Every Laugh Is The Energy

aau1

3 pack of flakes for 50p profit on 10 ways

Hi 10ways! I've got a good DTD at tosco today.
There are currently offers for flake 3 packs in my local express store. However there are two types of packaging old and new (I'll send some photos) they have 2 different barcodes also. One is scanning through for the clearance/offer price of 50p (looks like new packaging) but the old packaging are scanning through at £1.50. In my store they were all stacked together though.
The ones that work on the DTD are the old packaging barcode ending 8611

coreysnan

Hi , cjj it was only the banana flavour in my store. I did think it strange, but maybe keep a eye out in case the others also go rtc.

cjj_2

coreysnan wrote: »

Hi , cjj it was only the banana flavour in my store. I did think it strange, but maybe keep a eye out in case the others also go rtc.

Thankyou for your reply
It's chocolate & strawberry my kids drink so will keep checking thankyou xx

Classy_Chick06

Munqui wrote: »

Muller x9 good on new apg, fairy not so - W comp shown although M comp was cheapest on new apg.

edit to add: I make it 9 mullers v W for net cost of £1.41

(6x50p + 3x68p) vs £3.00 (-10% £2.70) = -£2.34
£3.75 paid -£2.34 apg = £1.41

Do you have any idea how the Mullers compare on the old system v Waitys if bought in 9`s please.

Sunshinemummy

Quick hello,

Hope everyone is okay!

Night x

Call_of_Trouty

Behind_The_Sofa wrote: »

I must say though, I never really liked her but she has grew on me immensely.

Totally love this pic taken at the end of one of the televised leaders debate. :D:D




And this one I like too.

I prefer this

http://metro.co.uk/2015/04/14/is-this-the-best-private-eye-celebrity-lookalike-ever-5149633/

Savvybuyer

With the election tomorrow, I've decided to come off the fence. I think my post earlier, about fixed-term parliaments, could itself be seen as taking some side and getting political. So, Savvy talks politics - and, if anyone doesn't like that, then simply skip... then again, some people might not like it when I talk about M prices:rotfl:.

My post earlier, about wanting them all to be deadlocked, might be seen by some as somewhat immature - however, as ever, it's more complex than that...

All the 'warnings' from various politicians though, they have no effect on me. "Do you want a strong economy or a coalition of chaos?". My reply "A coalition of chaos please":rotfl:! But, slightly more seriously, I don't think it would mean that. TBH, I'm fed up of the debates now - as all the same points as before are now being raised. We've heard the lines, numerous times by now, and we just need the vote.

I think Mr Cameron and the Conservatives contradicted themselves though. They clearly hadn't costed their plans for the NHS but, then we were told, a strong economy would protect the NHS. A week or so later and the economic figures that came out weren't as good as they expected and they said the economy still wasn't in the right place, despite this being right at the end of their five year term and therefore they can be judged on what they achieved in the Parliament. At that point, I saw no reference being made back to the earlier point about a strong economy and the NHS - so, clearly, we are not there and it's a great risk that we won't have the strong economy anyway... so why depend on uncosted plans and an economic situation that won't arise on which, they were hoping, would protect the NHS. What if the strong economy didn't materialise? Seemed to have no back-up plan for the NHS in those circumstances.

When he says he won't reduce child benefit, I think he is absolutely correct. I agree they are not going to cut child benefit. Because they'll cut (I think) carer's allowance, disability living allowance/employment and support allowance instead. They'll target the weak and vulnerable and clearly the plan is to get everyone onto this new universal credit which will be a far worse system and provide far less for the most vulnerable instead.

I had thought that there could be Conservative/UKIP combination and that that would be the worst option IMO. However, I found that UKIP pledge is to increase carer's allowance to the same as Jobseeker's allowance, so maybe it won't be bad if they prevent the Conservatives reducing carer's allowance. Or, maybe, if that combination came about, it would be like tuition fees and the Liberal Democrats and they (UKIP) would just vote for it to allow it anyway, for the sake of keeping the government in office rather than keeping their promises. Nonetheless, UKIP have no track record of breaking promises (that is trite, since they have never been in government).

That leads to the Lib Dems who, on several occasions, have said one thing but, when it comes down to it, then gone and supported the Conservative-led government and brought in the opposite of what they've said they'd do. The video that Russell Brand has posted shows several of the examples!

In fact, before the last election, I told who was then been my incumbent MP before, now seeking re-election, that I would have voted Lib Dem rather than Labour. After the election, then I saw - and many Lib Dem voters, who voted to try to keep a Conservative government also saw, they then joined the Conservatives and got them the very option they didn't want. They won't be voting Lib Dem again. Given what happened, I changed my view and would rather have had Labour voted in.

