Steven P

I think we did last year, Mrs Ps account so she might have had a cheque, think it was a direct payment

It's not been road tax for many years, the funds go into the general tax pot and used as and where they want to spend it.

The inference was there. Trying to justify these cuts by saying it won't be the veterans who get sacked and only the management "pen pusher" types.. inferring that the "pen pusher" management types are not going to be veterans. Usually the ones "who do something useful" are the visible ones, the ones who answer the phones or sit on the desks face to face, the bottom of the rung, these are the "useful" ones that you are inferring that veterans should be. There is no moral outrage here as you want us to have, but a realism that in an organisation, for veterans, staffed disproportionally by veterans and with 70,000 sacking in the offering this will affect a large number of veterans, throwing the out onto the street. Unlike your inferences I can accept that the organisation will be evenly distributed with veterans, and those being sacked will be proportionally veterans to, near 20,000 of them. The original comment was the irony that Trump 'bigs them up' in one sentence and then sacks a load of them in the next breath, no outrage, just highlighting his massive double standards. Again.

You're reverting to distractions and irrelevance there Gareth. For the Labour thread, it is not a mission in my life to try to change anyones minds there, I'll leave that for you all to rant... as that thread was set up to be. On topic though, None of us here know who is being sacked, and who works in what position. However a lot of veterans are actually quite intelligent and motivated, there is no reason for them NOT to be in a position of management, rather than your assumption that can't manage and be only suitable for menial front line tasks (the low paid ones). A very arrogant assumption of yours. Pretty sure Johnson,D would prefer to choke on his cornflakes first than give me a reasonable answer, but he is probably the best to ask if military veterans are capable of managing and running departments or companies. I think that they can and I think they will be evenly spaced through that organisation, and so at even risk of being sacked. Near 20,000 of them.

Veterans Affairs Department plans to cut thousands more jobs as part of Trump's cost-cutting efforts WWW.CBSNEWS.COM A memo from the Department of Veterans Affairs' chief of staff said the agency aims to return its workforce to just under 400,000 employees. 27% are veterans, compared to the general population where 6% are veterans. Edit: Sack 70,000 workers, that is nearly 19,000 Veterans sacked.

You might look at the demographic at who they employ... a larger than expected portion are veterans! All sacked....

Not really Stubby, I think it was just an accident / **************** up - but there are those that will make anything up if you add in the US armed forces

This will set the conspiracy theories going... the tanker was chartered to the US military

Didn't see this one over the weekend, but if you are getting a new chain... the big blue dial near the chain takes the chain cover off, might be a good time also to give all that a good clean - generally a wipe with a cloth to get the dust and old oil out. Make a note to clear anything that might be an oil way as well - so generally all a good clean. Putting the new chain on I'd normally go tight enough that the chain spins fairly freely but if you pull it away from the bar - half way along - the drive links come out half way (ie they are still half in the bar: Drive links the bit that runs inside the bar). Probably a whole can of worms there but kind of that tight if no one mentioned that before. Chain tension is probably a turning dial somewhere on the chain cover, loosen the cover a bit, tension, tighten the cover. Note also that a new chain will be sharp enough to cut... Looking at the pictures, as above a blunt chain trying to cut, getting to hot. You can buy files to sharpen your new chain or a shop can do that (If I remember right, mine was about half the price of a new chain), if going DIY, put in an expectation that the first chain won't last as long as subsequent ones. Chain file set I had was about the cost of a chain.

I was going for ash in the first set and then, yes willow I think. If free they are both excellent firewoods. If it was me I'd be collecting the ash first - make the most of your available time then the willow. Split it all this side of summer and both will be ready to burn Winter 2026 / 2027. If you have varied woods available take a quick look at the end grain - close growth rings indicate a more energy dense wood, far apart growth rings and the wood is generally less energy dense. Both have their uses - less energy dense can make excellent kindling, release their heat quickly, but you need to fill the stove more often, but for a heat blast mid winter can add just that. More dense wood is great for general use, and if you are not sat on the stove all day. Best of all of course, is 'free'

