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

Lotus-eater

ninky wrote: »

if we went back to using horses instead of cars i think we'd be in a worse situation than we are now.

No we wouldn't, the whole point about when we had horses before cars, was that not everyone could afford one, in fact not many people at all could afford to keep one.
If we did go back to horses and got rid of all the cars, we would have to go back to a society where only the rich travelled from where we lived. Only the ones that could afford to keep a horse, have space for stables, have the skill to keep one, or could pay someone else to have the skill.

lostinrates

Lotus-eater wrote: »

No we wouldn't, the whole point about when we had horses before cars, was that not everyone could afford one, in fact not many people at all could afford to keep one.
If we did go back to horses and got rid of all the cars, we would have to go back to a society where only the rich travelled from where we lived. Only the ones that could afford to keep a horse, have space for stables, have the skill to keep one, or could pay someone else to have the skill.

i hope we don't go back to such a time where people are ''kept in their place''. the aim could/should be to balance ethics (in this case green-ness) with progress/sustained standard. I'm sure I wrote a thesis on this ....:o:rotfl:

Lotus-eater

lostinrates wrote: »

i hope we don't go back to such a time where people are ''kept in their place''. the aim could/should be to balance ethics (in this case green-ness) with progress/sustained standard. I'm sure I wrote a thesis on this ....:o:rotfl:

The rich/ruthless always float to the top LIR

I wouldn't mind being stable boy to the local posh tottie*, what do you say, have you an opening (in case of global disaster/society meltdown etc)?


*apart from the fact that I hate horses**

** although having had many GF's in the past with equines, they are good for tightening up the thighs, so maybe not all bad.

lostinrates

Lotus-eater wrote: »

The rich/ruthless always float to the top LIR

I wouldn't mind being stable boy to the local posh tottie*, what do you say, have you an opening (in case of global disaster/society meltdown etc)?


*apart from the fact that I hate horses**

** although having had many GF's in the past with equines, they are good for tightening up the thighs, so maybe not all bad.

Stable boy? I wonder if my DH would mind? I think being the !!!!!! shoveller is my station in life, though.......so, might be making myself redundant. so unless its for payment in thigh tightening kind, I'm not rich enough posh totty atm.

nb I might be becoming an employer though, depending on turnover possibility in the future: I can't spend what I can't make. I have been approached already asking for a service, I can't provide ATM, insurance costs more than the service is worth, have told them to find a few friends and come back...... I've been looking into all my insurances, and frankly am amazed that some people I now can afford to work!

Pete111

Nikkster wrote: »

This article was in the Evening Standard tonight:
Why Liz Jones and John Humphrys love London

13.05.10


Liz Jones: I love London
I was in London a couple of weeks ago. I parked my car in Kensington so that I could load up with supplies from Whole Foods and took a cab to the photographic studio in Hackney where I was to interview a celebrity. Normally, I avoid driving through Islington: I'd lived in a leafy garden square in an immaculate Georgian house and, since moving to Exmoor upon my divorce two years ago, I've not felt strong enough to drive past, so deep is my longing for its high ceilings and pale wooden floors.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23833515-why-liz-jones-and-john-humphrys-love-london.do
QUOTE]

'Loading up with supplies' from Whole foods is not the way to save money Liz...

I work near their store. It's a great example of how to extract money from idiots who have (or think they have?) lots of cash.

Don't get me wrong, it looks great and stocks high end produce but as goods are roughly twice the price of waitrose you have to be a bit touched to do a 'big' shop there regularly...

ninky_2

lostinrates wrote: »

edit: I learned recently that many tenant farmers are REQUIRED to ensure their is no drifting from RoW: regardless of what is in the field. They will certainly be hoping walkers walk as the laws rightly enable them and no more.

required by the landowners. not required by the law. i think that's a bit of a red herring. and a way of landowners imposing their will on the land whilst passing the buck of costs onto tenants. what a surprise.

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

required by the landowners. not required by the law. i think that's a bit of a red herring. and a way of landowners imposing their will on the land whilst passing the buck of costs onto tenants. what a surprise.

No really. The tnancies that initiated this conversation are local government ones!

edit: a very belated foot note. I'm also checking insurances ATM and the small print in most requires some sort of vigilance over ensuring roaming off foot paths is not an issue. I have no footpaths crossing the small bit of land I'm buying, nor is it significantly in the way of anywhere to merit one. when we were looking at larger bits of land it was an issue that cropped up more though.

fc123

lostinrates wrote: »

. where we are buying we think in summer months we should be able to deal with DH's commute to station by horse: if I can get my body to cope with it (we'd both ride there, I'd lead his horse back.)
!

Fantastic What does he do with his briefcase though?

lostinrates

fc123 wrote: »

Fantastic What does he do with his briefcase though?

He doesn't have a briefcase, he has a messenger bag. (is that what they are called? I'm having a doubt now? ), in any case, it wouldn't be too much of a problem.

lemonjelly

lostinrates wrote: »

messenger bag.

What on earth is one of those? Is it an up market way of saying "bumbag"?;)