Did the French just ban crash helmets?
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: des hanging around for a while on 21 May 2010 13:59 On 21-05-2010, The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > des hanging around for a while <des(a)des.com> wrote: > >> On 21-05-2010, The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> > des hanging around for a while <des(a)des.com> wrote: >> > >> >> UK society is a pyramid with the Queen at the top and the plebs >> >> at the bottom >> > >> > Bwaaaahahahahahahaha! >> > >> > No, it's not. >> >> Yes it is. >> > See other posting. I saw it. > It isn't. Yes it is. > You got the shape wrong. No I didn't. -- des BA (Hons) | MPhil (Hons) | Agrégation 'The Jews haven't attacked any Arab village, unless attacked first' (Ismayil Safwat, 'Palestinian' (sic) commander, March 1948)
From: stephen.packer on 21 May 2010 14:14 The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > The UK, and pretty much most <waves hands vaguely> developed wealthy > democraciies have a sort of rugby ball shape. > > A few people right at the top, gradually swelling out into the mass of > middle class middle-income people, and then narrowing to the small > minority of utter scumbags at the bottom. I think there are probably more disadvantaged/dispossesed people (I presume this is what you mean by 'scum bags') than privilliged people at the top so it's kind of compressed on the bottom. I think that a pyramid which was reflected and then had the bottom 2/3rds of the reflection chopped off would be a more accurate model. Or something like that.
From: des hanging around for a while on 21 May 2010 14:21 On 21-05-2010, stephen.packer(a)gonemail.com <stephen.packer(a)gonemail.com> wrote: > The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> The UK, and pretty much most <waves hands vaguely> developed wealthy >> democraciies have a sort of rugby ball shape. >> >> A few people right at the top, gradually swelling out into the mass of >> middle class middle-income people, and then narrowing to the small >> minority of utter scumbags at the bottom. > > I think there are probably more disadvantaged/dispossesed people (I > presume this is what you mean by 'scum bags') than privilliged people > at the top so it's kind of compressed on the bottom. I suspect that TOG is buying into some neo-Thatcherist claim that 'we're all middle class, now' or something. It's the only thinking I could imagine to justify his claim that the underclass is smaller than the 'middle class'. -- des BA (Hons) | MPhil (Hons) | Agrégation 'The Jews haven't attacked any Arab village, unless attacked first' (Ismayil Safwat, 'Palestinian' (sic) commander, March 1948)
From: DR on 21 May 2010 14:37 Tosspot posted: >The Older Gentleman wrote: >> des hanging around for a while <des(a)des.com> wrote: >> >>> UK society is a pyramid with the Queen at the top and the plebs >>> at the bottom >> >> Bwaaaahahahahahahaha! >> >> No, it's not. > >Why is it called Her Majesty's Government then? And come to think of it, why is >the Queen Commander In Chief of Her Majesty's Armed Forces. Or <spit> Her >Majesties Customs and Excise? Basically, because that's how it is; it's tradition. The Queen has no executive power, no way to make anyone do anything - she may advise the PM, but that's about it, and the PM is not bound to act on that advice. The Queen cannot refuse to sign Royal Assent on an Act of Parliament, either. -- Darren GSF1200N K3 From acceleration comes exhilaration.
From: des hanging around for a while on 21 May 2010 15:30
On 21-05-2010, DR <motorbandit(a)hotmail.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > Tosspot posted: >>The Older Gentleman wrote: >>> des hanging around for a while <des(a)des.com> wrote: >>> >>>> UK society is a pyramid with the Queen at the top and the plebs >>>> at the bottom >>> >>> Bwaaaahahahahahahaha! >>> >>> No, it's not. >> >>Why is it called Her Majesty's Government then? And come to think of it, why is >>the Queen Commander In Chief of Her Majesty's Armed Forces. Or <spit> Her >>Majesties Customs and Excise? > > Basically, because that's how it is; it's tradition. The Queen has no > executive power, no way to make anyone do anything - she may advise > the PM, but that's about it, and the PM is not bound to act on that > advice. The Queen cannot refuse to sign Royal Assent on an Act of > Parliament, either. You're confusing theory and practice. She can perfectly well refuse to sign any law, and I'd love to see any Parliament try to bring in a law abolishing the monarchy. The whiff of tear gas would fill London's streets. -- des BA (Hons) | MPhil (Hons) | Agrégation 'The Jews haven't attacked any Arab village, unless attacked first' (Ismayil Safwat, 'Palestinian' (sic) commander, March 1948) |