how this wealth redistribution is going to be implemented

So all those fellas running round armed to the teeth and killing people don't constitute a para military force?

So you are unaware that the stated aim of Daesh is to establish a "caliphate" (islamic state)?

My Mum used to tell me to "Engage my brain before sticking my mouth in gear"

Good advice that maybe you should heed?

I would've retorted to your pitiful content but what's the point if you are going to stoop to such juvenile comments.

I'm aware of what certain clerics have "said" in newspapers, but the reality is this is not an army in the sense of the word. One of the main differences? When we drop bombs we grow their numbers as opposed to the intention

There is something wrong with the logic of somebody who would prefer to send money abroad rather than cut taxes. The distribution of the money saved is an entirely different argument.

Cut taxes to me? No, I pay more because I earn an average wage. Those on the threshold above, and those businesses making BILLIONS in this country are getting a free ride.

That will not change until 99% of the population produce the world's wealth not 1%. Nor should it or there is no incentive to produce wealth if it is taken from them.

Produce the worlds wealth? I don't follow..

1% have always benefitted from hard work of the 99%. It never has changed. Whilst this carries on, people still criticise giving money or aid to those who desperately need it. All the while ignoring the cause.

[JBiz]

Well overpopulation has been discussed at length before and I don't expect to convince anyone the second time round, but in my opinion long-term it will lead at best to total societal collapse and at worst to an unhabitable planet and the death of every species on it. This:

is not sustainable, its insanity.

Whether the rich are taxed or not isn't the argument, its whether taxing them more would benefit the poor or not. As I said, Sturgeon has just decided it doesn't by backing down on the 50p top tax rate. Maybe more could be done on tax evasion/avoidance, corporation tax or what the top tax rate could be, but every time its squeezed we risk companies and the wealthy moving abroad, which is worse for everyone.

Course its a war on an army. IS have an army that have been fighting the Iraq government, Syria government, Kurds and rebels for years now. They're just an army that bomb civilians indiscriminately in non-war zones as well as wage conventional combat. The attacks in the west are a miniscule part of the overall damage by IS and our bombs have driven them back from the gates of Baghdad and control over the vast majority of Syria, to a point where they hold few key cities. And long-term it will make a difference to people fleeing the borders because we're defeating the thing that's making them flee. That is of course if you actually think they're fleeing, its a curious phenomenon that involves men running from death and leaving their wives and kids right where they are. Basically the exact opposite of what the people of this country did in our darkest hours.

Companies moving abroad will only effect us if they are actually contributing. I appreciate that some will pay less levy a but employ over here, but you are ignoring the facts in the public domain that many high earning companies simply pay nothing through being "based" in Malta, Switzerland, Gibraltar etc etc. That is worse for everyone!

Nobody can say for sure what IS have achieved or what there army is like, but to think they are the only middle eastern issue - fallacy. Assad has just as many deaths on his hands, and the impact of the Kurdish issues, Turkish border control, the constant support from the Arabic states and essentially our "ignorance" of the impact the saudis have had.... Conveniently as we are "friends"...

[yoda]

Quite certain I saw a programme from the late 70's with pics of her visiting Ewood. Whether Bancroft gave her the honorary position then I'm not sure but he was chairman in 77-78. Seen other suggestions elsewhere (probably online) that Fox did. This is from Mick Pickup's site.

Chairman: WH Bancroft; Vice-Chairman: DT Keighley.

Directors: AL Fryars; WI Hubert; D Brown; W Fox and Dr M Jeffries. Secretary: JW Howarth and Manager: JM Smith.

Speaking of honorary positions wasn't Bancroft stripped of his "presidency" about 10 years ago? Because he said something the main execs didn't like?

How come nobody seems to refer to the "main men" prior to the 70's? The chairman at some point in the 60's for instance was a guy called D.Hull I know absolutely zero else about. Surely there was a main spokesperson (well maybe the manager was) not just a bunch of faceless directors? When people mention the 1960's FA Cup Final ticket fiasco there's no particular individuals mentioned just "the board". Before Jack took over I've seen the club referred to as "community owned." Presumably the directors owned the largest stakes while ex directors (like Hubert who made a significant profit by selling shares when Jack took over I believe) and fans made up the rest. I know the board in the 70's and 80's were not exactly pumping money into the club. Though there must have been times they put a little bit in to help keep things afloat.

