On 31/08/2011 11:31, 1506 wrote:

the UK would still have a World Class Aircract Industry,

Is that something to do with the Comet's windows?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 31/08/2011 17:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
In article
,
wrote:

... And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.

I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an
AOL here.

One is about clinging to old ideas and prolonged resistance to change,
while the other is a range of political philosophies?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Aug 31, 5:51*pm, Sam Wilson wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote:
Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a
retard. *One ought to feel sorry for him, really.

When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast aspersions:

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249

Or was that your best Frank Spencer face?

I don't think he looks that odd. *

Oh, I do. I liked Adrian's description of me as "Mr Bean". When the
pic was taken, I told my mrs I thought I looked like a cross between
Frankenstein's monster and Shrek, so Mr Bean is quite an improvement.

I'm very uppset, though, that Adrian insinuated that I look like Ed
Miliband. Now that *is* offensive.

In uk.railway Sam Wilson twisted the electrons to say:
In article
,
Nick wrote:
... And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.
I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an
AOL here.

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:51:59 +0100
Sam Wilson wrote:
I don't think he looks that odd. Can we have one of you to compare it
with - it seems only fair.

There has never been a photo of me online and there never will be. Privacy
is something you can only give away once.

B2003

On 31/08/11 09:55, d wrote:

Its only people desperate to score a point no matter what who resort
to commenting on typos. If there isn't some usenet law about that then
there should be. It doesn't make you look clever - just rather petty and
sad.

Not at all. It's simply a bit more evidence that you are a rather stupid
and poorly-educated chap, whose views can be discounted as those of a
rather stupid and poorly-educated chap.

Ian

On 31/08/11 11:31, 1506 wrote:
Some of us choose to vote Conservative, no one causes us to do so.

But you live in California, don't you?

Ian

On 31/08/11 11:34, 1506 wrote:
No poor man ever gave me a job. Taxing the job creators will not help
turn the western economies around.

And their clients - the people who paid you - were all rich too, were the?

Ian

On Sep 1, 8:42*am, Alistair Gunn wrote:
In uk.railway Sam Wilson twisted the electrons to say:

In article
,
*Nick wrote:
... And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.
I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an
AOL here.

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

It would seem to me dangerously irresponsible to run a health service,
or a welfare system, on the hope that random members of the general
public will contribute funds to it out of the goodness of their heart.
I mean, those members of the public who have a social conscience and
are relatively well-off probably would, but you can't rely on it.
State funding through taxes means you compel people who can afford it
into giving money to support the health service and welfare, and to my
mind, that's the way it should be if you want to guarantee the income
as much as practically possible.

If you don't like paying tax, remind yourself that you might find
yourself in a position where you will be the beneficiary of the tax
system one day.

Nick

On 02/09/2011 00:48, Nick wrote:
On Sep 1, 8:42 am, Alistair wrote:
In uk.railway Sam Wilson twisted the electrons to say:

In article
,
wrote:
... And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.
I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an
AOL here.

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

It would seem to me dangerously irresponsible to run a health service,
or a welfare system, on the hope that random members of the general
public will contribute funds to it out of the goodness of their heart.
I mean, those members of the public who have a social conscience and
are relatively well-off probably would, but you can't rely on it.
State funding through taxes means you compel people who can afford it
into giving money to support the health service and welfare, and to my
mind, that's the way it should be if you want to guarantee the income
as much as practically possible.

Although there are others ways of organising health care than the way we
do it. For some reason we look at only a 1950s dream of the NHS or a
stereotyped view of the USA. We never ask whether Continental European
streets are actually full of dying babies as a result of not doing
things just like the NHS does.




--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK