ChezGiven

150Gb of music in iTunes. I just presumed it wouldnt sync with iTunes?

Their continued participation in the great project is just a form of self-discipline. They need to control the urge to invade countries dressed up in S&M gear, this way has worked for half a century.

Well the majority of the country backed the tories for 3 long terms, even after the miners strike. Bastard this democracy lark for the dyed in the wool socialists. People are idiots Couldnt agree more.

I must look Max Kaiser up one day for afternoon tea.

Hence version 4 will be released this year which will spunk in the eye of your desire. http://www.googleandroidblog.com/news/ipho...t=Google+Reader Playing catch-up tbh. Running to stand still. Google rode on Apple's success with the iPhone. The app store is the real area of innovation now for smart phones, which is what everyone else has been copying. That list ignores the major reason why the iPhone is preferable for me, iTunes. I got an iPhone as i wanted my iPod and phone together, as i suspect most people did. My phone is primarliy a music player, a phone and has apps for when i'm bored or in need of some info. Anyway, Apple has first mover advantages in terms of brand, Android has second mover advantages in terms of technology, like most markets.

Just outside John Lewis iirc.

There did, yes. I used to love playing on them as a kid.

Well no, you're not going to convince me of anything when you seem to have either completely ignored, or cannot answer, my perfectly reasonable question of how you select what to believe and what not to. It's perfectly possible not to have a prior agenda in science and not all science is grant funded. What do you make of the work of Newton, Einstein, and Darwin? Anyway, as I suggested to Parky, technology is really just the application of science, and it works, end of story. Science is not completely incompatible with belief in the Abrahamic God only if you decide all the particularly absurd stuff is a metaphor. Which brings us back to my question, which you won't answer........... Well you either believe in God or you don't, quite simple really. I would add that whilst I do, I also don't have much faith in organised religion, which is in essence the industrialisation of faith for profit IMO. The scientists you mention are from the era before science became a truly big business, let alone the corporate monster it is today, when the quest for knowledge was more "pure" for want of a better word. Just look at some of the BIG science subjects, they are in fact just theories, not proven in fact, Big bang, Dark matter etc. There's a lot of science done to support these theories, but where's the contra-science to disprove them??. There isn't any, because once a theory gathers pace the research grants and kudos come pouring in. Best thing any scientist could come up with is a theory that sounds fucking great, could be possible, but is unprovable in fact, becasue the striving for that fact is what makes science the money machine it is. Dark matter and Big Bang, being a cases in point. As an analogy to what I'm trying to say. I'm an IT project manager, when I get into a project test phase, I don't want my test teams to tell me it works (if everyone has done their jobs right of course it fucking works!!), I want them to tell be it doesn't, I want them to try and break every single important element of the functionality, I don't want to know what's good about it, I want to know what's bad and how bad. Because when they can't, job's a good'un. I won't hear a word against funding the research into dark matter - its paying my daughters rent this summer I would have loved to have been bright enough to become an astrophysicist, or a particle physicist, but I'm relatively shit at maths. The dark matter and dark energy story is fascinating, about a million times more interesting than theology. I'd also suggest that despite what toonpack says CERN is a good example of pure science which has little or no political bias or motivation - its pure research for the sake of it and will add knowledge to the world. Its one of my biggest regrets/annoyances that physics and the sciences were taught so badly in my youth I never realised how fascinating they could be. I've taken a strong laymans interest since, but I have to confess I'm not giving her much help with her hiomework anymore You must be dead proud, thats amazing she works there.

I was referring to him getting lynched actually. If he grows a tache and wears those leather chaps he's so fond of, he could be in trouble.

Why I Want The Tories To Win: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2...ervyn-King.html According to David Hale, a US economist, the governor of the BOE thinks whoever wins will be out for a generation due to the fiscal austerity of the next parliament. Ha ha.

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower? Income decile 6 of 10 that goes up to 100k? 60k. I'd assumed it was cumulative proportion of the population, like in the Lorenz curve. I dont think so, as its a decile grouping up to 100k. It makes sense that way too, tax redistributions will still benefit people on 50, 60k in the UK because everyone benefits from larger tax allowances on the first part of income. The net effects takes account of all changes.

Any idea what income you'd have to have to be in group 6 or lower? Income decile 6 of 10 that goes up to 100k? 60k.

If he was German Rents, he wouldnt have to convert his Euros. So woulnt make any difference. Pound is rising against the euro since the low earlier in the year. Given our debt situation and the Euro frailty, doubt the pound will be where forex investors selling euros will head. So probably neutral.

Which one you watching?

Hence version 4 will be released this year which will spunk in the eye of your desire.