To be honest, sitting back and watching is the most all of us can do really, not in a position of influence however we can have opinions. It is rare that the politicians ask for direct feedback and opinions outside of the polling station, feel strong in a subject and if that opportunity occurs you should grab it - a rare opportunity. So yes watching and with opinions. I won' be holding my breath that any of the current governments (US, UK, European) actually reduce the associated national debts significantly in the next year, and likewise reducing the size of the state whiles maintaining its productivity. Third point... I cannot either see that any of Trumps politics will aligns with Saunders wish list (the wish list of the working man), though I can see that a lot of Trumps politics will enable growth in his own personal bank balance from now till his death.

If the country was a business, then a business man might do well to lead it though with Trump, all his inherited wealth, if he'd sat and done nothing with it, he'd be richer - considering his clouded admissions of his wealth, that is taking best estimates). Might be better business men out there able to turn a better profit rather than bankrupting businesses and selling them on so someone else picks up the bill like Trump has done. However government isn't a business, there is no profit and loss account. Government is there to make a loss, spend all they get in, though I think taking on debt is a bad thing. Many of Trumps proposals and his actions are based on spending more than the current income.... bankrupt the 'business' and move on so someone else fixes the problem. This can be seen with things such as his tariffs - touted as a perfect way to make 'other countries' (ie. the American consumer) pay, his efficiency savings (fire the employees like the Tories 'Austerity' years that worked so well, and extending his previous tax rises (he hasn't increased taxes... this term... just extended previously applied increases... sticking to his promises), and still the borrowing is set to increase by a Trillion dollars (?) think it was that. Government is there to spend money, that spending is there to make society work - whether it is large infrastructure like roads, nuclear power, or supporting those in need such as pensions, social security or healthcare. There is no profit and loss account, there is no profit. An alien world to a business man. Career politicians are more likely to have seen and experienced the 'loss' side of government, whether directly as a part of their life (as Saunders was), or on fact finding days out. A businessman is often secluded from the poorest in society as they sit on their gold plated toilets. What I am saying there Gareth, is that if government was a business, profit and loss, then employ a successful business leader with proven track record of increasing wealth. However it isn't and put in place politicians who know the loss side of things, where the money is best spent (as Saunders is). What options for the limited dollars bring the best returns. Trump isn't the man for either case in my opinion. Born into extreme wealth has no idea of poverty and hardship. His business deals haven't actually increased his wealth either, just covered his failed business deals.

I think we are going to see a raft for these stories this week - depends on the rest of world news, but I'm taking some with a pinch of salt. The one I read earlier was financial how the UK hasn't recovered financially like our counterparts in Europe, but failed to mention Brexit (the press don't like to mention that in case it upsets the politicians) and of course Liz Truss. Both have been impacting the UKs economy since they happened and neither affected our neighbours. So a little pinch of salt with these stories when it comes to finances

I'll stick these 2 responses together Gareth, First bit is that you come across as an intelligent man in the other threads in this forum, knowledgeable with your comments. I've seen in many other forums where those with no knowledge in a subject just revert to insults and forum point scoring, which can poison a thread, but get the whole forum kind of agreeing that the poster is an idiot - as I said you appear to be intelligent, don't go down the route of throwing out insults just for the sake of posting a comment. You quoted comment above was really just a jumble of connected words with no real point or comment to make. 'Lefty' as far as I can tell is not really an insult, it is not a weird thing to have left wing views (and in a country that recently voted for a left government). So go your way, insults and appear to have no knowledge, or... keep up your reputation as one with knowledge. In summary the video clip wasn't a bash at what Trump has done in his (4 years +) 6 weeks, the video clip was a response to a speech that Trump made and highlighting the discrepancies between what he has said. A man for the people, his base of the working classes, yet Sanders is highlighting that Trumps speech mentioned them exactly zero times, and his that plans did not include any benefits for that voter base (future plans not action to date, though his first term is a good reference point as to what his plans are). His party were in charge for 4 years, Trumps reign before that was also 4 years. However there are many many reports filtering out of Trumps voter base being summarily sacked for being junior workers, or just working in the wrong department.