Not sure if there's any truth in this but didn't the board try to resist Jack's offers for a while? Its unusual too that Jack's name seems unspoken of (at Rovers because those who recognised him must have known he was wealthy even before he sold Walkersteel) other than Clayton and Whelan saying they knew him. Before the materials were donated for the Riverside (he didn't pay for the WHOLE lot there was a fund at the time too) its really surprising there's seemingly no note of other donations as part of fans fundraisers, etc. I know he was extremely busy running Walkersteel (and couldn't attend every match) but its just surprising...and obviously its certainly not a criticism! Unless he made small contributions in the 70's and early 80's which were completely private knowledge? (Therefore nobody on here would probably know about it)

It was a constant critisism of the club back then that the "board" did not communicate very well with the fans.

The club was privately owned.

There was resistance yes, some thought Jack was a barrow boy, hence my questioning you about him being a Tory.

Contribution were made by other parties back then (and earlier) to help the club, most notable I think was the contribution by fans and a supporters club toward the covering of the Blackburn End.

[VinjayV4]

It was a constant critisism of the club back then that the "board" did not communicate very well with the fans.

The club was privately owned.

There was resistance yes, some thought Jack was a barrow boy, hence my questioning you about him being a Tory.

Contribution were made by other parties back then (and earlier) to help the club, most notable I think was the contribution by fans and a supporters club toward the covering of the Blackburn End.

I've heard that was paid for from the 1960 FA Cup run. Plus by that point the "minimum wage" hadn't completely crippled clubs in unfortunate locations.

I think someone (maybe Den) used the term "community owned". Are you sure it was privately owned thought a few fans were allowed to keep their shares. Heard Hubert was one who profited from the sale though he wasn't on the board by that point. Assume Fox had a stake and wasn't a guy called Edgar Pickering financially involved? Remember seeing an article from 1983 about a financial crisis (I would imagine that was the lowest it got because in 1985 Rovers made a profit and seemed more stable in the late 80's) and talk about Pickering (who I think was based on the Isle of Man) possibly coming up with some money.

Wonder if some of the directors were afraid Jack might go totally public with his interest. Some fans had heard rumors in the months leading up to the takeover though. OOJW for instance said he was aware.

Thatcher retaining her honorary position after Jack took over is the clearest indication of all.

Barrow boy that's ironic considering Fox actually sold vegetables/fruit didn't he? That is if he's one of the disruptive voices perhaps they just thought Jack's plans seemed so unbelievable they couldn't be true. Even when he had already made his huge contribution towards building the Riverside Stand. More likely though I think some would have wanted to retain their position and fought it for that reason. Fox and Coar were retained by Jack anyway and think some other directors were as well. Is there anyone specific you think was blocking for their own interests?

I think Bill Elliott (ran the 90's mailing list and I mentioned him in that PM a few weeks ago) said on that same site that it was the board to blame for it not happening sooner. He used stronger language than you as well! Sure I've seen others say the same though can't remember the exact instances.

EDIT-Here's Elliott's view written back in 1994...

"Considering that Jack Walker is a lifelong Rovers fan who was kept off the

board of directors for years by jealous, and small minded despots, I doubt he

will throw in the towel very soon. If former Rovers directors had allowed him

to use his money in the past, Blackburn would have been competing with

Liverpool and Manchester United long ago. "

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Companies moving abroad will only effect us if they are actually contributing. I appreciate that some will pay less levy a but employ over here, but you are ignoring the facts in the public domain that many high earning companies simply pay nothing through being "based" in Malta, Switzerland, Gibraltar etc etc. That is worse for everyone!

Nobody can say for sure what IS have achieved or what there army is like, but to think they are the only middle eastern issue - fallacy. Assad has just as many deaths on his hands, and the impact of the Kurdish issues, Turkish border control, the constant support from the Arabic states and essentially our "ignorance" of the impact the saudis have had.... Conveniently as we are "friends"...

It'll only affect tax if they're contributing. It'll affect jobs, suppliers, contractors, retailers and many of the other ways those companies inject money into the economy. Fundamentally I agree with you, the wealth gap and tax evasion are 2 issues that are absolutely disgraceful and in an ideal world we wouldn't have them. But in the real world there's been no point in the history of this (or indeed any) first world country where an effective, ultimately beneficial solution has been found. Sturgeon, Corbyn, McDonnell, any of the liberal champions, all they'll do on the issue is talk tough and not deliver. I'm not saying people should stop caring about it, but it should stop being used as the go-to justification for spending money elsewhere when we have a spiralling national debt.

