21.10.08 Price cuts create biggest ever fuel price gap

del.icio.us

digg

Technorati

Furl

reddit

SPURL.NET

1199 comments 262 votes

Have you noticed the fuel price gap widening in your area?

The price war driving down the cost of fuel in the UK has created the biggest ever gap between the highest and lowest priced fuel, according to data from PetrolPrices.com.

The lowest priced unleaded, as a result of retailers slashing prices over the last week week, is 96.9p. However, the most expensive is 121.9p - a full 25p more. For diesel the spread is also 25p. The cheapest diesel is now 107.9p, and the most expensive 132.9p. A 'normal' price gap is around 17-19p.

Petrol stations have been slashing prices recently as a result of a dramatic fall in oil prices. Last week was the first time the price of unleaded dropped below �1 a litre since December 2007.

However, smaller stations are typically unable to respond to falling oil prices as quickly as big chains, meaning that there is a bigger difference in prices than ever before. The previous record price gap of 20p and 22p for unleaded and diesel respectively was last set on August 12th.

The price gap over short distances has also increased. One example from PetrolPrices.com shows a 15p difference in unleaded over just 5 miles in Northampton. In London, the gap is 20p over just 2 miles. There are similar examples across the country.

A motorist shopping at the most expensive station in London would spend an extra �528* a year on fuel compared to a smart motorist who found the cheapest station in the area using PetrolPrices.com.

It's not often drivers hear good news about petrol prices, but fuel for less than �1 a litre certainly is that. However, not all stations are able to cut their prices as quickly because they bought fuel at a higher price.

When prices are falling the cheapest stations change every day, so drivers should shop around online to avoid getting caught out.

Have you noticed the fuel price gap widening? What's the price difference in your area?

*Based on 55 litre car filling up 4 times a month.

Your Comments

Click here to add your comments

Showing: 751 to 825 of 1214

« ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... »

741
Good one. We liked that.

Oh No!

Posted by Historian, 12th December 2008 8:29am

This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

739 Interesting times ahead

"I think nearly everyone agrees they'd like to see greater efficiency/less waste in Government and more funding to help the population change the way they live (renewable energy, better public transport, support for local food co-operatives etc).'"

I totally agree with both of you.

This part of ?Historians? blog is the second offering in his post No. 735 and this was never bought into question.

Perhaps it would benefit each of us if we supported the local corner shop and local produce, buy direct from the local farm etc. Supermarkets are OK but the stack-em-high mentality must stop and shoppers need to be encouraged to think about their spending habits.

I have no problem with Historian, as I have no problem with AJB, Steve M, Bubba Sparks (that is a cool handle), yourself or anyone.

I do not belong to either camp nor do I condone the concept.
I am a middle of the road, ear to the ground type.
If two sides disagree then rivalry is the next step. Call it football chanting, cricket's Barmy Army or whatever, on this site it seems par for the course.

AJB summed it up with his thick skinned comment.

Historian
"739: Thanks for the support"
Are you using Interesting times ahead as a crotch? I mean crutch.

Just a little humour.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 12th December 2008 11:21am

Cheers BTK, it is good isn't it.

Right everyone, stop bickering about who's who and what camp we're in and riddle me this....

We're all told diesel cars are the short-term future to reduce oil consumption/CO2 emissions. Yet the personal car tax for company car users is 3% higher for diesels with equivalent emisions to petrol-engined cars. So for example someone driving a BMW 320d (diesel) pays 18% BIK tax whereas someone driving a 320i (petrol) pays 17% BIK tax. Where therefore is the incentive to drive the more oil-friendly vehicle?

Add that to the fact that a Lexus 5 litre hybrid that does 20mpg pays no congestion charge and you could say (dare I say it) we are being ripped off.

I guess the point I'm making is that the alarmingly obvious truth is that there is so much evidence that so called "green taxes" are a sham, with only a nod to environmental benefits.

So my question to you, Steve M, AJB, historian and your alleged many guises plus BTK, if you were in charge what would you do to change taxes to help save the planet without penalising the hard working man in the street?

And if anyone says something as banal as remove all fuel duty you shall be condemned to have your legs gnawed at by a rabid goat for a thousand years, or worse still be sent to Wales (where that will probably happen anyway an)

Posted by Bubba Sparks, 12th December 2008 12:06pm

I was sat here thinking about shopping with my grandma when I was a young lad.
We used to walk to the little shopping area that had a post office which doubled as a shop for sliced meats, bread, tinned goods, cigarettes and of course the jars of sweets. There was a butchers, haberdashery's, grocers, and a little shop that sold newspapers.

We could walk into any shop and the owner would say to my grandma "morning Mrs Jones, how's the arthritis today?"
There was a tight knit community feel, everybody knew each-other.

These days, people don't know or care about the old Mrs Jones's, they could not give a fig about her arthritis, or the fact she will be alone on Christmas day again.

Maybe the oil depletion and a step back to the times when people cared will not be all bad after all.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 12th December 2008 12:07pm

745 Bubba
So my question to you, Steve M, AJB, historian and your alleged many guises plus BTK, if you were in charge what would you do to change taxes to help save the planet without penalising the hard working man in the street?

O.K Heres my answer and I'm ready to accept that there will be disagreement.

I've been trying to find out the official poverty line figures for the u.k and have found variations abound, therefore an assumption
We'll assume (I'm open to corrections please) that the poverty line/level for a family man (2 children) is £14500.p.a. gross so why on Earth should he have to pay any income tax on earnings below this level. My suggestion would be to start the tax free threshold at this level. I know we'll get the usual "The Country can't afford this" but surely if you're on the poverty line you can't afford to pay tax in the first place.
I'm expecting a huge backlash from this suggestion but I think it would be fairer than paying income tax on an income not even half the poverty line figures. My ears are burning already.
Also why are we producing cars with engines of 3,4,5 or even 6 litres or more
when with a few exceptions 2litres should be more than suffice.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 12:43pm

Greetings Bubba Sparks.

I am no expert on this particular subject, so this is only a passing glance over.
Historian, I have no data to back me up, it is an honest reply to a question.
There will be more informed opinions than mine, but here goes any way.

It is not hard to find evidence regarding the amount of diesel vehicles manufactured in this country, I understand it is about 50/50 of cars on the road and rising, considering not too long ago it there were far more petrol cars.

This next sentence may come across as cynical, but is it really in the governments interest to have lower tax charges on diesel engines if they will shortly be in the majority?
Are diesel cars now becoming taxed 4 times over, all at seemingly higher rates than petrol?
A company car is a luxury that most do not have the pleasure of owning.
Most working class people may argue this is not enough tax, so add even more, and lower the duty on fuel instead.

Going on a bit of a detour, why cant we abolish the road tax, have a mot and insurance disc in the windscreen, and have the tax on fuel on a pay as you drive basis?
This way the local authorities can see at a glance if the car is legal, and the more you use the road, the more you pay.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 12th December 2008 12:47pm

HIGHER TAX COZ WE ARE BEING RIPPED OFF YOU THICKOS.

Posted by Why Me?, 12th December 2008 12:49pm

748 BTK.
The abolition of v.e.d(road tax) is a good idea in one way, and then recover the loss from increased fuel duty. Problem is how much of the v.e.d or fuel duty go's to the upkeep etc of our roads?
The current fuel duty is around 60 pence in the pound?would it then double to £1.20 in the pound and all would be happy to pay it???
What about disabled drivers who now receive free road tax or would the general feeling be that they get enough freebies as it is. It's a very hot potato that no political party I think would want to be part of.
I'm all for the M.O.T & Insurance discs on display though.
p.s Isn't it good having no bitching going on? don't spoil it!

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 12:59pm

Greetings to you AJB

The bitching side was entertaining sometimes, the downright insulting was embarrassing.
Humour lightens the hardships.

