Recent content by in_the_top_one

No, he's lessened the problem and converted what's left from one type of problem into another. And problems are hierarchical. 40% of his charge right now is from renewables, nuclear or biomass. Biomass, which I know is not as good as it sounds, is 10%. Good for Toms, I say. He can afford an...

But, if you're claiming that's a bad thing because tax revenues into our coffers will be lower, that obviously has to be weighed against how much more tax the ones who remained paid. Giving only one side of the story is meaningless (perhaps deliberately on the part of the Telegraph).

Go ahead. I've heard it's like a burmese python.

:hmmm:

If we assume that 1000 people left and subsequently paid nothing, how many stayed and what happened to the total tax receipts? I'm only seeing one half of the seesaw in their article, which raises flags.

snook, ffs, SNOOK. Snoop..?:smoke::slap: [It's 8-1 to Ronnie O'Sullivan, @Ingy - thanks for asking.]

Teats, ffs, TEATS.

Jeepers. Just how badly are you expecting us to lose?

Well of course it is and everyone knows that but, as Toms just politely requested, "don't expect me to think".

Plenty of gender neutral toilets where I work. (Also on trains and planes, etc.) Do you know who it really winds up? Nobody.

Does that mean he might have given a penalty if only he had decided to review it but unfortunately he will never know now, even himself? What a twonk.

It is very hard to stack grapes.

They all wear tags just below the back of the neck for tracking purposes. Could just use those.

Well that was a waste of time. Did he say chorin'? As in, he had chores to do? You'd be better off reading Ingy's back catalogue for comedy. And what's the relevance? I told you I'm not Canadian, lovely as it is.