tonyh29 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Don't know if anyone's mentioned the fact that people in Scotland pay the least water charges in Britain. The reason being, Scottish Water was never privatised, it is still in public hands. I bet it's subsidised by the English PS .. it didn't stop the execs there paying themselves £1.5m in bonuses , a rise of 7% each on the previous year Edited April 10, 2013 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Don't know if anyone's mentioned the fact that people in Scotland pay the least water charges in Britain. The reason being, Scottish Water was never privatised, it is still in public hands. Its because they hardly drink the stuff Yeah i thought they drink nothing but Irn Bru up north Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Edited April 10, 2013 by Risso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death.Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners...The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions.People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted April 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. What about the people who don't care either way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. What about the people who don't care either way? You can, errr, meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Very much over the Thatcher coverage now - sort of hoping NK do nuke someone just to distract the Beeb until the funeral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. Of course you can do what you like. i personally feel that to criticise someone in the way many have done with the Baroness and then to display the lack of common decency or dignity on her death is basically displaying the same, if not worse, traits that they are sometimes complaining of when they level the accusation at her that she did not care and had no morals.. Double standards and hypocrisy. As human beings we surely have a duty to display decency, dignity, manners , standards call it what you like. Not to do that does, in my opinion, make our society a poorer place. Very very sad to be honest that people feel that way 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) I don't take pleasure in any human's death, but to say that rejoicing in a little schadenfreude is equal to Thatcher's purported wrong doings is rather disingenuous. Edited April 10, 2013 by Brumerican 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Very much over the Thatcher coverage now - sort of hoping NK do nuke someone just to distract the Beeb until the funeral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 A riot alongside the funeral cortège would be probably be the most fitting send off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 The comparison with hitler , and why it is disgraceful, was a direct reference to actions both had done. "Destroyed the lives of millions" was the phrase used and in the next breath hitler was the comparison, obviously comparing actions. My commentary there was that it is a disgrace to compare actions as it was obviously done.To claim that an inference you drew (correct or not) is a 'direct reference' to something whilst failing to understand that a comparison of the 'revulsion and expressions of hatred' for two people implicitly implies a comparison of the actions that led people to those expressions and opinions is, to be charitable, staggeringly biased.Two differs arguements as I am capable of multi tasking and having differen t opinions on different things.I think that kind of thing is best left to others to judge lest you be accused of immodesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. Great post Pete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. Of course you can do what you like. i personally feel that to criticise someone in the way many have done with the Baroness and then to display the lack of common decency or dignity on her death is basically displaying the same, if not worse, traits that they are sometimes complaining of when they level the accusation at her that she did not care and had no morals.. Double standards and hypocrisy. As human beings we surely have a duty to display decency, dignity, manners , standards call it what you like. Not to do that does, in my opinion, make our society a poorer place. Very very sad to be honest that people feel that way Out of interest, would you yourself have any criticisms of Maggie Thatcher relating to her time as UK Prime Minister? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death. Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners... The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions. People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever. Of course you can do what you like. i personally feel that to criticise someone in the way many have done with the Baroness and then to display the lack of common decency or dignity on her death is basically displaying the same, if not worse, traits that they are sometimes complaining of when they level the accusation at her that she did not care and had no morals.. Double standards and hypocrisy. As human beings we surely have a duty to display decency, dignity, manners , standards call it what you like. Not to do that does, in my opinion, make our society a poorer place. Very very sad to be honest that people feel that way Out of interest, would you yourself have any criticisms of Maggie Thatcher relating to her time as UK Prime Minister? That she resigned? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 does anyone know if paul mcartnys singing hey jude at the funeral? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 What did this Iron Lady do to bust everyones balls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2013 What did this Iron Lady do to bust everyones balls?Save anyone repeating themselves, perhaps you could read the topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 What did this Iron Lady do to bust everyones balls? How long have you got. "Vi er best i verden! Vi er best i verden! Vi har slått England 2-1 i fotball!! Det er aldeles utrolig! Vi har slått England! England, kjempers fødeland. Lord Nelson, Lord Beaverbrook, Sir Winston Churchill, Sir Anthony Eden, Clement Attlee, Henry Cooper, Lady Diana--vi har slått dem alle sammen. Vi har slått dem alle sammen. "Maggie Thatcher can you hear me? Maggie Thatcher, your boys took a hell of a beating! Your boys took a hell of a beating! Maggie Thatcher, jeg har et budskap til deg midt under valgkampen. Jeg har et budskap til deg: Vi har slått England ut av Verdensmesterskapet i fotball. Maggie Thatcher, som de sier på ditt språk i boksebarene rundt Madison Square Garden i New York: Your boys took a hell of a beating! Your boys took a hell of a beating!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted April 10, 2013 Moderator Share Posted April 10, 2013 My commentary is on the dignity and decency we should show upon someone's death.Why "should" we? what is it that says "yes, by all means call someone names when they're alive and can hear or read you do so, but once they're dead and they can't, then, well it's just not cricket, and it's disgraceful, terrble manners...The thing with manners is they change - Women and children are not allowed to speak without being spoken to. We don't have to call everyone "Sir". The level of deference accorded to people is now much more about earned respect, than the conservative (small c) traditions.People who liked or respected the poisonous, soulless witch, by all means hold a whatever type of thing it is you like, to steady your spirits and remember her, and those who regard her as a menace to Society, by all means have a street party, or whatever.Of course you can do what you like. i personally feel that to criticise someone in the way many have done with the Baroness and then to display the lack of common decency or dignity on her death is basically displaying the same, if not worse, traits that they are sometimes complaining of when they level the accusation at her that she did not care and had no morals.. Double standards and hypocrisy. As human beings we surely have a duty to display decency, dignity, manners , standards call it what you like. Not to do that does, in my opinion, make our society a poorer place....That's a set of views that people will recognise, but it's not an answer to the philosophical question I asked. Namely WHY should we treat people differently when dead, with more respect than when alive?And so it isn't one sided, I'd say why we shouldn't. - Firstly, of course, there's sensitivity. Were her family reading this site, it might, just might, be different, to spare the feelings of people genuinely bereaved, not to criticise their recently deceased realtive. But of course they don't read VT. SO there's no sparing the feelings of close relatives, to consider. SO who could be hurt by someone saying "Wahey, the witch is dead" or whatever. Well people who revered her might not like it. But that's no reason, if anything it's more reason to counter the (what many would see as) hagiography - the "sainting" - that goes on - "Ooh she was a marvel, loved children and animals, and northerners and football fans and the poor and the sick..." which is of course utter bollokcs. In other words, it's no more extreme to say she was wicked than to say she was brilliant.Hiding a desire to suppress criticsm of her behind "dignity" or whatever other terms people use is to me a (natural perhaps) aversion to hearing that "your" hero figure is someone else's villain. Like a football fan doesn't want to hear a fan of a rival team criticising their club.Like I said "manners" and etiquette change with time and generally reflect the time and place and culture of a society. Much of that change is for the better.In the 21st Century we do not tug our forelocks and bow before landowners, bankers and the like. And that's appropriate to these times.If the best argument for not critiquing Thatcher is "decency" or manners (tradition, basically) then that's no argument at all, IMO. And the same applies to other public figures. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts