Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
mr__powers1
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 56
Straight Female, 57
0 miles · Greater London
Forum
Quote by MidsCouple24
Some have commented on why shopworkers should have to work on Sundays, why not, bus drivers do, nurses, newsagents, bar staff, railway staff, airport workers, gas repair men, taxi drivers, the AA, thousands of people, how can you stock up on your Sunday paper ?
Many people like to go out for Sunday lunch or to attractions, the cinema, Alton Towers, fat chance if we say that nobody should have to work on a Sunday. Ok some people are lucky and don't have to work on Sundays, lucky them but thanks to all those who do turn up for work on Sundays and are there when I need them.
No just one particular Sunday, Easter Sunday...thats just one Sunday of the year when the country won't collapse if the shops are shut, after that it can be buisiness as usual.
Quote by kentswingers777
So you want to deny shop workers at least one sunday off...FFS i'm sure we can go one day without the need to go shopping.
Don't be your usual drama queen............jeeze.
You KNOW do you that workers do not want to work on a Sunday?
I know of many that do work on that day and funnily enough they prefer to work on that day and have a day off in the week.
I very rarely use the shops on a Sunday so I have no hidden agendas here, I merely asked....well read my original post and you can work it out.
Me the drama queen lol...coming from someone whose writing style is so sensationalised, you even write like the crap you read!
when sunday trading laws were introduced,bosses promised that staff would have to work on Sundays and that it would be voluntary...that soon changed, as new staff came into employment it was in their contracts that they would have to work Sundays as a normal working day...so the fact that a few corner shops or as you put it Indian and Pakistan shops are open in your area on Easter and Xmas holidays should mean ,that right should also go to the bigger shops,sounds to me like you don't like the idea of non christian buisiness's getting one over on the law!
Trust you to twist things as usual.
Long gone matey are the days of people working 9 to 5 Monday to Friday.
The people I know who work weekends actually do not mind it at all.
For a lot of businesses, working Sundays has saved their business, and suprise as it may be to you, also saved peoples jobs.
You actually sound like a typical union member.
I really do not give ( as Ben would say ) " a flying fuck " whether shops open on Sundays or not, it was merely a point of discussion which you do not do most times, just sly digs that contain nothing constructive!
You know what they say...." if you have nothing to say, then say nothing ". Cannot remember what famous person said that now.
Anyways happy Easter Powers, and try and cheer up a bit as IF like me I am off till next Tuesday so no working for me on Sunday.
Did i touch a nerve...i'll let you get back to work, i mean, you are at work right now?
Quote by kentswingers777
So you want to deny shop workers at least one sunday off...FFS i'm sure we can go one day without the need to go shopping.
Don't be your usual drama queen............jeeze.
You KNOW do you that workers do not want to work on a Sunday?
I know of many that do work on that day and funnily enough they prefer to work on that day and have a day off in the week.
I very rarely use the shops on a Sunday so I have no hidden agendas here, I merely asked....well read my original post and you can work it out.
Me the drama queen lol...coming from someone whose writing style is so sensationalised, you even write like the crap you read!
when sunday trading laws were introduced,bosses promised that staff would have to work on Sundays and that it would be voluntary...that soon changed, as new staff came into employment it was in their contracts that they would have to work Sundays as a normal working day...so the fact that a few corner shops or as you put it Indian and Pakistan shops are open in your area on Easter and Xmas holidays should mean ,that right should also go to the bigger shops,sounds to me like you don't like the idea of non christian buisiness's getting one over on the law!
Quote by kentswingers777
Because I have a 2.3 litre car I already use more fuel than many cars so I pay more in fuel duty, but the bigger cars now could end up paying £950. It literally is Highway robbery.
You could always get a car with a smaller engine, okay you might not be able to race away at the lights or do more than 70 mph without putting a strain on the engine...but think of allthe money your save!
Firstly I have loads of money.
Second if I did as you suggested I would be a bore, and would not want that...........would we?
You a bore then Powers?
Let me guess why...you a minimum wage paying boss?
