Squaredy

14 minutes ago, david lawrence said:

It also Grills sausages judging by pic👍

It sure does.  I do love a hot dog.

10 hours ago, Muddy42 said:

 

Sounds amazing! Id love to have one of those. Maybe when I downsize houses.

 

I think this fear of slumbering, or cold water cooling the boiler, low stove efficiency etc is way too narrow a frame of reference.  Your experience shows you can burn the stove hot and clean. Plus you are saving on heating oil/gas/electric. 

 

Here it is this evening.

8 hours ago, Muddy42 said:

 

Sounds amazing! Id love to have one of those. Maybe when I downsize houses.

 

I think this fear of slumbering, or cold water cooling the boiler, low stove efficiency etc is way too narrow a frame of reference.  Your experience shows you can burn the stove hot and clean. Plus you are saving on heating oil/gas/electric. 

 

It is good.  But don’t underestimate how much firewood it burns.  Probably getting on for a ton of properly dry firewood per month when it is cold.  So don’t even think about it unless you have the energy, space and time to process a whole lot of firewood.  If you have to buy it in you will save no money.

11 hours ago, GarethM said:

They aren't designed to be a poncy room feature, they're designed to burn hot and hard and store the heating efficiently out of sight.

 

That's partly why back boilers were stopped, it can't burn clean just ticking along slowly.

Now I bought a Morso stove fifteen years ago with a back boiler.  It heats my whole house via rads, but not hot water.

The salesman told us when we bought it that it would be slumbering much of the time.  How wrong he was.  Maybe if my house were better insulated he might have been right, but If it is properly cold I have it on quite high, and if it is only a little chilly I don’t light it because it would end up boiling.

Not saying you are wrong, just not been my experience.

I have just read about Elizabeth Kinney and how she was arrested in the bath by 11 police officers for what she said in a private text message.  I genuinely would like to know if there is another side to this story as it seems too preposterous to be real.

Here is the link.  Not sure it is going to work but you can google her name.

I am always suspicious of someone who looks like that as clearly she places a vast importance on how she looks and enjoys sharing how she looks (or how AI makes her look).  But in a nutshell this is the story:

An acquaintance and her fell out and she ended up in hospital when he assaulted her.  She then ranted by text message and amongst other things called him a faggot.  11 police officers came into her house without warning (all but one male) and arrested her whilst she was having a bath.  They told her she could get 5 to 10 years in jail for a hate crime.

In sentencing the magistrates handed out an uplifted sentence due to the 'homophobic' content.  None of the messages were even read out in court.

Surely the police don't send 11 police officers to arrerst someone for hurty words said in private when they usually don't bother to attend actual burglary or shoplifting.....?????

On 08/11/2025 at 16:22, Mark J said:

Maccabi fans are well known for violence. I genuinelly think it was a good call to prevent their firm rocking up and wrecking the place, like they did in Amsterdam. 
 

Why Maccabi Tel Aviv fans with record of violent rampages were really banned

WWW.MIDDLEEASTEYE.NET

---

Starmer has condemned restrictions on Aston Villa match amid widespread outrage, but the Israeli club's supporters have a history of violence and disruption

 

This story just took a turn for the worse.  It turns out that when West Midlands police did their research into Maccabi Tel Aviv some of their information was just gleaned from social media with no double check.  They had to admit yesterday in front of a select committee of MPs that their report even quoted a football match that never took place.  And that an incident in Amsterdam last  year where a Maccabi fan was pushed into a river was inverted to say Maccabi fans pushed Ajax fans into the river.

This would be very embarrassing for anyone.  But this is the research that one of our largest police forces used to decide to ban Maccabi fans.  Someone needs to be held accountable.

6 hours ago, trigger_andy said:

Im considering buying a used Sawmill thats on a trailer package from Europe. As I understand it I'd be liable for 20% vat on the purchase price and have to show its origin of manufacture. 

 

How easy/difficult is it navigating to and on/off of the LeShuttle with a 7m plus trailer?

 

How likely am I to be "caught" by customs with a used machine and told to cough up?

 

Any advice?

Can you not get it on one of those inflatable dinghies from a beech? 

The French authorities would give you a shove out and the Brits would give you a new phone and a bed for a year or two once you land.  You could even state you would be persecuted in your native Scotland and they would have to feed you for quite a while.  You could use Arbtalk threads as evidence of how you are treated and racially discriminated against.

10 hours ago, daveatdave said:

MSN

WWW.MSN.COM

 

The details of this will be interesting.  Whatever is proposed however will it be policed....?!

8 hours ago, sime42 said:

It's rather a tricky thing to quantify anyway: the exact degree and then ranking of Openness of Corruption. How would it ever be proved one way or another in court if it ever came to that?

That is exactly the point.  The BBC could never prove that Trump was the most corrupt US president. Especially as only one US President has resigned due to corruption (Nixon).  It was unsafe and unprovable so it was removed.  Seems fair to me.

And yes I agree there is undoubtedly a degree of corruption in the Trump administration.  And Biden’s and Obama’s etc, etc.  And indeed the current Uk government, the previous government, and so on.

