ChezGiven

I agree, one of my biggest phobias is getting gang raped by a car full of mincers. My only comfort is that my poor dress sense combined with ugliness will keep them at bay, however I suppose Gays get beer goggles too. Aye apparently Parky gets 'gay beer goggles' too. Try saying that pissed up with a length in yer gob. Have you tried? Are you offering?

I agree, one of my biggest phobias is getting gang raped by a car full of mincers. My only comfort is that my poor dress sense combined with ugliness will keep them at bay, however I suppose Gays get beer goggles too. Aye apparently Parky gets 'gay beer goggles' too. Try saying that pissed up with a length in yer gob.

Its gay as fuck on here today.

Saw him last week, he's fine, got his job sorted and the new bairn is doing well so all fine. His tache is still beyond words like. Good stuff. Some fucking tache as well btw. Swedish 70s pornstar He's fucking bizarre. Him and his two chef mates got us twatted on friday on these hash chilli-chocolate truffles. Tasted amazing with the chilli. They sound nice. Actually bought some chilli chocolate the other day (Lindt) as I'd heard about it before. I've put chocolate in a chilli instead of sugar before after a tip in a recipe as well. Do you want to send me the recipe for them btw. The Mexicans use chocolate in a basic form - called morle or something (mor-lay), in a spicy chicken dish. I'll have to get him to ask the chef and then send it on to you. They were proper spicy which gave them a strange kick. Strong as well.

Saw him last week, he's fine, got his job sorted and the new bairn is doing well so all fine. His tache is still beyond words like. Good stuff. Some fucking tache as well btw. Swedish 70s pornstar He's fucking bizarre. Him and his two chef mates got us twatted on friday on these hash chilli-chocolate truffles. Tasted amazing with the chilli.

Saw him last week, he's fine, got his job sorted and the new bairn is doing well so all fine. His tache is still beyond words like.

What do you call a pakistani lesbian?

I prefer big cuddly 'bears' with handlebar cumcatchers to mincers. Each to their own though.

Been a while since you had one?

Apparently we spend 10m a day on counter-terrorist activity in the UK. Thats a lot of cash.

manc mag butting in on my comments, and calling me obsessed !!!! Class. You are a bit when it comes to Renton like. Wouldn't say you're the only one on here who is obsessive at times by any means. It would make a good advert for that Calvin Klein perfume if you ask me.

For the record, Fop is far from fucking right about anything he has said in this thread (well to me anyway). http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Define_social_policy Cant believe i stooped to googling for an objective defintion. Worth it for the though

if I was already loaded and was responsible for a lot of angry people losing their jobs, I would A bit harsh to suggest it was former employees of his fiefdom. That is unless you are presuming that we can pin an inevitable correction in a totally overstreched economy on the actions of a few people. Goodwin and his empire building are in the past and the longer people yearn for some figurative retribution, the longer we'll miss the opportunity to look at the challenges ahead. Goodwin pressing ahead with the ABN Amro deal did not bring down the UK economy- yet it seems to be as if it did. Let's not forget that Teflon Gordon is more than happy to keep the press fed about the evils done by "the City" under a regulatory system that he not only created, but boasted about around the world. Yet now he's off to the states telling people how it should be done. Bit of an about-face, that. This sort of action only helps the sort of yobs who will be 'protesting' against the G20 next week as they wreak a general trail of havoc and interrupt the lives of thousands of workers so we can listen to the same message that has been relayed countless times in the past, only to be forgotten on Monday as we struggle to find glaziers who wil repair this damage out of the goodness of their own hearts. Nicely put.

I once read a Newcastle United blog which posed a similar question about a Spurs supporter.

Howay man, i'm having a laugh. Give us another one and reply to the post.

Insert amusing Fail pics*

What side effects?