95% of IS' active missions, attacks, troop movements, resources, support base, however you want to describe it, is based in the Middle East. I understand what you're saying that they're the symptom of a problem (the phenomenon of violent Islamic extremism in general), but tackling the problem is either impossible or will take hundreds of years. Nobody knows how to do it or can even agree on how to start. So yeah if we cut off the serpent's head, it'll just grow another one. If we try to persuade the serpent to stop being a serpent, it will have eaten everyone before its convinced. We need to do both.

[JBiz]

Can't disagree with much of that. The answer, if there even is one is somewhere inbetween. It's important to see answers to public debt somewhere similar - the deficit has grown since the austerity measures though. It's very difficult for anyone not in "power" to do much bar chatting, it's irrespective.

[yoda]

I've heard that was paid for from the 1960 FA Cup run. Plus by that point the "minimum wage" hadn't completely crippled clubs in unfortunate locations.

I think someone (maybe Den) used the term "community owned". Are you sure it was privately owned thought a few fans were allowed to keep their shares. Heard Hubert was one who profited from the sale though he wasn't on the board by that point. Assume Fox had a stake and wasn't a guy called Edgar Pickering financially involved? Remember seeing an article from 1983 about a financial crisis (I would imagine that was the lowest it got because in 1985 Rovers made a profit and seemed more stable in the late 80's) and talk about Pickering (who I think was based on the Isle of Man) possibly coming up with some money.

Wonder if some of the directors were afraid Jack might go totally public with his interest. Some fans had heard rumors in the months leading up to the takeover though. OOJW for instance said he was aware.

Thatcher retaining her honorary position after Jack took over is the clearest indication of all.

Barrow boy that's ironic considering Fox actually sold vegetables/fruit didn't he? That is if he's one of the disruptive voices perhaps they just thought Jack's plans seemed so unbelievable they couldn't be true. Even when he had already made his huge contribution towards building the Riverside Stand. More likely though I think some would have wanted to retain their position and fought it for that reason. Fox and Coar were retained by Jack anyway and think some other directors were as well. Is there anyone specific you think was blocking for their own interests?

I think Bill Elliott (ran the 90's mailing list and I mentioned him in that PM a few weeks ago) said on that same site that it was the board to blame for it not happening sooner. He used stronger language than you as well! Sure I've seen others say the same though can't remember the exact instances.

EDIT-Here's Elliott's view written back in 1994...

"Considering that Jack Walker is a lifelong Rovers fan who was kept off the

board of directors for years by jealous, and small minded despots, I doubt he

will throw in the towel very soon. If former Rovers directors had allowed him

to use his money in the past, Blackburn would have been competing with

Liverpool and Manchester United long ago. "

The reference was pointed towards Bancroft I believe.

Bill Fox was more open and did one memorable interview on the TV when he said the Rovers was a well run football club in response to some childish questions by the interviewer. I think he also said the Rovers shirt was the height of fashion

[VinjayV4]

The reference was pointed towards Bancroft I believe.

Bill Fox was more open and did one memorable interview on the TV when he said the Rovers was a well run football club in response to some childish questions by the interviewer. I think he also said the Rovers shirt was the height of fashion

Someone (maybe Revidge Blue) said he disliked any criticism and could be a little rude. Though some might prefer the term "gruff" which is how he's been described too. Then there's people like Nixon who said Fox was one of the nicest guys he met in football. Wonder why Fox hasn't had as much praise as Williams (now and when he was alive) considering his job was much harder. OK Williams had to manage a multi million pound business in the Premier League but never had people coming down to cut the electric off!

When was this interview post Jack takeover or before? There's one on Youtube and Fox does seem a pretty straightforward talker. Asked what sort of finances Jack would make available to Dalglish..."what it takes!"

Do you mean you think Elliott's quote was directed towards Bancroft? What position did Bancroft take up when he stepped down as chairman? Straight into the "presidency" or back to just being a director? I doubt Jack tried to buy the club in the 70's (he was just too busy and while rich not MEGA rich then) so it would depend on whether Bancroft was a director in the mid-late 80's. Yes I know Jack's first reported involvement (though maybe nobody made the connection and Peter White couldn't reveal everything he knew at the club if he was aware it was Jack) was the signings of Ardiles/Archibald. I've seen the Riverside materials donation story too though it was referred to as "Walkersteel" not as "Jack Walker" though we know it meant the same thing.