The exact charges would have to be worked out but this could be a different way of encouraging drivers to make less journeys when walking or public transport is an option.
The government could still use their cream offs to repair roads.

I know this next thought will upset one or two, but here goes, the disabled community get more than enough in extra help and extra funding for the more extreme cases, I totally agree with this.
But it is the bloke who has a poorly finger, the woman who has a bunion, these should pay, along with the rest of us.
Only severely disabled people, and I mean wheelchair bound, should have blue badge privileges. Too many people take the pi$s.
Anyway, the blue badge holders would get a yearly refund depending on miles driven. Even though, the first 1000 miles should have to be paid for.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 12th December 2008 1:30pm

751BTK
Sounds fair to me but may prove hard to police.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 1:40pm

Not really, the mileage of your car must be provided to the mot inspector and your insurance provider. this could easily be cross-referenced by DVLA or appropriate governmental departments.
It would not be in your interest to adjust the mileage either way as this would encur further charges, by the insurance company or less rebate for fuel consumption.
Using this concept, insurance companies would then insure you for less if you drove less. Or is it charge you more for driving more?
I know different rates for different cars has made it more complicated, but thins can easily be undone to accomodate future changes.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 12th December 2008 1:59pm

753 BTK
Generaly then this has good merits and would be worthwhile more than a passing mention in prospective government manifestos.
We shall see.

Manchester refused the C.Charge then.
I can't quite decide my feelings on this & personally I hate **driving** (but not drivers) though public transport leaves much wanting and I don't believe increased fuel duties are getting through to improve the system but I don't want to get into an argument about this.
**When I passed my driving test there was mile for mile less congestion on the roads, and today there are 60% more drivers compared to then yet the road network and conditions have only increased by 30%+- and this for me
=more stress. I drive as little as possible now but still feel the hurt. I think driving for a lot of people ceased to be a pleasure many years ago.
Despite my obvious ramblings within these blogs I still prefer to walk where possible. I bet that has shocked a few on here.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 3:24pm

I always thought there was a set time for petrol stationsto adjust their prices.
On my travels this morning at around 8:30 I passed the garage near to where I live.
Petrol was 88.9 pence. that remains the same so far.
Diesel on the other hand was 102.9
At 10:30 I passed on the way back, diesel had been lowered to 100.9.
I left home this evening to collect my wife and I was astounded to see the diesel price had fallen yet again, this time to 99.9.

Now, I understand we are supposedly happy when prices fall, but is this a sub-plot by garage owners to maximise profits?

I live in the UK, so choose to accept the taxes thrust at us, I may not agree but have no option but to cough up.

Being robbed by the garage owners is a different matter.

Posted by John Doe Uk, 12th December 2008 4:29pm

755
Petrol stations are no different to any other shop - they can change prices when they want - up, down, sideways, .9, .4, .0, whatever.

Not quite sure how this could disadvantage anyone though - obviously annoying to fill up just before the price goes down - but that could happen whether there was a 'fixed' time to change anyway?

Posted by Historian, 12th December 2008 4:49pm

Historian, people will think you're me (or vice versa) at this rate...very few make the point that business is business and the value of something is determined by what someone is willing to pay for it!

It is quite interesting though how the prices are trickling down at different rates - wonder if there is any science to it or it's a case of who blinks first. That's why we should raise a glass to the fella who set up this site because it's quite handy being able to save a few quid by timing your fill up correctly.

Any sort of price-fixing has a multitude of issues and in this global village in which we live is completely impossible, but....wouldn't an annual fixed price of a barrel of oil be great, manage supply and demand, help with budgeting etc.

Guess I'm after a sort of global communism without the corruption, which is probably the pipe-dream to end all pipe-dreams, maybe we should have a benign dictatorship with me as king instead?

Interesting answers to my earlier question about tax; i fear though that most would result in the books balancing even less. So the follow-up questions, what would you increase tax on/what would you cut spending on (and would you like me to be the benign dictator of the world?)

Posted by Bubba Sparks, 12th December 2008 5:33pm

757

1.The obvious answer cut spending on wars illegal or otherwise.

2. Introduce a tax/license on car stereo systems starting at £50.per year for the quietest rising to a £1000. year for the loudest. Decibel level checked at M.O.T test and if tampered with after test, 10 times the annual rate of duty to be paid.

3.Introduce a cat/dog license £100 per year rising to a £1000 per year if caught $hitting in any garden other than its own.

4. Introduce a mobile phone license. £10 per year for using it only in private but £1500. per year if you want to use it in public places. (Pubs could have special phone shelters built).

5. Charge all foreign vehicles entering through U.K ports £5. per day to use our roads. (They charge us tolls if we drive abroad).

I could think of loads more but will stop for now.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 5:55pm

758

*3. I love cats really. (They taste just like chicken)
And a dog is not just for Christmas you can save some for Boxing Day.

Yep you've guessed it I am a doddering old git who doesn't like loud music/mobile phones or foriegners.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 6:17pm

757
"Historian, people will think you're me (or vice versa) at this rate...very few make the point that business is business and the value of something is determined by what someone is willing to pay for it!"

I agree with you Bubba - I wasn't really emphasisng that point though - just stating the obvious really.

It's quite funny that for all our complaints and concerns about price and 'dubious' pricing practices, at least with fuel there is a whacking great sign outside stating what the price is! I think this probably answers your question about "who blinks first" - once one moves, others in the area follow suit because it's so obvious for customers to see who's cheapest. And as you say, this web site does a great job in taking away the need to drive around looking (except in the case of 755 where, for whatever reason, the price changed twice in a day).

758
Is Grumpy Old Men back on TV? Can't really disagree with any of those suggestions........

BTW, I am (was) Jackson, Petal, Colin B, Historian, HaHa and Realist (sorry about that one - it was the attempt at Mr Nasty). Sadly (or happily?) I am not Kellerman, Greg Brown or Richard Robinson (that was a long shot). Also, not all the posts under those names were from me.

I'll take the abuse as read for that! Apologies to anyone offended! (although I think it's hard for anyone to be offended in this anonymous, 'virtual' world - if most of us acted or spoke like this in real life we'd probably have been murdered years ago!). I have an interest in creative writing and this was a (fairly feeble) attempt to see what sort of reactions/responses could be provoked within the 'theme(s)' that exist on this blog and see how people defend/argue their position. The idea was that this might generate some usable material. Ultimately it was quite interesting but, even with a bit of input from a couple of colleagues, it was hard to keep up the quality of the charade enough to generate suitable responses (that's not a criticism of anyone but myself). It was interesting that the load of toffee I posted under this name some time back actually took a hold (the 'groups' thing) - although not quite how I'd imagined. I don't believe in groups - everything's just a range. Damn well done to those who spotted what was going on. Anyway, apologies again for taking up time/space amongst people who obviously have some good and genuine ideas/fears/anger and so on. I do have some genuine views on these issues, but this isn't the time.

Anyway, enjoy the cyber-pub tonight (great concept - do you really have a drink?), I'm off to a real one tonight, which is probably for the best. I'll pick up your tab - have what you like and the toast is "Thank goodness that sad (insert expletive of choice)'s gone!"

Posted by Obsidian, 12th December 2008 6:57pm

Obsidian
Guess what it was only me & you here all the time.
I was all the ones that you weren't.

Posted by Billy Tworivers, 12th December 2008 7:21pm

761
Classic!

BTW, I am Billy Tworivers.

Only joking. Gotta run!

Posted by Obsidian, 12th December 2008 7:26pm

Any body know where the bodies are buried?

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 12th December 2008 7:33pm

Steve M
It seems we were right all along then about multiple personalities.

The blog appears to have died the death.
R.I.P Blog you were very entertaining.

