Liz Jones is Credit Crunched in the end.....

lostinrates

fc123 wrote: »

They are quite hard to do in an MSE way. I taught OH how to do them but he used to get distracted.

LOL, thats what sisters and best girl friends are for.

mrscmr

hi fc123... twitter assistance will be with you by the end of 'married, single. other"....

as for brazillians................... NOT ON UR LIFE!

lemonjelly

vivatifosi wrote: »

Wasn't Astrakhan a brand-name fake at one point (50s?) and Persian Lamb the real thing? I remember I had both when I collected vintage clothes and was mortified when I found out one was real. Now I've read where it comes from I'm even more shocked. I'd never knowingly wear fur. Can't believe its back again.

I only have 1 awareness of Astrakhan!:o
George Hutchinson was a friend of Mary Jane Kelly. On the night of 8 November 1888 he reported seeing her in the early hours. She asked him for a few pence but he didn't have any money. A few moments later she met another fella & took him back to hers at 13 Millers Court.

George Hutchinson watched her/them, even to the extent of following them to Millers court. He waited outside for about an hour or 2, but no-one came out so he left.

George Hutchinson apparently paid a phenomenal amount of attention to the bloke he saw with MJK, that a few days later he was able to give a phenomenally detailed description of the man to the police. So much so, that he was even interviewed by Inspector Abberline himself! (Abberline was convinced he was telling the truth, however the sheer amount of detail in Hutchinsons statement surely calls it into question.)

One of the details Hutchinson submitted was that the man he saw wore an Astrakhan coat.

Interestingly, & to further compound things, Hutchinson didn't come forward to the police until 2-3 days after the murder to make his statement, which has lead to further concerns about his validity.

As a result of the detail etc, Hutchinson has subsequently ended up becoming a JtR suspect amongst modern researchers, however it appears he wasn't considered a suspect at the time.

lemonjelly

lostinrates wrote: »

LOL, thats what sisters and best girl friends are for.

& best interweb buddies!

dopester

But because of Labour’s ‘lightness of touch’ with the financial industry, I’ve lost many years of investment – amounting to £46,000; this was taxed income, so double that – due to the banking crisis. I am also tied to a mortgage with a fixed rate ELEVEN TIMES the current Bank of England interest rate, while my property, something I clawed my way up the housing ladder to afford, is now worth less than my loan.

Is that fair? Is it fair that rich donors to both the leading parties avoid paying millions of pounds of tax while people like me are hounded by HMRC to within an inch of our lives? (They’ve told me they are going to make me bankrupt and have already sent bailiffs to my home.)

Yesterday's Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1261176/LIZ-JONES-High-fliers-aren-t-lucky-We-pay-sleepless-nights.html

JoeCrystal

Is she even on the same planet as us?! Her 'articles' really beggar belief.

Spartacus_Mills

She is right when she says this.

All three major parties talk about a fairer Britain. But punishing people who have taken risks to start businesses, who have sacrificed a lot personally to get ahead, isn’t fair, is it?

But how that applies to her remains to be seen. She has earned alot of money, been paid very well, spent it and borrowed more. She does not deserve any sympathy.

vivatifosi

Thanks for the article dopester.

Enough of the whining Liz. You made poor decisions and spent money that you didn't have, that's not the government's fault. You have two possibilities - wallow in self pity, or do what the great entrepreneurs and high-flyers that you aspire to be do - and pull yourself up by the bootstraps.

On another note, if I was Liz's "friend" discussed in the article, who is currently facing legal action from former staff, I'd have been spitting chips at her indiscretion. Who in their right mind put's a friend's legal case in jeopardy for the sake of column inches?

fc123

vivatifosi wrote: »

Thanks for the article dopester.

Enough of the whining Liz. You made poor decisions and spent money that you didn't have, that's not the government's fault. You have two possibilities - wallow in self pity, or do what the great entrepreneurs and high-flyers that you aspire to be do - and pull yourself up by the bootstraps.

On another note, if I was Liz's "friend" discussed in the article, who is currently facing legal action from former staff, I'd have been spitting chips at her indiscretion. Who in their right mind put's a friend's legal case in jeopardy for the sake of column inches?

I have ID'd who it is from the article. I would be mighty p***ed off if that was my business she was gossiping about.

I am fed up with LJ's moaning and whining too....in fact, it's really getting on my nerves.


Is she hinting at herself as an entreprenuer? Her hobby farm animal rescue centre isn't an income generating business, but a well paid persons hobby.

The employment issue....yup, new tighter rules put off small business from employing and so, have led them to seek new solutions for getting the extra labour they need in their businesses.

I cannot be the only person in the world who just get's on with adapting to changing times? Not bigging myself up or anything but all the 'looking back' to previous times, generations and how things used to be done is winding me up.
We have to live in the now and deal with things according to the new 'rules of now'.

tartanterra

It's funny how LJ blames everyone but herself for her current predicament. It doesn't even seem to cross her mind that their is some personal responsibility involved here.
She is an allegedly educated person with a fabulous income, who believes that the Government should regulate lenders, to prevent her reckless borrowing habit spiralling out of control.

What a muppet; you couldn't make it up.....:(