ChezGiven

So you dont know then. If there is a reduction in tax credit, this has no impact on the incentive of a business to pay better wages. The minimum wage is another policy and the overall impact of both is predicted to be negative on real wages.

Via what mechanism does reducing tax credits lead a business to pay better wages?

:lol:

Has HF sprouted ovaries?

ewerk is such a heartless bastard

They are actually using research that says posture impacts levels of testosterone and cortisol. They give you these dead easy breathing techniques too. I can present quite well and usually have an audience of 15 to 30 people but once the audience is higher than that, nerves get the better of most people. Honestly, 5 minutes of breathing and walking on with your chest out and legs apart like a constipated cowboy and you can bizarrely handle the nerves. I presented to 80 people last week and it was basically Steve Jobs does Stand Up.

Water is bad for you? Water is magic Parky, its a mystery and basically shouldn't exist. Nothing else acts like it. I thought you knew this. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18473-the-many-mysteries-of-water/

Yes, not sure I remember exactly how she explained it. I think to go through both Houses, it has to pass the Senate which has equal representation from each state no matter the size. She said Obama was imploring people to contact their Senator, not their Representative which are voted for in different elections. Hence to pass the Senate, they need the gun loving rural states to get on board. In what I think is a particularity of Senate voting, if enough people petition the Senator, they have to do something under State law. Or something.

Had a great chat with an American last night about this. Obama can only do if people petition their senators and they have to do this in the small population (I.e. Rural) states to get it through the senate. The House of Representatives can only do so much which is why Obama was imploring people to contact their state representatives as this is the mechanism they have to change the law. I think I've got that right. Despite watching the first two seasons of the House of Cards, I've never fully understood the US's legislative process.

Aye I thought you got it from eating rich food and drinking too much port. Apparently not.

It's called a power stance. I work with an agency that consults with politicians in the UK and US and they teach you 'how to stand'. There's a really famous TED talk on it, the theory being the body can control the mind so they teach you to use a 'confident stance' and they show you pictures of people standing like that. It's ridiculous when you do the training but it does sort of work. Not personally ever gone for the 'I am opening my sphincter' look but may give it a go.

Android users are bigger wankers? Have less girlfriends?

Is it true that the county gets its name from how her majesty says cunt?

He is going to re-brand the party in exactly the way it needed to be. Voters will be able to associate the party with a clear set of values. That is how he can contribute to the next election. Labour need to start grooming the next leader who can be associated with strong values but also can be a strong international leader.

Sometimes you don't need a shadowy 3rd party for there to be mystery. I mean it's not like we are discussing JFK....

A book on how the Normans weren't French, yes. It's called '1000 Years of Annoying the French' by Stephen Clark

Second para.

You're the one who mentioned astrology.

The Egyptians didn't do horoscopes, so you undermine the rest of that post. My contention that the Norman invasion wasn't 'French' but Viking and was facilitated either indirectly or directly by the concerted Viking invasions that had been going on since the 700s is a perfectly valid reading of the history of Britain. The Normans may have just been chancers and lucky that another raid was going on but the point was it had nowt to do with Parisian Kings / Franks who were what we would now call the French at the time. I seem to remember you conceding on that one.

Morning! No, just that Hippocrates and Pythagoras came after the Egyptians. Then things slow down until the early Rennaissance. The Egyptians were ahead of the Greeks and the Greeks laid the foundation for the next millennium. Anyway apparently the pyramids were made out of a type of concrete. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/africa/23iht-pyramid.1.12259608.html?pagewanted=all&referer=&_r=0

You tit.

I am having a lazy afternoon - been working all weekend. It cant be obvious to build them if not everyone built them was the point. "If you want to build big, you've got to build a pyramid" doesnt hold up to much scrutiny.

Also - why is building an enormous, utterly ridiculously sized triangular building that serves no other purpose (except to connect people on earth with the stars as per Egypt, Cambodia and Mexico) an OBVIOUS thing to do? If its that OBVIOUS why aren't they everywhere? We were populated in 2500 BC, why not one on the British Isles. Why didn't everyone build one if its just the OBVIOUS thing to do with your pre-historical day? Why are they all about gods and stars? The OBVIOUS argument isn't.

You do like to sneer at things, it comes over quite obviously. Its really clear what i think, i've said it twice already. There are clearly some gaps in our understanding, we still dont know how they even build the fuckers (the article which toonotl posted was another theory) and we still dont know how they managed some of the astronomical alignment with such precision. Possible explanations are not why i replied to this thread. The fact that you hate religions yet seem so desperate to swallow the linear narrative of the judaeo-christian world is interesting. Maybe the pyramids were built by Nubians? Maybe they also traveled around the world? Who knows. Pre-history is just that, before our knowledge.