Well, compared to Cameron he pretty much is actually. What would have happened if Cameron and Osbourne had let the banks collapse? Sorry, I should have clarified: the line needs to be that it's a bit rich positioning yourself as the great rescuer when you were complicit in creating the problem and exposing the country to the global crisis to a massive extent in the first place. True, but what's done is done now, and we are hardly unique in this aspect. I want to back the best man to get us out of the mess, and think Brown is still best qualified to do it. Daftest thing I've ever read. Brown got us into this mess by piss poor planning. We had the biggest economic boom in ages and rather paying off our debt and saving for future issues like the pension time bomb or banking collapse like the Australia did, he wasted it while making arrogant claims (e.g. 'end of boom and bust' etc...). We are in £848.5 billion debt (Feb 2010) and have to pay 42 Billion a year to service it. What baffles me is Gordon has the cheek to attack the Conservatives aim to cut 6 billion spending to try and reduce it, while claiming he will reduce it by half in four years. Wake up and smell the coffee mate, even Shepard would agree borrowing 14 billion a month is wrong. The conservatives have laid out their plan to regulate the banking sector and force them to lend, which will stimulate SME and grow the economy. Super Gordon wants to piss away more money on public services which has created an unsustainable reliance on the public sector. If you want the country to stand any chance vote conservative, if you want to work until you die and live in a crappy over crowed care home with a worthless pension, stick with Gordon - the debt is out of control. The debt was perfectly manageable until the ripple effect from the sub prime crisis in the US fucked up just about every economy in the Western world. We are not alone in this and would have been completely fucked if we had followed the tory plans during the peak of the crisis. And now its the same old story from the Eton brigade - tax relief for the super rich and specific plans to fuck the North East over as Cameron admitted last week. As for tax relief for married couples, parents setting up new schools etc, what a joke. Amateur stuff which hasn't been properly thought out. Your last sentence reeks of scaremongering, or perhaps you've just not had a very good time of it of late. For me personally I recognise all the good things Labour have done whilst in power - massive improvements to the NHS, to schools, minimum wage, working tax credits, winter heating allowance for the elderly, etc, etc. The fact that the tories in opposition objected to most of these things tells its own story. In the last decade since Labour has been in power our citiy centres have also been virtually rebuilt (for the better in general). We've had genuinely good times and now are suffering the hangover of a global recession, but it is NOTHING compared to Thatcher under the 80s. We are in £848.5 billion debt (Feb 2010) and have to pay 42 Billion a year to service it and are lending a further 14 Billion a month and you think this is beacuse of the sub prime crisis? Northern Rock cost us 90.7 billion, which was too much for a failing company. The Tory's were right, we should have let it go bust and transfered the Morgages and savings to the Post Office setting up a national bank. Companies go bust all the time, Rover being a good example. Why are Northern Rock and Lloyds any different. The improvements were paid for by the housing market boom and continued by racking up debt. Gordon is spending £4 for every £3 in tax, how on earth can this be sustained. The Conservative party have said in their manifesto they will try and keep interest rates as low as possible for as long as possible. You have to let Thatcherisms go, everything about her was wrong and the current Conservative manifesto show her views are no where near the current parties. Yes. The reason we have to service the debt because the economy is in recession. If it was growing, tax revenues would more than cover the debt repayments. The reason for the recession? Also, keeping interest rates low serves no purpose if they are already low and it isnt producing economic fuel.

Attributing causality to a global economic recession to a UK policy-maker is daft iyam. The only expansionary method to re-ignite a stalled economy when real interest rates are 0% is a Kenynesian fiscal approach. You cut the debt by growing the economy, cutting government expenditure will not open opportunites for private investment when banks are not lending. If you want the private sector to invest more, you try to get their money out of banks and into projects by reducing interest rates (and to ensourage borrowing). When the interest rate is effectively 0 but investors are not lending, then you have to use other methods to kick-start the economy. Hence Kenynes is back in fashion. All that needs to happen is for the UK economy to grow which will increase tax revenue, reduce government liabilities and reduce the debt. The debt is an issue because short-term bond traders are bearish due to lack of growth in the economy. Reverse that and you reverse the problem. So who is best placed to deliver growth? Vote for who you want but dont base it on what Brown said about the Conservatives expenditure plans, as most experts agree with Brown. Parky is right in that whoever wins this election is in for a shit-storm in 6 months IF the economy is still stagnant.

It actually looks like 4 lines of mephedrone.

Is that someone's tent, top right?

Lost 2 stone this year , lighter than John Terry (and better lookin) Is this your first Donald? I'm made up for you mate you must be so happy. I heard you had more chins than a chinese phone book, good to shed a few unwanted pounds though

Well done Stott and chins up Stevie.