NJS

What bothers me in the light of the obvious fact that the £6bn is a drop in the ocean is that it seems to be pandering to the markets and ensuring they feel as if the right thing is being done rather than actually thinking about the best strategy. One thing that was suggested in the run up to the election by Labour was to shift the balance of the economy back to manufacturing and away from finance and though realising that would be a tough task, it would have the benefit of having more of an ability to stick two fingers up to a sector which has too much power. Honestly, if that was possible it would have done already. It simply is basic economics that we cant make stuff as cheap as third world countries. My view is that "The Markets" are simply looking back to the 80's and remembering the Tories took the hard decisions and got the public finances back under control. They know they are prepared to do it again. There will be very few winners, only losers unfortunately. I think they took the easy way out in "allowing" the finance sector to boom while not giving a shit about manufacturing (That's Labour as well as Tories) but I don't agree with a defeatist "China will build it all" mentality - I think there is a place for stuff like renewable energy technology and even "local" goods to be made here if it makes economic sense. By the latter I mean in terms of the related benefits of the jobs on the whole economy as I mentioned in relation to mining before. As for the Markets they act on very short term bases and I'm sure they don't really understand what the cuts will mean - they just look back on a shallow level and think "Hmm Thatcher sorted it so it then so it's bound to work now" without any idea about how the world has changed. As I said before theres not that much left in places like the NE that they can cut any more.

What bothers me in the light of the obvious fact that the £6bn is a drop in the ocean is that it seems to be pandering to the markets and ensuring they feel as if the right thing is being done rather than actually thinking about the best strategy. One thing that was suggested in the run up to the election by Labour was to shift the balance of the economy back to manufacturing and away from finance and though realising that would be a tough task, it would have the benefit of having more of an ability to stick two fingers up to a sector which has too much power.

Watched Cass yesterday - probably the best of the hooligan films I've seen so far (still to see Awaydays) although the reason it was better was probably due to it being more of a drama rather than just fights.

The CGT tax change affects 130,000 people - Cameron wants to protect them as a priority over millions of others - same old cunts.

The way I understand it CT is that up until the credit crunch, the deficit and the total debt were considered perfectly manageable - just like a family who has a mortgage and maybe other loans but has a decent total income so everything's okay. The mistake that was made which I think most people accept is that it was assumed the golden age of financial services was unassailable - not many people were predicting such a shitstorm even if in hindsight is seems obvious. I still don't think that going all out to pay off all the debts as soon as possible is the right strategy as I think it will do a lot more harm. I'd rather see a measured approach which says it will be paid off as and when we can afford it. Of course obvious wins like cancelling Trident should be part of that.

As I said, I think they do have advance knowledge - I thought it was designed to provoke debate rather than provide info. Even if they don't, someone in that position should/would have a team who think "Ah MP, for Houghton and Sunderland, I wonder what she'll be asking" and wouldn't have to go a million miles to anticipate a question on jobs or even Nissan. Of course it may be that they just haven't decided on the grant issue which would be fair enough in the timeframe and I wouldn't see anything wrong in him saying that - the fact that he averted the question suggests an answer he didn't want to give as I said.

As far as I'm aware, all initial questions for PMQT are pre-registered - so either his office screwed up or he had to say he didn't know because he wanted to avoid giving the actual answer - probably -"Of course we're cutting the grant - What point of we're going to fuck the NE over again did you not understand"?

Do you think it could survive on its own without US help DG? (I mean economically not militarily).

A guilt therapist's wet dream. The only thing you said which I'd question is that if most Israelis are liberals and/or sympathetic why do they keep electing leaders like Netanyahu? Or is this another argument against PR/coalition governments?

haha, I was the same when we got Sky+ HD. I just spent a day watching Bio HD. My Sky HD is fucked and I'm getting that fixed tomorrow as well. BTW if anyone is within driving/pick up distance of Chelmsford and fancies a 3 year Philips 42" 1080i LCD going cheap, drop me a PM.