Much as I sometimes hate the media, we really do depend on them to point the finger when there is evidence.  But am I OK with them self censoring?  Yes absolutely, if Trump has made them examine their output to see if it is accurate then thank Trump for that.  Remember that as long as they can prove the accuracy of a statement they cannot be sued for it.  The problem is if they start making statements or giving opinions which are disputed.  We could argue all year about who was the most corrupt US President; but if you state that Trump said this and did that then as long as he did, that cannot end up in court.

I do however agree that freedom of speech in the UK is being seriously undermined at the moment, but that is largely by our own government.  The fact we even have a free speech union is shocking enough.  And the examples recently of arrests for what people have said are state over-reach becoming very sinister. But the finger of blame points at our controlling establishment (government, police, councils, schools, universities) not Trump. 

35 minutes ago, AHPP said:

 

Wool of gay sheep makes its debut at a New York fashion show - raising money for rams 'that prefer same-sex partners' | Daily Mail Online

WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK

---

Los Angeles-based designer Michael Schmidt, launched the line to bring a 'human rights story' to the runway after finding out that homosexual sheep...

 

Some people have way too much free time.

30 minutes ago, sime42 said:

 

To be fair it was far from just Trump bashing. He didn't get much more than a mention in the hour long session. He, Bregman, was equally as scathing of the Left as he was of the Right really. He has no allegiance to the BBC as far as I know. 

 

The sensored claim was that Trump was “the most openly corrupt president in American history”.  Which isn't that controversial actually. The man himself doesn't exactly make much attempt to conceal his dealings. 

Bregman seems like a very well informed and knowledgeable guy, I'm sure he didn't write those words without a good deal of research leading to credible citations and evidence. 

 

The point here is that the BBC, our public broadcaster, is running scared from the bullying tactics of another country's president. That means he has influence over them. To me, that isn't a good state of affairs. I thought more people might be alarmed by this, as there's been a lot of noise about The Death of Free Speech recently. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mmmm interesting.  I think it is clear why they removed that line.  It is nonsense.

I guess you don’t know about Nixon and watergate.  Or indeed Clinton. Not to mention many moons ago Harding.

Trump has been accused of various things, but so far not much has stuck.

34 minutes ago, sime42 said:

 

 

Not bias as such, but an interesting twist on the theme. This is a bad sign of the times. It looks like the BBC have been bullied into self-censorship this time. The not so insidious death of free speech again.

An interesting programme btw. The Reith Lectures are always good. I'd urge you to have a listen. 

 

 

Historian Rutger Bregman criticises BBC for removing Donald Trump line from Radio 4's Reith Lecture

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

Rutger Bregman says he is "genuinely dismayed" after a line about the US president was edited out.

 

 

 

Thank you, I will listen.  Though I have heard from someone who attended the lecture and he hated it!  If it is just Trump bashing I have heard plenty of that from the BBC over the years.  Their presenters on the radio are all anti-Trump, even the many who I listen to on Times Radio (all ex BBC) are always highly partisan when it comes to Trump.
 

I guess if the BBC removed a line they must have realised it could be libellous.  In which case that is what they should do.  As long as they stick to reporting things accurately they have nothing to fear

1 hour ago, Steven P said:

fuel (petrol) duty being frozen

This was a funny way of putting it.  What she actually has done is end the fuel duty freeze which has been in place for 16 years (as from next September).

But somehow she spun that as a freeze on fuel duty!

No comments about the budget anyone?   I suppose it was already fairly well known so no major surprises today?

+1 for Cutty Mc Cutface.

35 minutes ago, BillQ said:

What does it say?

 

 

If jumping to conclusions was an Olympic sport, you'd be a contender!

You make the point that he is just a suspect, nothing is proven yet.  But I suspect most people would not welcome him in the UK.  It is great to be a lovely caring society but sometimes you have to say 'No!'.  After all, if we get a reputation as being a country that will always protect terror suspects and block them from returning to the country where the crime took place we are pretty much doomed.

And there is a second problem of him staying here.  Should he be allowed total freedom, in which case that could be putting the lives of many people in the UK at risk (if he is a terrorist that is).  Or if we agree he must be supervised or at least kept a careful watch over then what will that cost?

18 minutes ago, green heart said:

Motorway matrix signs... slowing all road traffic down to 40mph, for an  accident, that was cleared the previous day.... ?!

 

Motorways restricted to 50mph and 2 lanes, for several miles, due to road works, where the only person present is the Traffic Management employee -asleep in the truck.. 

 

Yes, I think that's the smell of heated urine..

 

You have just reminded me of the M48 in South Wales.  It’s is always a 50mph motorway.  Permanently.  It is a lovely quiet motorway as the new Severn bridge and new motorway were opened in 1993 which are far more convenient for most journeys.  If I ever go to Chepstow from my house I drive along the full 12 miles of it at 50.  It seems to take weeks.

9 hours ago, Billhook said:

Now I have turned something on, but there was no red warning!  G.O.M.S.