The one and only A.J.Bell. Accept no substitutes.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 13th December 2008 10:11am

Hello to all,

I have been hospitalised for a few days and when I logged on a while ago I was shocked to say the least.
I have read the last four days worth of blogs twice!!

Adrian, it would appear we were right after all. But this is not really a surprise.

I think we all have our views on this individual, but they will keep.
For now.

Obsidian, Realist, Petal?(bit girlie that one) Jackson, (not Kellerman????) Colin B, Historian and whoever else.
Why not come as yourself?
Not as part of a group? (workmates)
Let us hear your real views and allow them to be examined.
Let us know which name you wish to be known as.
The banter was sometimes erratic, other times educational.
*************************************************

Adrian my friend, Do not bury the blogs just yet, I sincerely hope old friends and new will return.
*************************************************
ITA, I hope you are well.
Bandidoz, how is it hanging?
John Doe UK, hiya.
Bubba Sparks, I would vote for you, as long as I am set high on your council, along with Adrian as overseers of fair taxes for the working class masses.
*************************************************
Have I missed something, but who is BTW?
**************************************************

Please....someone reply, it is lonely out here in cyberspace.

Kindest regards to all.
Steve.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 1:53pm

TOP 10 REASONS FOR BEING ENGLISH
1. Two World Wars and One World Cup.
2. Warm beer.
3. You get to confuse everyone with the rules of cricket.
4. You get to accept defeat graciously in major sporting events.
5. Union jack underpants.
6. Water shortages guaranteed every single summer.
7. You can live in the past and imagine you are still a world power.
8. Bathing once a week - whether you need to or not.
9. Ditto changing underwear.
10. Beats being Welsh.

*************************************
TOP 10 REASONS FOR BEING SCOTTISH
1. You ain't English!
2. You ain't English!
3. You ain't English!
4. You ain't English!
5. You ain't English!
6. You ain't English!
7. You ain't English!
8. You ain't English!
9. You ain't English!
10. You ain't English!
************************
TOP 10 REASONS FOR BEING GERMAN
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

*****************
TOP 10 REASONS FOR BEING WELSH
1. You've got to be having a laugh, haven't you?
**************************************

Just humour.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 2:36pm

Hi Steve
Hope you've recovered o.k from hospital and all is fine.
Glad to see the blog is not dead after all.
Will be back later on today.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 3:16pm

Hi Adrian,

Thank for the kind words,
I will be back myself at around at 7 ish

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 3:31pm

Hi,

RE 758 Adrian

" Introduce a mobile phone license. £10 per year for using it only in private but £1500. per year if you want to use it in public places. (Pubs could have special phone shelters built)."

Great idea.
The money could be raised by ""if you do not go to the local pub with your family three times a week and each have a meal on at least one occasion"" tax.
And a ""refusing to have a go on a karaoke just for fun"" tax.
How about a ""wait your turn at the bar and stop pushing in during busy periods"" tax

+VAT.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 7:53pm

769
Hi Steve
I thought they were all good ideas myself.
Well 1 & 5 were real but 2,3 & 4 were tongue in cheek really.

Hope you've recovered o.k.

Do you think we'll have anyone in tonight?
We spotted the deception quite early on didn't we, but it was quite good fun.
They were too similar in their postings to be individuals.
Still hope they come back as theirselves.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 8:03pm

Hi Adrian,

I am feeling much better thanks. I will spare you the boring details but the hospital staff were faultless.

RE no, 3, I once watched a bloke letting his dog have a dump on the car park, then he just walked on.
I flew down the stairs, grabbing a carrier bag on the way. I scooped the steaming pile up and ran after the ar$hole with his pooch. As he turned around I thrust this package into his hands.
I have never seen him since.

I am not suggesting we all go around chucking doggy poop at their owners (although the idea seems fun) and the taxing seems a vote winner to me.

As for the dual identity thing, we did unmask him several times.
Strange fellow.