I'm not naive enough to think there wasn't an element of provocation/shit-stirring in sending this aid with the "Loonies" as LM would call them aboard but fucking hell - sending commandos onto ships in International waters has to be some kind of line crossing thing doesn't it?

Got the rest of the week off to sort a few things around the house so feeling pretty good. Also hate to sound all geeky but I'm getting my new fuck off TV tomorrow which will make me very happy.

RIP I enjoyed him as a psycho but think my favourite film of his is Flashback.

Only read about this today - claiming the rent for two years after his bloke had bought a house is surely fraud? I don't see how they can call it a "personal tragedy" just because he's gay - he's trying to say he never thought of the bloke as his "partner" so thought it was okay - what a load of shit and I'm sure it will upset his bloke..

I had a soft spot for Cunningham - not because he was good - he certainly wasn't - but he just had a happy give it his all kind of commitment that I've seen far too many players lack completely. I don't really know what you're trying to say there btw - nobody I know thought he was good and that was in the contest of a time when people recognised Beardsley as something special so we did have an idea what good meant. As I've said before I think Ameobi is fucking shit and it saddens me to the very depths of my being that he's made a living out of football.

Making it "illegal" for businesses to speculate commercially with loans sounds dodgy from an EU law pov.

are you advocating Newcastle United taking a stand against a paper which constantly prints anti - NUFC agenda too, along with the latest disgraceful racist slurs against NUFC supporters ? After all, "racist" comments are a particular bone of contention with you and others ? Or does slating England bid to host the World Cup hit harder home for you My view is that general "Geordies are thick cunts" articles a la L Taylor are regrettable and should be questioned/slagged off/ apology demanded as a matter of course. However even as someone who isn't a fan of National football, I think the Triesman thing was beyond the pale and deserves a different response. It was a despicable, callous attempt to sabotage something quite tangible for the good of this country and I think everyone involved (especially the cunt of a woman who did it) should be held up for what they are.

The initial ban for slagging Ashley (presumably) is pathetic, however I'd echo those who say this taking a stand on the Triesman thing is actually pretty good.

I always took the "wiped off the map" to be more conceptual than literal - though accept the latter view is probably held by some. Also the "continual invasions" number 2 as far as I can remember - 67 and 73.

Again with no denial about shite in the 80s I'd point out that another couple of things always shown as examples need a context - there was a game against West Ham in 87 I think where George Parris was booed after a vicious "accidental" head butt on Andy Thomas which caused him to have to leave the field - it's always shown as "classic" football racism without the context. The same applies to booing of Gary Bennet and Howard Gayle on NYD 1985 - both were mainly "normal" abuse for players being sent off for disgraceful tackles thoughh admittedley there were some monkey chants as well.

The thing is even if you ignore the Cole crap, to write an article on Asian footballers' failure to make it without mentioning Chopra just adds to the laziness/shitness view. Either the author and Taylor are unaware of Chopra or his background or they decided not to include him as it spoilt the dig at Newcastle. The former is lazy, the second would be a bigger crime than including the Cole lies.

Didn't his family - in particular his Grandfather - make their fortune selling arms to the Nazis in the 30s?

Got 10 minutes and Swindon in a game we lost because the ref let them get away with murder, made his debut at home to Notts Co 1 goal in a 4-0. I love it when journalists print hearsay which fits their story - getting a good kicking in the comments though.

I'd like to see an end to their school type holidays before anything else - I'm sure they will insist they "work" in their contituencies during all the weeks of recess but I'd love to see timesheets. I also don't see why they should get "employee" benefits - especially if the fixed length of their "contracts" is firmed up as is planned.

I remember noticing in either 83 or 87 when Sunderland first staring doing the first declaration thing that their main rivals were Torquay. The Sunderland poll count was 85k and the Torquay one was 47k iirc. Equal numbers sounds fair but I think it should also reflect complete communities if that makes sense.