Quote by kentswingers777
Because I have a 2.3 litre car I already use more fuel than many cars so I pay more in fuel duty, but the bigger cars now could end up paying £950. It literally is Highway robbery.
You could always get a car with a smaller engine, okay you might not be able to race away at the lights or do more than 70 mph without putting a strain on the engine...but think of all the money your save!
Quote by goldsmith
Sorry, I wasn't implying that you were. I added that I didn't know your reasons, but I'm sure that some other couples would have that reason
I re read your post and edited mine, great minds think alike eh?
It would be good for people reading this topic to here your own personal reasons though, as I cant think of anything other than homophobia to a lesser or greater degree, and that exists within the theatrical community. Whether that's to a lesser or greater degree it does exist,
I am sure it would, but it really isn't important what the reasons are, they are our choices. If I was homophobic, would I be bi - I think not!
Perhaps not,but is your partner?
No - I don't like homophobic people, so I wouldn't be with him if he was. And if he was homophobic, would he be with me? I doubt it.
But your not a gay or bi guy are you,so why wouldn't he be with you.
homophobic - prejudiced against homosexual people - I suppose that means bi too, so that answers your question i think.
ah but what about the guys with the "i don't mind my bird having abit of lesbian sex but not two blokes,it ain't normal" mentality.
Quote by goldsmith
Sorry, I wasn't implying that you were. I added that I didn't know your reasons, but I'm sure that some other couples would have that reason
I re read your post and edited mine, great minds think alike eh?
It would be good for people reading this topic to here your own personal reasons though, as I cant think of anything other than homophobia to a lesser or greater degree, and that exists within the theatrical community. Whether that's to a lesser or greater degree it does exist,
I am sure it would, but it really isn't important what the reasons are, they are our choices. If I was homophobic, would I be bi - I think not!
Perhaps not,but is your partner?
No - I don't like homophobic people, so I wouldn't be with him if he was. And if he was homophobic, would he be with me? I doubt it.
But your not a gay or bi guy are you,so why wouldn't he be with you.
Quote by goldsmith
Sorry, I wasn't implying that you were. I added that I didn't know your reasons, but I'm sure that some other couples would have that reason
I re read your post and edited mine, great minds think alike eh?
It would be good for people reading this topic to here your own personal reasons though, as I cant think of anything other than homophobia to a lesser or greater degree, and that exists within the theatrical community. Whether that's to a lesser or greater degree it does exist,
I am sure it would, but it really isn't important what the reasons are, they are our choices. If I was homophobic, would I be bi - I think not!
Perhaps not,but is your partner?
Quote by goldsmith
People who worry about being jumped by bi people when they're straight aren't using much common sense. If you agree to meet up and everyone knows the score then it's just going to ruin the fun if people are put into uncomfortable positions. I can understand being in an uncomfortable position with single guys, but bashing them is for another thread.
I agree with that, when we meet new couples we always make sure we all know what's what before we ever get to the playing stage. It did baffle me really that the person who mentioned it to me said she had come across lots of people who wouldnt meet them because she was bi and they didn't want their lady half of the couple 'jumped' on. I would never, ever expect to play with a str8 female of a couple, its not only disrespectful, its a sure fire way of ruining what could potentially be a good time.
However, just to put the cat among the pigeons, we dont meet bi guys, not because we are afraid that they will 'jump' on silver, but because we choose not to for reasons which we feel comfortable with. Hypocritical or not, that's our rule which we stick to.
From experience we have found bi guys to be less pushy than bi girls.
If you read what I said, thats not the reason we dont meet bi guys.
Did i say it was?
Quote by goldsmith
People who worry about being jumped by bi people when they're straight aren't using much common sense. If you agree to meet up and everyone knows the score then it's just going to ruin the fun if people are put into uncomfortable positions. I can understand being in an uncomfortable position with single guys, but bashing them is for another thread.
I agree with that, when we meet new couples we always make sure we all know what's what before we ever get to the playing stage. It did baffle me really that the person who mentioned it to me said she had come across lots of people who wouldnt meet them because she was bi and they didn't want their lady half of the couple 'jumped' on. I would never, ever expect to play with a str8 female of a couple, its not only disrespectful, its a sure fire way of ruining what could potentially be a good time.