It would be nice if ITA, BTK, Bubba and Bandidoz could pop in.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 8:46pm

Well what can we say about some dog owners?
When I take my dog for a walk I take a carrier bag and a bottle of disinfecting water. The "dump" keeps your hands warm in this weather. Mans best friend even manufactures central heating til you get home.(As long as you don't have a bag of chips and forget which one you're eating out of.)
I liked Bubba, Brummie, BTK and even Greg Brown when he was in a jovial mood, and the others on times.

Shame about Kathy Staff passing. She was a good actress and married for 57 years.

Are you on Facebook? my daughters have got me hooked on "pathwords" it's very addictive.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 8:58pm

I should have said we (as in my wife and children, not camp 'A') have a dog, and like you, a responsible owner.
We have a family pet, not a fashion statement, as lots of teenagers seem to have these days.

I think Greg Brown and Kellerman are one and the same. Schitzophrenic comes to mind, but not in a nasty way. god bless him/them.

Statistically 10 out of every 5 people are Schizophrenic.

I was talking to a bloke with schizophrenia the other day.
He said
"The thing is I have 2 personalities and they absolutely hate each other"
I just told him not to beat himself up about it....

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 9:24pm

KATHY BATES.

Great actress, great loss, I do not think 'Last of the summer wine' will ever be the same.
She was the show along with Compo.
Stockings and all.
It managed to survive his passing, but this might be too much.
God bless.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 9:32pm

I used to have a split personality but we're both fine now.
If you suffer from schizophrenia and you become unemployed can you claim dole twice?
I won't go down the immigrants road, o.k I will then.
How is it fair that an immigrant living alone in this country can claim family allowance for children he says he has back in his own country. Could this be the reason the government want to clamp down on the jobless here simply because they know exactly where they live as opposed to immigrants claiming for numerous husbands, wives children that they can't check on?
If we weren't doing this then our taxes (including fuel duty) could come back to the indigenous population. O.K rant over.
That sholud get one or two of the others commenting maybe.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 9:44pm

I really don't want to get into a heavy discussion about immigrants.
As in all walks of life there are good honest people and the shirky benefit claiming brigade.
I am sure though, a lot of money paid to them by the tax payer goes a long way, infact all the way to asia, the eastern block and other countries.

It cannot be the solution or anything to do with high fuel prices, that is a global thingy, an oil company thing.

In this country, we encourage school leavers to get a job and find accomodation, pay taxes, be law abiding, live with a 'partner' and live happily everafter.
In reality, they have no prospects, its not a "what you know" society, its a "who you know" survival package. Young girls, fresh out of nappies are having kids just to get a council flat on a drug and crime ridden inner city estate.
And people are queing up to get in!!
Oh my gawd.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 10:12pm

Well well well...

look who's still in town.
Hello to Adrian and Steve M.

I cant stop too long, was just browsing and there you are.

Its a little message to Historian/Petal/??????

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity, a side of you that positively shines through.
If you have the capacity to learn from your mistakes, you will learn a lot today.
It's hard to make a comeback when you haven't been anywhere, but show your sorry face anyway.

One last thing, Jesus loves you!
It's everybody else that thinks you're an ar$e.

Posted by Boo To Kellerman, 14th December 2008 10:15pm

Of course you're right I'm just trying to flush the gang out.They need a bit of bait
to get them going.
It makes you think mind why does anybody want to come here, if I had my time over again I think I'd have left long long ago.
Plenty of sheep in Austrailia or New Zealand I'd feel right at home.
Neither of those countries have an "open door"policy though.
Never mind come to Great Britain we'll save the world, we've just given £6million
to pakistan and how much did we give to China for the Olympics?
Every little bit of tax/duty helps.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 10:24pm

Only in the UK can we promote ' dont do as I do, do as I say' mentality.

The sheep down under have a back door policy.

hello to BTK,
I can only agree with the sentiments, but you put it so much more beautifilly.

Posted by Steve M, 14th December 2008 10:42pm

Hello BTK nice to hear from you again.

