Your right. Everyone knows you need to shout louder to be understood.
Sort the world out?
So I can make any changes whatsoever to the current status quo to make life better for all species on Earth?
Well even one day of God given powers isn't enough.
But I'd make a start by banning America.
Over qualified eh, damn you, get to the back of the line!
The simple truth when you are 'over qualified' is that you screwed up. Employers don't want to take people with too many qualifications for a good reason, the employee gets bored, moves on and costs the employer money.
Ok, lets over exaggerate. We have a qualified Doctor of applied mathematics applying for a job at a supermarket as a shelf stacker.
Turnover of staff is fairly high in that sort of job as people get bored or they apply for other jobs, they get promoted or they move on through other means.
So would you employ a guy on 10K knowing that he is aware that he can earn 150K and he will actually cost you money in the mean time to train, adorn, wage etc?
I don't think you would, and neither will they; The simple answer is to tailor your CV to the job you are applying for, not simply blast all your qualifications in their face. Does it really matter if your a qualified astro physicist if you can't get a job in your line of work and look for something else in the mean time? Of course not, but don't let your prospective employers know!
You need to tell your PC which cam to use as it is currently reverting to the default.
Does it really matter seeing as it was six years ago ???
I don't like to push my beliefs on anyone, and likewise expect the same. However one factor here is blindingly obvious, no matter what your political opinion.
This is still a democracy in name, and therefore we all have a right to say who should be in power. 45.5 million people had the chance to change politics in this country at the last election, and around 55% used their voice.
If the remaining 45% used their vote then the country and it's politics might look vastly different.
It is my belief the reason that politicians of all parties are economical with the truth is because our cynical population has allowed them the comfort and grace to do so.
You will soon see a Privatised Fire & Rescue Service. Mark my words.
To me it's a simple maths equation. The more densely populated the area that you live in then there are likely to be more swingers and therefore more potential meets.
We live in Exeter now, and while not exactly the centre of the swingniverse there are a lot more people than when we lived near Inverness. Conversely when we lived in Kent and close to London there were far more people than we could ever have found the time to meet with.
I've got to admit that is one of the best posts I've ever read of yours Jed, and in my opinion it's spot on :thumbup:
Dean that was a very enigmatic reply and really helps to show your depth of feeling over this issue, Thank you.
To all in general I'd like to question the final point of Dean's post. If a mine was to be profitable it must have someone to sell the coal too right?
It's expensive to transport so surely the most profit is made by selling it to the closest buyer?
But if our own power stations are already contract bound it does make opening a mine a hell of a risky investment for all but the hardiest of entrepreneurs does it not?
I think the prohibiive costs of safety arrangements and high wages in comparison to elsewhere may be a factor.
I may be wrong, but the government at the time succeeded in breaking the unions hold over Britain. I don't recall any union having the same power since the miners strike that they the had before those dark days?
As with all things in life people are more likely to spread a bad story than a good one. The internet is, as Geordie quite rightly said before me, just another method of spreading your opinion. The major difference it makes is that you are effectively broadcasting your opinion, rather than passing it on to people known to you.
I'm sure most of us know someone who can moan about absolutely anything. When that person starts telling you a story do you think to yourself 'here we go again'? I know I do ;)
But someone else reading their review online probably won't realise that life's moaners are all out there broadcasting their doom and gloom to everyone. Don't get me wrong if there are 100/100 bad reviews then yes I will be swayed by them. If there is 1/100 bad reviews would I do the same? Hell no.
We've managed to pick up two negative shreps, but does that mean we are bad swingers, or could there be more to the story? It's all the same when you think about it.
For the record I have also left reviews online which are almost all positive. However I have left three poor reviews out of around sixty, but I typed them several days after the visit to allow the red mist to disappear, passion to ebb away and clarity of thought.
We will be floating around the chatrooms on new years eve. We really can't be bothered with heading into town for yet another overpriced night out.
We would be concerned too.
BA isn't footing the bill, and never was.
A BA source is quoted in the articles as saying 'It would cost up to £10million to take a plane out of service, dedicate it to England, tear up the timetable and dedicate crews for the duration of the tournament,'
BA have said it would cost them up to £10 million to cater for the England team for the whole of the tournament. This would include direct costs i.e the flights and staff, as well as indirect costs, such as rescheduling of other activities. They simply don't have an aircraft available to sit idle for a large part of the tournament at the expense of profit making elsewhere. Obviously they want to pass their costs on to the consumer, in this case the FA.
Understandably the FA only wants to pay for the costs that are directly linked to the aircraft, ie the rent of the plane, staff wages/accom, fuel, landing fees etc which would be far less than the £10 million, especially as England aren't likely to be there all the way to the end of the Finals.