However, just to put the cat among the pigeons, we dont meet bi guys, not because we are afraid that they will 'jump' on silver, but because we choose not to for reasons which we feel comfortable with. Hypocritical or not, that's our rule which we stick to.
From experience we have found bi guys to be less pushy than bi girls.
Quote by goldsmith
I have just been informed by someone in the chatroom, that most str8 couples wont meet a couple with a bi female incase the srt8 lady gets jumped on. I think this is rather odd as surely people chat about such things before they ever get into that situation. And being a bi female doesnt mean you have no respect for someone who is str8.
I just thought I would put this one in and see what comments come back, if any.
I'll tell you of our first experience on the swinging scene,it was in a club and we were in one of the play areas and another couple approached us...the usual touching and fondling started,until the lady of the other couple started doing the same to my wife, my wife made a polite wave of her hand that she was not interested in her, well you should have seen the strop this woman put on, like what my wife had done was the biggest insult ever. We have been to many clubs and we have seen quite a few women assume they can just go up to other women and grope them without even asking,like it's their god given right, because your a woman and your in a swingers club, you must be bi!
Quote by Kaznkev
i never heard this myself , but since straight couples seem to believe that bi men are gonna the male given half a chance i can believe it,
To be honest , and i am in a bad mood so this is something im gonna regret in the morning,it seems typical of the attitudes of those who are not swingers but believe that a little dalliance in nsa to enhance there sex lives is just the ticket.
i am not saying that bi/straight/gay/poly/pan/trans are designations of swingers, you can be any all or none of these,however i do believe that an openness to others and acceptance of them is the only point the silly word has.
Bring back the contact mag days i say , then these feckers with a credit card can all hang out togeather and share stories of wild nights
tola ya i wasnt a fluffy bunny right now :giggle:
Really? Thats a bit of a generalisation,you do have the facts to back that up don't you?
Quote by kentswingers777
Would this woman have recieved as much press coverage if she had refused an unmarried couple from staying at her hotel,probably not!...would anyone care...probably not ,but because its a gay couple "shock horror"...everyones outraged!
i before e except after c...
err yeah right okay!
Quote by kentswingers777
It is all well and good having a Sarah's law, as that obviously can help others to protect their kids but....how must Mrs Payne be feeling today to find out her childs killer, had pictures of her in his cell?
|uk|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F% %2Fsarah-payne-photos-in-killers-cell%2Farticle%2F 467965798
I cannot for the life of me understand how this filthy person managed to acquire these in the first place? He is in a prison environment and the very child he murdered, the authorities obviously were not monitoring him enough.
Spare a thought today for Mrs Payne and try for one second to think how she must have felt.
This animal really should have saved us all a lot of money, and been put to death when he was found guilty! Human rights only apply to humans, and this animal does not fall into that category!
There is a sweeping statement. :twisted:
Actually they are being monitored,if he wasn't, then these newspaper and magazine clippings wouldn't have been discovered, prisoners are allowed to have newspapers and magazines delivered and Wakefield has over 600 prisoners,now if this man did have his papers censored there is nothing stopping other prisoners from passing stuff on,thats why routine checks are made on cells to look for inappropriate material from specific prisoners like this we take his right away and the right of all other prisoners to have newspapers and magazines,yeah we could but guess what,some con would sue the prison service on the grounds of their human rights being violated and probably win...less expensive just to let them have the papers...besides we wouldn't want the poor newspaper companies losing all that revenue.
Quote by GnV
We used to have a system whereby the more academically able and inclined were taught at a separate school better resourced and equipped for their needs. The less academically able were similarly taught more practical and vocational skills. This was the 11+ and the grammar school system.
Now we have (mostly) a homogenised, dumbed down, one size fits all solution which serves nobody very well.
Standards have definitely declined over the years. GCSEs are so dumbed down that they're practically worthless as far as employers are concerned and as everyone seems to have loads of them with good grades, they cannot determine who the better candidates are.
The GCSE stuff my kids did, did not appear dumbed-down.