It may be the back door with the sheep but only the front door with the women.
The jury is still out on Brummies/Bubbas sister. It was Brummies wasn't it?
Memory and old age? A deadly combination.

Steve Facebook? Pathwords?

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 10:51pm

Don't know if I've posted this one. Memory gone.

(1) Fine: This is the word women use to end an argument when they are
right and you need to shut up.

(2) Five Minutes: If she is getting dressed, this means a half an hour.
Five minutes is only five minutes if you have just been given five more
minutes to watch the game before helping around the house.

(3) Nothing: This is the calm before the storm. This means something, and
you should be on your toes. Arguments that begin with nothing usually end
in fine.

(4) Go Ahead: This is a dare, not permission. Don't Do It!

(5) Loud Sigh: This is actually a word, but is a non-verbal statement
often misunderstood by men. A loud sigh means she thinks you are an idiot
and wonders why she is wasting her time standing here and arguing with you
about nothing. (Refer back to # 3 for the meaning of nothing.)

(6) That's Okay: This is one of the most dangerous statements a women can
make to a man. That's okay means she wants to think long and hard before
deciding how and when you will pay for your mistake.

(7) Thanks: A woman is thanking you, do not question, or Faint. Just say
you're welcome. (I want to add in a clause here - This is true, unless she
says 'Thanks a lot' - that is PURE sarcasm and she is not thanking you at
all. DO NOT say 'you're welcome' ... That will bring on a 'whatever').

(8) Whatever: Is a women's way of saying F... YOU!

(9) Don't worry about it, I got it: Another dangerous statement, meaning
this is something that a woman has told a man to do several times, but is
now doing it herself. This will later result in a man asking 'What's
wrong?' For the woman's response refer to # 3.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 10:57pm

Heres another.

A guy is browsing in a pet shop and sees a parrot sitting
on a little perch. It doesn't have any feet or legs. The
guy says aloud, 'Jeesh, I wonder what happened to this
parrot?'
The parrot says, 'I was born this way. I'm a defective parrot.'
'Holy $hit,' the guy replies. 'You actually understood and answered
me!'
'I got every word,' says the parrot. 'I happen to be a
highly intelligent, thoroughly educated bird.'
'Oh yeah?', the guy asks, 'Then answer this...How do you hang onto
your perch without any feet?'
'Well,' the parrot says, 'this is very embarrassing but since you
asked, I wrap my 'willie' around this wooden bar like a little hook.
You can't see it because of my feathers.'
'Wow' says the guy. 'You really can understand and speak English,
can't you?'
'Actually, I speak both Spanish and English and I can
converse with reasonable competence on almost any topic: politics,
religion, sports, physics, philosophy. I'm especially good at
ornithology. You really ought to buy me. I'd be a great companion.'
The guy looks at the $200 price tag. 'Sorry, but I just
can't afford that.'
'Pssssst' says the parrot....'I'm defective, so the truth is; nobody
wants me cause I don't have any feet. You probably can get me for
$20. Just make the guy an offer!'
The guy offers $20 and walks out with the parrot. Weeks go
by. The parrot is sensational. He has a great sense of humour, he's
interesting, he's a great pal, he understands everything, he
sympathises, and he's insightful. The guy is delighted. One day he
comes home from work and the parrot goes 'Pssssssssssst' and motions
him over with one wing.
'I don't know if I should tell you this or not, but it's
about your wife and the postman.'
'What are you talking about?' asks the guy.
'When the postman delivered today, your wife greeted him at
the door in a sheer black nightie and kissed him
passionately.'
'WHAT???' the guy asks incredulously. 'THEN what happened?'
'Well, then the postman came into the house and lifted up her nightie
and began petting all over' reported the parrot.
'My God!' he exclaims. 'Then what?'
'Then he lifted up her nightie, got down on his knees and
began to kiss her all over, starting with her breasts and slowly
going down.....'
'WELL???' demands the frantic guy. 'THEN WHAT HAPPENED?'
'Fcuk knows. I got a hard-on and fell off my perch.'

