Dean Lofthouse

Sean, you are first on the "At risk" register. Move out of the smoke mate before it's too late

I'd sell it and use the money to move to a less populated country and stuff you brits, leave you to starve to death whilst infested with all sorts of diseases

If we got all the brits back that had ever emigrated we would still be 60m + I get where your coming from though, it seems some cultures enjoy breeding more than others

I had a browse through some 80 year old maps I have of the town I live in the other day. I was shocked at how many houses have been built in such a short space of time....and I mean truly shocked. Town centre is about a mile. Eighty years ago there was about 20 houses between me and 200 yards out of the town centre, now there are thousands. Local governments have housing targets that are rediculous and are eating up the green belt and agricultural land like there's no tomorrow. With the population set to increase from 62m to 70m in less than a decade then it's just getting beyond a joke Your kids may be well brought up and never have claimed benefits ( well done you for that ) but they are one of a number that will need a house that is going to be built on land that should be retained for agriculture. I for one dont think we should be reliant on imported food, we are at the moment. I honestly believe that we are not far off giving up the means of being self sufficient by destroying agricultural land. If we can be proved to be totally self sufficeint and build houses without using green belt land then breed away, no worries. But there has to come a point when we need to sit back and look at how many people we can fit into a given area and be self supportive It may be hard for some people to swallow, but it is fact

Humans have the intelligence to limit their breeding but choose not to, animals do it naturally according to their food source. If you would prefer nature to thin out the populus, no worries. We are due a pandemic any time soon, that'll sort us

Like has been said Ben, swap the carb for one you know is good to isolate the problem. You an spend hours messing about when it only takes a few minutes to swap, obviously if the problem is still there at least you know to look elsewhere. I had one which turned out to be one of those faulty carbs

I wasn't aware there was one ??

I believe heavily in nature. Nature has it's own way of sorting out the populus, it isn't pleasant, so it's better we manage our population ourselves the pleasant way. Super bugs, aids, flu's, virus's, etc etc etc are all natures way of thinning us out. They target weakness's, normally old, infirm or ill. But they also come into play during famine when the bodies natural defences are weak due to nutritional deficency. I dont have a problem with death, when my time is up it's up. What I do have a problem with is people breeding out of control without the means to self support without the help of benefits. I think you should be allowed three kids then should have to have the chop and if your a prolific benefits claimer and have never worked and no intention of working, then you should be steralised. You should also be steralised if you are a repeat criminal. Don't want bad blood in the gene pool

Money left in the pot has nothing to do with increasing population That is bad budget management.

People living longer has nothing to do with it. Keeping their tackle in their pants has. This isn't a UK problem, it is a world wide problem, we multiply worldwide at a rate of something like 1 million newborn per hour

I have always been of the opinion that a couple should only have two kids to replace themselves. I personally had the chop after two kids. Around ten years ago I remarked how green belt and agricultural land was being eaten up at an alarming rate. The reason behind this is simple, there are far too many humans populating a given area of land. If there was another world war and we had to rely on food we produce, we would be stuffed. If the land we occupy cannot sustain the populus, then we need to think about a cull or to stop breeding. Humans are supposed to be intelligent beings, but seem to be so thick that they continue breeding at an alarming rate. It has now made the news recently, that in a very short time, Britains population will go over the 70 million mark and unless we start bring agricultural land back into use we will be very heavily dependant on importing food. So much so, that if imports stopped there would be a mass famine in the uk. There is even talk about having to geneticly modify crops to produce enough to self sustain. Nature isn't complex, you follow some basic rules and you will survive, break those rules and you will die. So here's a little pointer to everyone, stop breeding because you are putting me and my family at risk in the future.

Wasn't me....I've been fencing this week

I know Mick, I'd never have made a good Sergeant Major.

Got an H&S assessment visit and your form filling to do I'll ring back end of this week

I need you monday, are you free ps. "looking" has got two o's

Excuses excuses !

What about with a 14" bar and one with a 10" bar. There's more to life than worrying about 1lb Try taking a dump in a morning, you can lose a good few pounds. Personally, I reckon if one pound in weight on a saw bothers you, you need to get an office job I want power and speed of cut and if that means an extra two pounds, I can live with that. I doubt it would take months of weight training to handle the extra weight

I think worrying about an extra pound in weight is a little extreme

I used to repair them Matty and it was quite common for a lot of stihl saws to be missing a serial number, not because it has been removed, but because it had never been stamped. The milling marks were still on the plate but no numbers

I think safer may have been the wrong word in that sentence, efficient would have been a better word to use there, as I know you are going to mention slings. Safer has in two hands "close in" or one hand at "arms length"

I've just sat and watched all their vids on youtube Fascinating

I started with tree work in 1986 came out of it after a few years then started again 9 years ago and I have tried every conceivable method, back hand, fore hand, between the legs, upside down, back to front, inside out, you name it I have done it. Using a saw two handed all the time, does not suddenly make you a good arborist nor using it one handed make you a bad arborist. You are clearly missing my point 95% of tree sureons one hand and maybe cut and hold. With that sort of percentage dont you think training should be provided when doing your cs units to encompass this and demonstrate safe and unsafe cutting, rather than someone new to the industry learning from what they see. Newbies are taught correct cutting when felling so when unleashed unto the world, they instantly recognised dodgey bad practice and can choose whether or not to follow suit. If they are not taught safe use of a saw one handed, then they will have to make a judgement for themselves as to what they are seeing is good or bad I would say that if 95% of people cut using one hand, then it cannot be all bad, there must be some parts of that cutting that can be seperated out as completely safe and training provided So 5% are right and 95% are wrong, that's democrasy for you. I personally want to see a form of cut and hold taught within a cs unit, because I know, that under cirtain circumstances it is much safer than cutting with two hands

For an extra £50 we could even demonstrate ladders from a mewp basket to gain extra height just for fun

Already got a bound copy and a copy on disc:biggrin:

I have used it very little to be honest, just enough to try it out. It's been sitting gathering dust Initially I can't fault it