This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Apr 20 4.29pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
How much rent are you charging (above social housing rent and above your costs)? How much profit are you making? Or are you charging well below the market rate? I am tempted to tell you to mind your own business! My rents are set so that those receiving housing benefit can afford them. The profit varies on occupancy levels. It's a better return than leaving it in the bank but not as much as you might imagine. It's also much more work than most realise, if you behave responsibly, as I try to. I am in discussions with the Mears Group about them taking over the management on a long term contract.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 01 Apr 20 4.31pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Easy target....I can think of plenty of situations where they wouldn't pull this. Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Apr 2020 3.31pm) You are correct, that Peckham incident being one. But if you get caught, don’t complain. I may be wrong but I think I remember you saying Europe should do as China did with their strict lockdown. Well people have to accepts real while it’s in place here. I think a lot of people haven’t got used to not taking the P1ss in Britain for short time.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 01 Apr 20 5.24pm | |
---|---|
Good article from the BBC Taxpayer expected to fund minimum wage staff at football clubs whilst the club pays the high earners their full wage. I am not one to say that footballers should be forced to take a pay cut but this 80% rule is supposed to be for companies that are struggling not for clubs with billionaire owners. I hope they are shamed into funding their own staff.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 01 Apr 20 5.30pm | |
---|---|
Didn’t all those South American peoples chew on tobacco before the Spanish came? Didn't seem to help them.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 01 Apr 20 5.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I certainly attack ideas and as a consequence those holding them will tend to get in the firing line too. That though is very different to seeking to find every and any excuse to attack a poster, which is what has been happening for a very long time. That's not moaning at all. It's water of a duck's back to me. It just a statement of fact. That such things are closed down is not any kind of attempt to stifle criticism. It is to ensure that the criticism is directed at the idea and not at the poster. You are continuing this on then. Ok, well You seem to contradict yourself in the very same post. Oh and all this 'only the ideas' stuff seems to go bye bye on the Trump thread doesn't it....calling me sub species and far right...and the site far right for that matter. In my view you are deliberately provocative and look for it. Several posters have made that observation. You deliberately go to sites that are the opposite of the ideas you want to express.....Hol is an example and previously you spent time on that catholic site arguing with them to alter their beliefs. I should imagine you were highly criticised there as well. Fair enough, however you take advantage of a site that allows free speech when you then criticise the speech you don't like....Having the cheek to say you shouldn't be personally criticised when personal criticism has been a part of Hol since day one. You aren't being sworn at nor physically threatened and as stated you have given back....So basically you just want to censor. Not only that in this post you then say it's water off a duck's back....I personally don't think you care about any of it....You're here for whatever attention you can get regardless of its colour....and you will then tactically complain about anything if you think a mod will fight your corner. Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Apr 2020 5.55pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 01 Apr 20 5.53pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I certainly attack ideas and as a consequence those holding them will tend to get in the firing line too. That though is very different to seeking to find every and any excuse to attack a poster, which is what has been happening for a very long time. That's not moaning at all. It's water of a duck's back to me. It just a statement of fact. That such things are closed down is not any kind of attempt to stifle criticism. It is to ensure that the criticism is directed at the idea and not at the poster. Really?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 01 Apr 20 5.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
Didn’t all those South American peoples chew on tobacco before the Spanish came? Didn't seem to help them. Yes, and several other weirdly named natives.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Jimenez SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 01 Apr 20 6.04pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Good article from the BBC Taxpayer expected to fund minimum wage staff at football clubs whilst the club pays the high earners their full wage. I am not one to say that footballers should be forced to take a pay cut but this 80% rule is supposed to be for companies that are struggling not for clubs with billionaire owners. I hope they are shamed into funding their own staff. Agree up to a point, but find it a bit rich (scuse pun) this being asked by 'Politicians' & a Union Boss on close to 1M a year !!
Pro USA & Israel |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 01 Apr 20 6.08pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Good article from the BBC Taxpayer expected to fund minimum wage staff at football clubs whilst the club pays the high earners their full wage. I am not one to say that footballers should be forced to take a pay cut but this 80% rule is supposed to be for companies that are struggling not for clubs with billionaire owners. I hope they are shamed into funding their own staff. Oh my god....Sadiq Khan said something I agree with.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Jimenez SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 01 Apr 20 6.09pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Oh my god....Sadiq Khan said something I agree with. Even a clock is correct twice a day...
Pro USA & Israel |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 01 Apr 20 6.33pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
Good article from the BBC Taxpayer expected to fund minimum wage staff at football clubs whilst the club pays the high earners their full wage. I am not one to say that footballers should be forced to take a pay cut but this 80% rule is supposed to be for companies that are struggling not for clubs with billionaire owners. I hope they are shamed into funding their own staff. ‘ Tottenham, Newcastle, Bournemouth and Norwich have opted to utilise the government’s job retention scheme’ Surprised at Norwich. Not at the others. Bournemouth’s owners probably don’t care about England and flout FFP and pay the £7mil fine no problem but no way cover their staff’s pay. Eddie Howe is the first manager to take a pay cut. There could be a reaction from fans but if the effects aren’t felt for a while by most then they might get away with taking the p1ss.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Apr 20 6.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
You are continuing this on then. Not at all. I gave you the opportunity to draw a line but you insisted on carrying on making assertions, which need to be countered. Ok, well You seem to contradict yourself in the very same post. Oh and all this 'only the ideas' stuff seems to go bye bye on the Trump thread doesn't it....calling me sub species and far right...and the site far right for that matter. I don't recall the context of that particular remark but I seriously doubt if it was specifically aimed at anyone in particular. Much more likely that a particular type of viewpoint seems to exist in a particular group of people. Hence the "sub species" epithet. That you take offence at that just confirms that your skin is very much thinner than mine. I have never suggested that this site is exclusively far right, only that it is dominated by views I regard as held by the far right and that more liberal approaches are routinely subjected to ridicule and insult. we have diametrically opposing views on Trump. In my view you are deliberately provocative and look for it. Several posters have made that observation. What you might see as provocation I see as challenging. People without answers will see provocation. You deliberately go to sites that are the opposite of the ideas you want to express.....Hol is an example and previously you spent time on that catholic site arguing with them to alter their beliefs. I should imagine you were highly criticised there as well. I mostly certainly never tried to alter anyone's beliefs on a Catholic site. I tried to understand them and then to discuss with them how they impacted certain aspects of life. I am married to a Catholic and have attended Church with her. I made many friends and had some great discussions. I also encountered some very closed minds, especially in the USA. Fair enough, however you take advantage of a site that allows free speech when you then criticise the speech you don't like....Having the cheek to say you shouldn't be personally criticised when personal criticism has been a part of Hol since day one. You aren't being sworn at nor physically threatened and as stated you have given back....So basically you just want to censor. I prefer the old adage of listening to the message and not attacking the messenger. Personal insults have no impact on me at all other than they divert from what is important. It's not my job to censor anything but I support all attempts to keep the personal stuff off the threads. Whether it has always been part of the Hol from day one or not. Not only that in this post you then say it's water off a duck's back....I personally don't think you care about any of it....You're here for whatever attention you can get regardless of its colour....and you will then tactically complain about anything if you think a mod will fight your corner. I just want the debates to concentrate on rational argument and not on personalities. I am not actually complaining to anyone about anything. All the moaning is coming from others. Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Apr 2020 5.55pm)
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.