The shirt is great too as is the club badge neither should ever be changed. Not simply due to "tradition" because after all the club used the town crest on the 1960 FA Cup Final shirt and on club programmes. Then when the current badge was introduced that was used on programmes as well. Don't know why they didn't just start using it on the shirt when they had the other "red rose" logo.

The shirt is marketable and the badge is marketable. Once again areas where Rovers are more marketable in every possible way over the other Lancashire clubs. I don't think there's any need for "improvement" both are just fine as they are.

[Al]

I would've retorted to your pitiful content but what's the point if you are going to stoop to such juvenile comments.

I'm aware of what certain clerics have "said" in newspapers, but the reality is this is not an army in the sense of the word. One of the main differences? When we drop bombs we grow their numbers as opposed to the intention

Cut taxes to me? No, I pay more because I earn an average wage. Those on the threshold above, and those businesses making BILLIONS in this country are getting a free ride.

Produce the worlds wealth? I don't follow..

1% have always benefitted from hard work of the 99%. It never has changed. Whilst this carries on, people still criticise giving money or aid to those who desperately need it. All the while ignoring the cause.

Your arguments are illogical. I was talking about foreign aid not your tax bill.

The 99% may do the work, for wages, but the 1% create the wealth.

[JBiz]

Your arguments are illogical. I was talking about foreign aid not your tax bill.

The 99% may do the work, for wages, but the 1% create the wealth.

Off the backs of the rest. You are no nearer to explaining how a society like such is fair or something we shouldn't complain about!

I found it, and still find it ridiculous that anyone could complain about the meagre amount of foreign aid we give compared to the billions we are giving away to those who do not need it.

[Al]

Off the backs of the rest. You are no nearer to explaining how a society like such is fair or something we shouldn't complain about!

I found it, and still find it ridiculous that anyone could complain about the meagre amount of foreign aid we give compared to the billions we are giving away to those who do not need it.

Where would the 99% (workers) get their money if the owners didn't employ them? The employers are essential.

Meagre foreign aid. You are joking. However little it may be it is money thrown away as far as this country is concerned and could be used to help your "poorest people" without raising taxes. Is that not what you want?

[Amo]

Foreign aid is great n' all but it only treats the symptoms, not the disease.

[otto man]

I would've retorted to your pitiful content but what's the point if you are going to stoop to such juvenile comments.

I'm aware of what certain clerics have "said" in newspapers, but the reality is this is not an army in the sense of the word. One of the main differences? When we drop bombs we grow their numbers as opposed to the intention

Cut taxes to me? No, I pay more because I earn an average wage. Those on the threshold above, and those businesses making BILLIONS in this country are getting a free ride.

Produce the worlds wealth? I don't follow..

1% have always benefitted from hard work of the 99%. It never has changed. Whilst this carries on, people still criticise giving money or aid to those who desperately need it. All the while ignoring the cause.

You just did! Touched a nerve there then.

[JBiz]

Where would the 99% (workers) get their money if the owners didn't employ them? The employers are essential.

Meagre foreign aid. You are joking. However little it may be it is money thrown away as far as this country is concerned and could be used to help your "poorest people" without raising taxes. Is that not what you want?

No, what I want is irrelevant. What I think is those with friends in high places continue to benefit at a cost of the lowest earning of our society. How people living in communities so affected can ignore this is beyond me. I've read posts you've made about immigration, what is essentially the dynamo for such? Work for better money, or more likely employees for businesses who cost less. That's an old human "tradition".

The cost of the foreign aid is, unless you can show me different, insignificant in terms of the money we lose through big corporations who avoid tax, yes some will contribute like SKH said in other ways but there are far too many who make an absolute fortune. What about the arms budget or the expenses of those in parliament? Easily something which could be reduced, why do 60k a year politicians even need such benefits?... Yet the man in the pub is more likely to complain about teachers holidays... Ha

I agree that we should concentrate efforts in stemming the issues that cause poverty- but that's the point, those are ignored. Deemed unimportant, when the real issues are how much we give to India...

Problem is, nobody would buy that paper.