No, only the enablers and criminals that he surrounds himself with. "Lefty tag", is that insulting? I'd have to check if a political persuasion, left or right, is an insult. I don't think it is.

Don't be daft, of course he hasn't.

Fact check, as far as I can tell from the fact checker websites, Bill Gates didn't visit Epsteins island. Maybe you should do that next time, fact checking. Fact check also if you are casting accusation about those friendly with Epstein you should consider the headliner of this thread, well documented with his friendship with the late paedophile, a man who had dinner many more times than the 37 times Gates is reported to have had dinner with him.. and a man who knew that Epstein "Liked them young" but never raised this with any authorities as any human would. Complicit with the crimes. Oh, Trump also visited his island... but that is OK isn't it?

Back to stifling protestors then? You peacefully protest so you become a nutter, a lunatic, mentally unstable. Right. 1st and 14th Amendments, right to free speech might apply here. But no, lets label those that protest against Trump, The Rapist, as mentally unstable. Far easier and convenient than asking if they actually have a point.

There you go an 'unedited' web page to show an equal and opposing view that most Americans like the man. Highest approval rating before he took office and dropping quickly the longer he is in office. Half the population surveyed (the women) are dead set against him (I do wonder why, did I ever highlight his attitude to women?), anyone over the age of 45, anyone who is non-white or educated. That is a good chunk of his population. Here ends todays lesson that for every link you might find there is usually an equal and opposite. Donald Trump approval tracker | The Economist WWW.ECONOMIST.COM Follow polls showing how favourably Americans view their president and which issues are shaping their views Here

I edited your text for you to correct it: I reckon if I looked I'd find a similar clip with an opposing view, doesn't mean either clip speaks for the full population.

And since the current POTUS is Trump, the news feeds are never quiet. US Stock market tanked the day after he imposed 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Today 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico have been suspended for now. Good to see that he is executing his sound financial knowledge onto the lives of Americans. Wonder how many billions were 'lost' today on the stock market?....

Still not quite getting it are you. So a quick recap, The US were supporting The Ukraine - rightly or wrongly depends on how you view finances and human life - and The Ukraine have counted on that support to defend itself, protect it's land and people against an aggressor. Built a strategy that is working based on continued support, the support agreed by US congress. Then Zelensky rocks up in Washington and - get this - wasn't wearing a tie, so Trump has a hissy fit and withdraws the support with immediate effect. Giving the green light for the Russians to invade further in the spring. The Ukrainians will run down what stocks they have, and then be defenceless. And be slaughtered. Be a very different thing if Mr Ego had given more than an hours notice for support to be withdrawn - that void could be filled over time. But with no notice, just an ego fuelled power trip, he has condemned thousands to be killed. That is the problem being highlighted and that you are missing with semantics, futile forum point scoring attempts and blindness to the written word. You all appear to think it is OK to throw them into the killing fields without a means of protection. I don't. I think so long as you value the $$ above a human life fighting to protect their homeland against an aggressor then we are going to always disagree.

I'm denying everything.

... though they have -probably- had a rug doctor in there since I was last in it... -probably-

I think you are reading this how you want to read it and not the words I wrote. Point is that sometime, burying your head in the sand, someone elses problem, doesn't work. Have to act. In the case of the Ukraine it is not a NATO issue, the UK has no remit to directly intervene. Neither does the US, or many other countries. We can, and do, provide equipment and as much support as we can. This is the right thing to do otherwise 'in my poor examples' burying the heads in the sand as someone else problem will end up with the problem on our doorstep. The US also has a duty to enforce previous ceasefires - as agreed - but are failing to do so and under the current president are stepping even further back. Stepping even further back is condemning more Ukrainians. You are an educated man, and I cannot understand how you are failing to see that Trumps actions will result in more deaths... deaths of the aggrieved, the ones who were invaded (illegally by the way). All well and good having a political stance, right or left, but political views have never stopped Republican presidents doing the right thing before. (now as for Why Trump is stepping back, there are other issues afoot however that is for another day, and do revolve around the mans fragile ego)