As for the Lib Dems, I hope their support absolutely collapses, to the point that are unable to get the numbers to form a government.

Really I'd like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE

No, that's not the Conservatives, but rather the SNP calling the tune! I would rather have that 'nightmare scenario' that the Tories paint. To me, the SNP policies would be a better option than Conservatives ones that only protect the rich.

Rather it's this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsBaB39TV54

Let the Scots protect us all! So, yes, the tune of "do do do do do", instead of achieving what the Tories want, of me supporting them, I'd rather prefer that tune to be called!

I think I've ended up the same as Russell Brand - I think, in Brighton, vote Green, in Scotland, vote SNP, elsewhere in Great Britain, vote Labour. Although I was never saying "don't vote" in the first place.

That's not to say that I am always Labour. In my area, I'm in a strong safe Labour seat (and not of the Scottish kind:rotfl:), the old deride of "put a gorilla up and they'd vote for it", so really no way I could affect any other outcome, that's a feature of first-past-the-post, I don't much like (who was) my Labour MP - obviously technically they are all candidates at the minute - but I'm voting Labour for the party. In the local elections, at the same time, I shall very likely be voting otherwise as I don't like Labour running the local council. (I've long felt Conservatives would be better in local government, with a Labour central government, although I don't think I'll be voting Conservative for local government this time either.) I'm possibly a bit like the Sun newspaper this time - with the Scottish Sun wanting the SNP and the Sun elsewhere wanting the Conservatives to try to keep the SNP out:huh:! I think it's simply Rupert Murdoch's very wise and tactical decision to 'support the winning party' in whichever part of Britain they are in - and a matter of what sells newspapers - in other words Tory support by the Scottish Sun would not please as many people in Scotland.

The Conservatives may still win the largest number of seats, but Labour may still form a majority. I agree with Nicola Sturgeon - to lock the Tories out. It commands support across the UK and not just in one area (e.g. England).

In fact, one final thing, and again a point I haven't seen raised anywhere else, they were saying at the time of the independence referendum (zzzzz....):(, but hear me out:cool: - that HSBC were going to quit the country if Scotland voted in favour of independence. Well, Scotland rejected independence and guess what... HSBC proposing to leave the country within months even though we've kept the UK! So that threat, that banks would quit if Scotland became independent, really should have not been allowed to be used as an argument since, even without independence, it seems keeping the UK has risked HSBC now to threat to leave! Obviously the corporation-friendly policies of the Tories that save economy recovery:rotfl:.

On that, though, we had a recession but, still, during it, the richest people became even richer - so clearly, even in a 'recession', some people are doing very well. That to me, is the basic unfairness of it - that people, the very rich, are taking money out of the country and for themselves when the rest of the country is losing and having a recession - if the rich were contributing and taking cuts in their wealth, then maybe no-one would be in recession at all. And the rich could still well survive even with (for them) slightly less. Instead, their wealth has continued to grow and grow and outpace the pay freezes and cuts that ordinary people have suffered elsewhere! The tax avoidance/evasion of some wealthy people, able to store their wealth outside our tax system or to claim non-dom. status, an anacronism. It's not just individuals, but companies too - and companies like Vodafone that are able to get, several years ago, special deals with Revenue & Customs that save them several billion in tax that, in my view, they ought to have paid - and how, in my view, Revenue & Customs sold us down the river. You can bet that, if it were an ordinary individual like you or I, they would come down hard on us and require all tax back but, if it's rich, they can afford expensive lawyers and keep their money away from the tax system.

fairclaire

lookinforabargain wrote: »

Argh it's just so frustrating more than anything! I'm tempted to go print it again and try and spend it now :rotfl:

The thing is she didn't even let me pay for the shop I was trying to use it against, she cancelled it :eek:

It really does just depend on which way the wind is blowing if they are going to take them or not!

Why shouldn't you print it again. It's not been spent so won't......or shouldn't have gone in the till. I would print again and either use in another store or leave it a bit and try again if you only have one store.

Big difference from printing twice to spending twice. I've had to re-print when mine disappeared behind the sofa before and there was no one here to help me move it

Good evening BTW

rockyrose

cjj wrote: »

Multis on rice crispie squares on A.com and Msm for me now xx

i can see multi's on msm but none on a.com signed in or out

poppypopster

Savvybuyer wrote: »

With the election tomorrow, I've decided to come off the fence. I think my post earlier, about fixed-term parliaments, could itself be seen as taking some side and getting political. So, Savvy talks politics - and, if anyone doesn't like that, then simply skip... then again, some people might not like it when I talk about M prices:rotfl:.