[yoda]

Someone (maybe Revidge Blue) said he disliked any criticism and could be a little rude. Though some might prefer the term "gruff" which is how he's been described too. Then there's people like Nixon who said Fox was one of the nicest guys he met in football. Wonder why Fox hasn't had as much praise as Williams (now and when he was alive) considering his job was much harder. OK Williams had to manage a multi million pound business in the Premier League but never had people coming down to cut the electric off!

When was this interview post Jack takeover or before? There's one on Youtube and Fox does seem a pretty straightforward talker. Asked what sort of finances Jack would make available to Dalglish..."what it takes!"

Do you mean you think Elliott's quote was directed towards Bancroft? What position did Bancroft take up when he stepped down as chairman? Straight into the "presidency" or back to just being a director? I doubt Jack tried to buy the club in the 70's (he was just too busy and while rich not MEGA rich then) so it would depend on whether Bancroft was a director in the mid-late 80's. Yes I know Jack's first reported involvement (though maybe nobody made the connection and Peter White couldn't reveal everything he knew at the club if he was aware it was Jack) was the signings of Ardiles/Archibald. I've seen the Riverside materials donation story too though it was referred to as "Walkersteel" not as "Jack Walker" though we know it meant the same thing.

The shirt is great too as is the club badge neither should ever be changed. Not simply due to "tradition" because after all the club used the town crest on the 1960 FA Cup Final shirt and on club programmes. Then when the current badge was introduced that was used on programmes as well. Don't know why they didn't just start using it on the shirt when they had the other "red rose" logo.

The shirt is marketable and the badge is marketable. Once again areas where Rovers are more marketable in every possible way over the other Lancashire clubs. I don't think there's any need for "improvement" both are just fine as they are.

It was well before Jack bought the club,

As for the rest of your reply, go google, I haven't the patience for your tedium

[Al]

No, what I want is irrelevant. What I think is those with friends in high places continue to benefit at a cost of the lowest earning of our society. How people living in communities so affected can ignore this is beyond me. I've read posts you've made about immigration, what is essentially the dynamo for such? Work for better money, or more likely employees for businesses who cost less. That's an old human "tradition".

The cost of the foreign aid is, unless you can show me different, insignificant in terms of the money we lose through big corporations who avoid tax, yes some will contribute like SKH said in other ways but there are far too many who make an absolute fortune. What about the arms budget or the expenses of those in parliament? Easily something which could be reduced, why do 60k a year politicians even need such benefits?... Yet the man in the pub is more likely to complain about teachers holidays... Ha

I agree that we should concentrate efforts in stemming the issues that cause poverty- but that's the point, those are ignored. Deemed unimportant, when the real issues are how much we give to India...

Problem is, nobody would buy that paper.

Ah! now your real reasons are coming out. It's jealousy of the ones who have more and you want it taken off them. Although I know you will deny it. What relevance my views on immigration has got to do with it I don't know.

If you read them I believe that immigrants are reducing the wages for your precious 99% so your point evades me.

[Gav]

That ex-banker Javid should resign after swanning off to a trade fair in Australia, with his daughter in tow, instead of at least giving the impression he's helping the Tata steels employees.

In his shoes I'd have been in Mumbia to talk to the Tata steel board, it's about doing the right thing and actually giving a sh1t, maybe I'm expecting to much.....

They're all out for themselves, shock horror.

[ABBEY]

Interesting news on sky news ..

A private school in dewsbury being investigated over promoting extreme Islam .

If found guilty swing the scum from the tower for treason . Enoughs enough

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

That ex-banker Javid should resign after swanning off to a trade fair in Australia, with his daughter in tow, instead of at least giving the impression he's helping the Tata steels employees.

In his shoes I'd have been in Mumbia to talk to the Tata steel board, it's about doing the right thing and actually giving a sh1t, maybe I'm expecting to much.....

They're all out for themselves, shock horror.

The Tories have no interest in manufacturing and haven't had in my life time. That's why we're in the state we are now. They just want to buy it the cheapest. Doesn't matter what it is or where it's from - as long as it's cheaper that's fine.

[jim mk2]

The Tories have no interest in manufacturing and haven't had in my life time. That's why we're in the state we are now. They just want to buy it the cheapest. Doesn't matter what it is or where it's from - as long as it's cheaper that's fine.

Ted Heath's govt actually stepped in to save R-R when it temporarily got into trouble in the 1970s but you're right otherwise. After all, industrial workers generally vote Labour don't they?

Southern Tory @#/?s.