I posted at length earlier regarding my own, very recent experience of university and current school leavers.
Degrees are increasingly easy to pass - soon that qualification will be so prevalent that post grad degrees will be needed (as per Vonnegut's "Player Piano") in order to get a job of any substance.
I know not all children are academically inclined, that's why they used to teach kids how to do brick laying, plumbing, basic mechanics, joinery, metalwork at secondary schools and they'd do CSEs which were more appropriate to their academic abilities.
They still do. They just don't call them CSEs; they are NVQs now.
Some kids develop later than others and it was quite commonplace for a non grammar school students to do some O levels as well as CSEs if they were up to the required standard.
It seems to me, that we've scrapped an, albeit less than perfect, system which served us well and replaced it with a total disaster. Then we're told how wonderful it is, how much standards have improved, when it patently is simply not the case.
Ah the old NVQ.
Most employers that I deal with think they are almost worthless unless it is a level 3 NVQ.
We took on a 21 year old last August with a couple of NVQ's and he could not count past twenty, that is true.
Napoleon Bonaparte had a similar affliction - but it didn't put him off. He just changed the numerical system of the State to accommodate his needs - which endures even to this day :grin:
Albert Einstien couldn't do simple arithmetic.
Quote by kentswingers777
So are you saying we have NO failing schools?
I think you will find there are many.
As I know roughly where you live, check the Offsted report for Bexleyheath school 2007.
The headteacher was sacked and the teachers were vilified in their report.
I think I have said this before on here.
The school had a new headteacher in who has turned the school around but a whole five years of pupils education was wasted by a school that Offsted said was " miserably failings it's pupils " in many areas.
So a headteacher at the top of his profession cannot do his job, and the teachers who have degrees and a minimum of five years experience were also found to be " inconsistant ".
Offsted must be wrong then?
so it about the teachers failings??
what about the kids??
shouldn't they also take responsibilty for some of these failings aswell?
like i said if they don't want to learn you can't force them.
and why not put some of this blame on the parents aswell while we at it,if some parents can't give a monkeys arse what their kids are learning at school then why should the kids. Schools could do alot more with the support from parents and not just blaming it all on the teachers!
The problem with you is like alot of other people,when the exam results come out every year, and it looks like a good one for the pupils,you go and blame the exams being dumbed down,why not just accept that it's down to better educated pupils instead for once!
Quote by kentswingers777
What I meant by the basics is a reasonable level of attainment in the three R's!
We have interviewed youngsters who cannot read or write properly.
How is an employer going to give them a fair chance of work?
Reading is knowledge and knowledge is success....it sort of goes hand in hand.
their reading and writing is not down to the quality or lack of teaching skills...have you ever considered that maybe they just don't want to learn anything and spend the best part of school just bunking off?...and if such kids can't be bothered to learn or go to school,are they really interested in working?
Quote by kentswingers777
Am sorry Foxy but I get sick and tired of " snipes " at me all the time.
I start threads here which some do not like and some that is the nature of a forum.
Seems it is always the same people that have nothing constructive to say apart from a dig...on this occasion I am not talking about Awayman. He put together a good counter arguement.
If I had a quid everytime this has happened I would be able to buy myself a new house.
you are inconsistant,inconsistant,inconsistant,there i said it...in one sentence you talk of exams being dumbed down ,then in the next say kids are better off just knowing the basics,why? does their intellect frighten you so much that you need to have them kept down to your level of intelligence...you talk of "so called professionals" as knowing nothing yet you take the word of a "so called professional,with a plumb in the mouth" as gospel...you have selective thinking that is so blinkered.
Quote by kentswingers777
Well whatever officials within the education system may say, this high powered business woman surely knows better?
I have said for years that exams are getting easier, what with coursework being allowed as part of your grades or...being allowed to take your GCSE's a year earlier in a lot of cases.
This is a pretty damning statement from an employer who recruits thousands of people.
As an employer we have taken on youngsters, and whilst they never seemed to have a attitude problem, I certainly would not have let any of them write a letter on the companys behalf, or do an invoice as their skills in that department were pretty poor.