My post earlier, about wanting them all to be deadlocked, might be seen by some as somewhat immature - however, as ever, it's more complex than that...

All the 'warnings' from various politicians though, they have no effect on me. "Do you want a strong economy or a coalition of chaos?". My reply "A coalition of chaos please":rotfl:! But, slightly more seriously, I don't think it would mean that. TBH, I'm fed up of the debates now - as all the same points as before are now being raised. We've heard the lines, numerous times by now, and we just need the vote.

I think Mr Cameron and the Conservatives contradicted themselves though. They clearly hadn't costed their plans for the NHS but, then we were told, a strong economy would protect the NHS. A week or so later and the economic figures that came out weren't as good as they expected and they said the economy still wasn't in the right place, despite this being right at the end of their five year term and therefore they can be judged on what they achieved in the Parliament. At that point, I saw no reference being made back to the earlier point about a strong economy and the NHS - so, clearly, we are not there and it's a great risk that we won't have the strong economy anyway... so why depend on uncosted plans and an economic situation that won't arise on which, they were hoping, would protect the NHS. What if the strong economy didn't materialise? Seemed to have no back-up plan for the NHS in those circumstances.

When he says he won't reduce child benefit, I think he is absolutely correct. I agree they are not going to cut child benefit. Because they'll cut (I think) carer's allowance, disability living allowance/employment and support allowance instead. They'll target the weak and vulnerable and clearly the plan is to get everyone onto this new universal credit which will be a far worse system and provide far less for the most vulnerable instead.

I had thought that there could be Conservative/UKIP combination and that that would be the worst option IMO. However, I found that UKIP pledge is to increase carer's allowance to the same as Jobseeker's allowance, so maybe it won't be bad if they prevent the Conservatives reducing carer's allowance. Or, maybe, if that combination came about, it would be like tuition fees and the Liberal Democrats and they (UKIP) would just vote for it to allow it anyway, for the sake of keeping the government in office rather than keeping their promises. Nonetheless, UKIP have no track record of breaking promises (that is trite, since they have never been in government).

That leads to the Lib Dems who, on several occasions, have said one thing but, when it comes down to it, then gone and supported the Conservative-led government and brought in the opposite of what they've said they'd do. The video that Russell Brand has posted shows several of the examples!

In fact, before the last election, I told who was then been my incumbent MP before, now seeking re-election, that I would have voted Lib Dem rather than Labour. After the election, then I saw - and many Lib Dem voters, who voted to try to keep a Conservative government also saw, they then joined the Conservatives and got them the very option they didn't want. They won't be voting Lib Dem again. Given what happened, I changed my view and would rather have had Labour voted in.

As for the Lib Dems, I hope their support absolutely collapses, to the point that are unable to get the numbers to form a government.

Really I'd like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE

No, that's not the Conservatives, but rather the SNP calling the tune! I would rather have that 'nightmare scenario' that the Tories paint. To me, the SNP policies would be a better option than Conservatives ones that only protect the rich.

Rather it's this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JeYlBRvUeE

Let the Scots protect us all! So, yes, the tune of "do do do do do", instead of achieving what the Tories want, of me supporting them, I'd rather prefer that tune to be called!

I think I've ended up the same as Russell Brand - I think, in Brighton, vote Green, in Scotland, vote SNP, elsewhere in Great Britain, vote Labour. Although I was never saying "don't vote" in the first place.

That's not to say that I am always Labour. In my area, I'm in a strong safe Labour seat (and not of the Scottish kind:rotfl:), the old deride of "put a gorilla up and they'd vote for it", so really no way I could affect any other outcome, that's a feature of first-past-the-post, I don't much like (who was) my Labour MP - obviously technically they are all candidates at the minute - but I'm voting Labour for the party. In the local elections, at the same time, I shall very likely be voting otherwise as I don't like Labour running the local council. (I've long felt Conservatives would be better in local government, with a Labour central government, although I don't think I'll be voting Conservative for local government this time either.) I'm possibly a bit like the Sun newspaper this time - with the Scottish Sun wanting the SNP and the Sun elsewhere wanting the Conservatives to try to keep the SNP out:huh:! I think it's simply Rupert Murdoch's very wise and tactical decision to 'support the winning party' in whichever part of Britain they are in - and a matter of what sells newspapers - in other words Tory support by the Scottish Sun would not please as many people in Scotland.

The Conservatives may still win the largest number of seats, but Labour may still form a majority. I agree with Nicola Sturgeon - to lock the Tories out. It commands support across the UK and not just in one area (e.g. England).