 

While we are on about Road Closed signs what about sets of roadwork traffic lights and cones and barriers that are not protecting a hole in the road, that could easily be shifted to the side after work , holding traffic up all through the night needlessly.  Or similar in the daytime when nobody  is working except for one man reading the paper in his van with the engine running. Talk about pollution as it is happening all over the country 

Totally agree.  I have a photo of a hole dug in a pavement near me which then had a set of three way temporary lights set up and the only obstruction was a small pile of earth in the road - between parked cars.  Ludicrous and caused massive congestion for absolutely nothing.  Actually thinking about it the A48 near me had this earlier this year....but that was a four way set of lights.  And for three days it was just for the pavement - nothing at all in the road.  Finally they dug up the road.  But the chaos it caused for the first few days on a very busy bus route was awful.  No brain was engaged in that traffic managament except covering their backs.

This thread is made for me!  I have wondered in the past about starting a thread about terrible design, but this is even better. 

Following on from the taps mentioned earlier, what about automatic taps that simply do not work.  I first came across this in 1997 (so etched on my mind was the trauma of not being able to work a tap) and one would think they would work well now.  But no.  I know a set of three newly installed at a local sports club near me where you have to dodge between them all hoping that you will get enough little dribbles out of each to finally wash your hands.

1 hour ago, nepia said:

Grumpy Old Man moans... where to start?

 

How about the appalling use (misuse) of Road Closed signs?  You cannot trust them either way and if they're legitimate you can't tell what road they're referring to.

My starter for 10...

Excellent point.  And then if you go past the sign (as they are so often obsolete) and then people shake their heads at you when you are forced to turn round as it is actually closed!

24 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

weird how house prices were even more expensive than today in 1845 - before the minimum wage a lot of those people in 1845 would have been properly poor, so the average wage much lower

Well of course people did not buy their house then.

And I totally agree about upgrading.  I would like to move out of suburbia into proper countryside.  But to do that even for a smaller house means finding about £150,000 extra, so it just ain’t gonna happen.  So yes, we all lose by having high house prices, unless we are lucky enough to inherit or for some other reason have multiple houses.

16 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

I don't see the problems with taxation that you do - many of my customers are quite well off with big gardens, and not aristocrats, just people who worked hard and made good decisions when they were young. Taxation hasn't stopped them building wealth. On this forum I could mention a dozen or more guys who have build successful tree firms that are still trading, despite the tax burdens of recent decades.

Take Beechwood and Aspen, both successful firms that are still trading. You could argue those business owners, as examples would be even wealthier if VAT was only 10% and Ltd tax only 10%, but my point is people are living a good standard of living in the here and now. I'm nowhere near as successful as the two I mentioned, a mere one man band, but I have savings (ISA) and a SIPP, my own modest home nearly all paid for and hopefully a few years left to increase my wealth before my body is degraded to the point manual work is not possible.

Today's environment is good I'd say - I  don't care about VAT or other tax, if I want more mony I just work more days, or sometimes get away with increasing prices. There is no poverty for the hard working that I can see. My tax hasn't all been sqaundered - I've seen a retired guy with a massive lump from leukemia now in remission, cancer treatments are better than 20 years ago. Someone has to pay. People can go to Uni, or become florists, bin men, chefs - all is right in the world

 

I agree I do not see much poverty.  Except perhaps when it comes to buying a house.  I feel for my kids when they want to buy their first house.  

My main gripe is that the government have more money than ever, yet public services are generally dire.  Of course, bear in mind I have lived in a Labour area for 26 years.  Some things like education are certainly better where Labour have not been in charge for long.

25 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

but it isn't the highest tax regime since WW2, if you read that Wiki history of taxation Mark J posted above it says the basic rate was up around 33% for a while. 

 

The government of Margaret Thatcher, who favoured taxation on consumption, reduced personal income tax rates during the 1980s in favour of indirect taxation.^[19] In the first budget after her election victory in 1979, the top rate was reduced from 83% to 60% and the basic rate from 33% to 30%.^[20] The basic rate was also cut for three successive budgets – to 29% in the 1986 budget, 27% in 1987 and to 25% in 1988; The top rate of income tax was cut to 40%.^[21] The investment income surcharge was abolished in 1985.

Under the government of John Major the basic rate was reduced in stages to 23% by 1997.

21st century

Under Labour chancellor Gordon Brown, the basic rate of income tax was further reduced in stages to 20% by 2007. As the basic rate stood at 35% in 1976, it has been reduced by 43% since then. However, this reduction has been largely offset by increases in other regressive taxes such as National Insurance contributions and Value Added Tax (VAT).

And it is worth remembering that when people talk about austerity, the amount of money the public sector takes as tax and spends is at record highs - not just due to the Labour government.  Despite accusations of austerity public sector spending went through the roof under the Conservatives.

Many services have been cut and are struggling, but this is not due to tax cuts or frugality.  If only it were then the solution would be easy.  Our public sector is better funded than it ever has been, but outcomes are probably worse than they ever have been at least since WW2.  The actual solution is to somehow make the public sector efficient and productive.  

45 minutes ago, Mark J said:

those who own the government debt ie: the billionaires we should be taxing

It is worth remembering that the billionaires you are talking about consist mainly of pension funds.  In other words the future prosperity of you and I (unless you have no pension of course).