It sorts of makes a mockery of the " best exam results ever " brigade.
I deal with a lot of companies who experience exactly what she is saying, and that is why a lot of employers will not take school leavers on, which is sad as a huge percentage are not like this....are they?
You should choose your friends more carefully Kenty.
She's a former civil servant who worked for the worst government in the twentieth century (John Major's sleaze ridden collection of non entities) then used her career in the Civil Service as a springboard to a place on the board at Tesco's despite having no real time experience of the world of work. Quality recruitment that by Tesco's. If you're in the business of playing join the dots, can you think of the most famous Tory Party figure to be associated with Tesco's? Anyway, on to your more substantive points.
Kids have always been allowed to take exams a year early. The 'genius kid gets O level maths at 11' story is a staple of local hacks in August.
Coursework is a way of redressing the balance between those kids who're bright but nervous and those who're good at exams, rather than intelligent.
As for Tescos having problems with the kids they recruit, have they tried some traditional recruitment tactics; like paying a decent wage, giving them decent training, motivating them and giving them a reason to believe there's a career for them in Tescos.
Nah, thought not. They like 16 year olds because they don't even have to pay NMW, and they lobbied the government to allow them to use 16 year olds to sell alcohol they can't even drink.
Class company Tescos.
You have shown your opinions many times on here, and I always knew you hated big business.
I think you will find they pay a decent wage already. Or are you saying they employ youngsters and pay them an illegal wage? Which one is it?
I also think you know nothing whatsoever about the training they offer, otherwise you would not make ridiculous unknowledgable claims.
Sometimes you really overdo the amateur dramatics thing.
Or are you now implying another trade you have done?
Prey tell everyone how you know so much about Tesco's recruitment policies and their wage structure. I am intrigued to know or is it another rant against anything successful in business?
well i'd take anything awayman says over the inconsistant bollocks that you sprout on a daily basis...
Quote by kentswingers777
Kent, he's never going to be released. It's just not going to happen. He is however entitled to know what his minimum sentence is, and that's what is being thrashed out in the courts at the moment. When he was sentenced, the judge said he should serve a minimum of 30 years, which he's very nearly done, but unusally the Home Office have never actually given him his tariff, which sets out the minimum length of sentence before he becomes eligible for consideration for parole. The current case is simply looking at what evidence should be taken into account so that the tariff can at last be set. Chances are, after lots of legal arguments and lurid headlines about this, that and the other, for 13 murders he'll be given a whole life tariff, which means he will die in prison.
Neil x x x ;)
:thumbup:
Kent, I often wonder why you actually still live in this country, when you appear to be so against many of the systems in place for us all.
Being honest it is because I am English and my family is here.
When I retire which will be in about ten years time, I will move abroad.
The UK has become a laughing stock for most of Europe, and a guy who was on the radio the other day from South Africa was talking about the UK, said they view us over here as rather odd....cannot disagree with that comment I suppose.
:lol: I am hoping and praying that this lefty Government that have destroyed a lot of what was great about this country, will be kicked out and then I hope that some of the things can be put right...won't hold me breath though.
Nice of you to think about me FB...truly touched. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Anyway FB schools are not shut for another holiday at the moment are they? As you seem to be on here in school hours.
100 lines...........I shall not use the computers in working hours. :lol:
Yeah,because South Africa doesn't have any faults,and is considered the safest country to live in,no poverty to talk about there!
Quote by kentswingers777
*snip* So who ARE the people who can teach the kids?
Well certainly not just a teacher out of Uni, but I would say someone to come in from outside the school.
Quote by kentswingers777
I would say a Primary school teacher may well know how to teach it, but have you any exams or a diploma in sex education? A biology degree perhaps
So a teacher out of Uni could teach sex education...i mean they would have a degree wouldn't they?
Stopped watching Eastenders regulary,years ago...too much doom and gloom,unbelievible story lines,awful acting and definately an unrealistic view of the east end of london.I can understand why it is so popular however but not because of how gritty and realistic it is, its because its so awful it makes for funny and entertaining viewing.
Send me a dirty PM and I'll think about it 