In fact, one final thing, and again a point I haven't seen raised anywhere else, they were saying at the time of the independence referendum (zzzzz....):(, but hear me out:cool: - that HSBC were going to quit the country if Scotland voted in favour of independence. Well, Scotland rejected independence and guess what... HSBC proposing to leave the country within months even though we've kept the UK! So that threat, that banks would quit if Scotland became independent, really should have not been allowed to be used as an argument since, even without independence, it seems keeping the UK has risked HSBC now to threat to leave! Obviously the corporation-friendly policies of the Tories that save economy recovery:rotfl:.

On that, though, we had a recession but, still, during it, the richest people became even richer - so clearly, even in a 'recession', some people are doing very well. That to me, is the basic unfairness of it - that people, the very rich, are taking money out of the country and for themselves when the rest of the country is losing and having a recession - if the rich were contributing and taking cuts in their wealth, then maybe no-one would be in recession at all. And the rich could still well survive even with (for them) slightly less. Instead, their wealth has continued to grow and grow and outpace the pay freezes and cuts that ordinary people have suffered elsewhere! The tax avoidance/evasion of some wealthy people, able to store their wealth outside our tax system or to claim non-dom. status, an anacronism. It's not just individuals, but companies too - and companies like Vodafone that are able to get, several years ago, special deals with Revenue & Customs that save them several billion in tax that, in my view, they ought to have paid - and how, in my view, Revenue & Customs sold us down the river. You can bet that, if it were an ordinary individual like you or I, they would come down hard on us and require all tax back but, if it's rich, they can afford expensive lawyers and keep their money away from the tax system.

Talking about voting.. I saw this on facebook


63 reasons not to vote Tories:

1.Food bank use up.
2.Tuition fees trebled.
3.Ema scrapped.
4.Zero hours contracts.
5.More people in part time employment.
6.Suicide rates up.
7.Benefit sanctions targets meaning 90,000 people a month are sanctioned for little or no reason.
8.A and E in crisis.
9.Longer waiting times to see GP.
10.Selling off Royal Mail.
11.Stagnant wages.
12.Closures to police stations.
13.Closures of fire stations.
14.Increasing the national debt.
15.Creating more new debt in 5 years than labour created in 13.
16.Increasing vat.
17.Scrapping meaningful statistics collection.
18.Cutting university funding by 80%
19.Cuts in public transport grants, 20% rise in rail and bus fares.
20.Making councils in poorer areas cut more than councils in wealthier areas.
21.Housing benefit cuts as rents continue to rise.
22.Reneging on curbing bankers bonuses.
23.Loss of 'AAA' credit rating.
24.Double dip recession.
25.Treasury lieing about what income tax is spent on.
26.Universal credit mess, this has cost the taxpayer over 200million.
27. The unlawful Workfare program.
28.The health and social care act, a top down reorganisation of the NHS.
29.Trying to scrap our human rights.
30.Atos.
31.Bedroom tax.
32.Cuts to social care.
33.Cuts to library services.
34.Cuts to the disabled students allowance.
35.Cuts to local council disability transport.
36.Changing DLA to PIP meaning thousands of people are no longer eligible. (Disabled people make up 10% of the population but face 25% of cuts).
37.The IFS says the average household has lost £1,127 a year thanks to coalition policies.
38.The IFS also say that the biggest group to loose out are single jobless parents.
39.Child poverty increased by 13% (after labour cut it by 50%).
40.Removing legal aid.
41.Privatising NHS direct.
42.Tax avoidance up by 13% according to HMRC.
43.Homelessness up 26% (despite labour cutting it by 41%).
44.Closure of sure start centres.
45.30% increase in childcare costs.
46.Childhood obesity up by 16%.
47.Privatisation of the East cost mainline.
48.Stamp price hike by 50% since 2010.
49.Closure of 410+ schools.
50.Cutting the funding for conexions careers advice service for young people.
51.Overcrowded classrooms have trebled since 2010.
52.The Tories have presided over the closing or downgrading of 33% of NHS walk in centres, 66% of A and E/maternity wards and 16% of A and E's.
53.477 fewer GPs surgeries.
54. Mental health provision has been cut by 25%.
55.Closure of prisons
56.The number of millionaire bankers has climbed by 11%
57. 1,368 people died after work capability assessments wrongly found them fit to work.
58.Withdrawal of the subsidy for remploy that saw the closure of 34 remploy factories (that employed disabled people).
59.Water charges up 20% since 2010.
60.Raising the retirement age.
61.David Cameron decided to "cut the green crap" from policies.
62.Fracking.
63.The uk statistics authority has repeatedly warned the Tories to stop lying over immigration, unemployment, benefits cap, debt and NHS spending.
Doesn't count if you're well off or privileged I suppose