The idea that people would use Toontastic to propagate a commercial vested interest shows the complete lack of perspective the lad has. It an easy way to counter an expression of personal beliefs when you dont understand them or have not investigated the issues in anything other than a superficial manner to say they reflect a bias or a vested interest. The fact of the matter is that i'm employed by a private company, like the majority of people. For the record, I'm a keyhole economist when it comes to all distributive questions. If the distribution of Televisions is seen as a fundamental moral issue (hence why i gave you Rawls fop), then we need to understand the micro-economic dynamics of the market mechanism. If the market mechanism fails to deliver 'justice' in the distribution of televisions, then the government should intervene. I use TVs as an example as its a 'good' everyone has but no-one believes that the government 'ought' to ensure that the allocation of TVs is fair across society. Health, Housing, Education etc are all 'services' whose distribution is considered important, not just how much of the service is produced. The share of the 'service' across society is as important if not more than the total amount we can produce. In this instance, market mechanisms will fail to deliver social objectives as they can produce lots of health resources, lots of housing resources but they cant ensure that they are distributed properly. If we want everyone to have access to health, we cant leave it to the insurance market as this leaves people uninsured and without access and therefore the distribution is not 'equitable'. The keyhole economist looks to identify where markets fail to acheive social objectives and proposes ways in which alternative (government led) allocation mechanisms can acheive these. When a government intervenes in the allocation of a service then this forms part of its 'social policy' since it believes the distribution of the service has social welfare implications. Where the distribution of a good or service is not important morally, governments let the market do its job, as we dont care who gets it. Like with TVs. That philosophical approach to social policy is referred to as 'extra-welfarism' and that point of view (admittedly poorly captured here) basically colours most of my social political views. Its consistent, practical and has nothing to do with my work. Your turn.

Again that is a meaningless statement in this context, which "people"? what "social welfare"? What where you talking about? Fop doesn't know, and clearly you still don't either. "Social Policy is the study of social welfare, and its relationship to politics and society." As an Economist, i define it as the combined welfare of all individuals that comprise a society. See Arrow for measurement problems and Rawls for a definition that includes liberties, which would be of interest to you. Always happy to help. So still you don't actually know what you mean by "social policy"; using a lot of words just to say that really doesn't help you know. Did you google Arrow or Rawls? You should have done on Rawls, his stuff would interest you. Anyway, you claimed 'health policy' wasnt part of 'social policy' which is just daft. Fop already said health policy may have aspects of social policy, but it is not "social policy" per se. But as you where the one (along with Renty) going on about comparing "social policy" I expected you to have some idea of what you were supposedly comparing - clearly you DON'T and the rest is history. Any policy that affect the social welfare of society forms part of 'social policy', its why the design of the spectrum of social benefits that country governments pay for including health, housing, education, unemployment benefits etc are referred to as their 'social model'. If you worked in the area, you'd know this. Why you want to insist that social policy be narrowly defined is just a reflection of your personality, not a reflection of how policy-makers, academics and public sector agencies refer to it. When York University prepared their 'Social Policy and Analysis' course for my Economics MSc in 1997, they used a broad definition that included all elements of policy that affect social welfare. You're clearly not comfortable with these concepts as you cant engage intellectually with the posts here. To return to the point, the Conservatives dismantled a prohibitively progressive tax regime which included a 98% tax band and streamlined our fiscal system into two broad tax bands. If you search on the Institute of Fiscal Studies website, you can find data that shows the shift in the tax burden from the rich to the poorer.

Again that is a meaningless statement in this context, which "people"? what "social welfare"? What where you talking about? Fop doesn't know, and clearly you still don't either. "Social Policy is the study of social welfare, and its relationship to politics and society." As an Economist, i define it as the combined welfare of all individuals that comprise a society. See Arrow for measurement problems and Rawls for a definition that includes liberties, which would be of interest to you. Always happy to help. So still you don't actually know what you mean by "social policy"; using a lot of words just to say that really doesn't help you know. Did you google Arrow or Rawls? You should have done on Rawls, his stuff would interest you. Anyway, you claimed 'health policy' wasnt part of 'social policy' which is just daft.

Again that is a meaningless statement in this context, which "people"? what "social welfare"? What where you talking about? Fop doesn't know, and clearly you still don't either. "Social Policy is the study of social welfare, and its relationship to politics and society." As an Economist, i define it as the combined welfare of all individuals that comprise a society. See Arrow for measurement problems and Rawls for a definition that includes liberties, which would be of interest to you. Always happy to help.

Nevermind the trainers, where does the tax money come from that runs the public transport? I fucking hate Marxists. Yeah you Parky...