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 14th December 2008 11:05pm

With regards to price adjusting in the earlier posting.

I managed to speak with the forecourt manager this morning, he told me the price is dropped according to the nearest competitors.

They receive an E-Mail from BP and are told what to charge the motorist.

I took him to task and he admitted, off the record, that yes they do sometimes delay dropping the price.

I really do not wish to stir a hornets nest so I will deny this next section was said to me and by whom.

Basically, they hold back on the said reduction so they can, in this case, make 5p per litre profit for TWELVE hours, then they dropped it a little, gained another 1p profit until 4:00pm then adjusted to 99.9p

Posted by John Doe Uk, 15th December 2008 11:30am

George Monbiot in the Guardian today, article copied and pasted below.

Peak Oil is correct you know, as individuals we should be taking this very seriously and stop relying on those idiot politicians (Caroline Lucas excepted). The implications of the IEA report are not trivial, but certainly make just about all the other things we worry about seem very trivial.

Article:

Can you think of a major threat for which the British government does not prepare? It employs an army of civil servants, spooks and consultants to assess the chances of terrorist attacks, financial collapse, floods, epidemics, even asteroid strikes, and to work out what it should do if they happen. But there is one hazard about which it appears intensely relaxed: it has never conducted its own assessment of the state of global oil supplies and the possibility that one day they might peak and then go into decline.

If you ask, the government always produces the same response: "Global oil resources are adequate for the foreseeable future." It knows this, it says, because of the assessments made by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its World Energy Outlook reports. In the 2007 report, the IEA does appear to support the government's view. "World oil resources," it states, "are judged to be sufficient to meet the projected growth in demand to 2030," though it says nothing about what happens at that point, or whether they will continue to be sufficient after 2030. But this, as far as Whitehall is concerned, is the end of the matter. Like most of the rich world's governments, the UK treats the IEA's projections as gospel. Earlier this year, I submitted a freedom of information request to the UK's department for business, asking what contingency plans the government has made for global supplies of oil peaking by 2020. The answer was as follows: "The government does not feel the need to hold contingency plans specifically for the eventuality of crude-oil supplies peaking between now and 2020."

So the IEA had better be right. In the report on peak oil commissioned by the US department of energy, the oil analyst Robert L Hirsch concluded that "without timely mitigation, the economic, social and political costs" of world oil supplies peaking "will be unprecedented". He went on to explain what "timely mitigation" meant. Even a worldwide emergency response "10 years before world oil peaking", he wrote, would leave "a liquid-fuels shortfall roughly a decade after the time that oil would have peaked". To avoid global economic collapse, we need to begin "a mitigation crash programme 20 years before peaking". If Hirsch is right, and if oil supplies peak before 2028, we're in deep doodah.

So burn this into your mind: between 2007 and 2008 the IEA radically changed its assessment. Until this year's report, the agency mocked people who said that oil supplies might peak. In the foreword to a book it published in 2005, its executive director, Claude Mandil, dismissed those who warned of this event as "doomsayers". "The IEA has long maintained that none of this is a cause for concern," he wrote. "Hydrocarbon resources around the world are abundant and will easily fuel the world through its transition to a sustainable energy future." In its 2007 World Energy Outlook, the IEA predicted a rate of decline in output from the world's existing oilfields of 3.7% a year. This, it said, presented a short-term challenge, with the possibility of a temporary supply crunch in 2015, but with sufficient investment any shortfall could be covered. But the new report, published last month, carried a very different message: a projected rate of decline of 6.7%, which means a much greater gap to fill.

More importantly, in the 2008 report the IEA suggests for the first time that world petroleum supplies might hit the buffers. "Although global oil production in total is not expected to peak before 2030, production of conventional oil ... is projected to level off towards the end of the projection period." These bland words reveal a major shift. Never before has one of the IEA's energy outlooks forecast the peaking or plateauing of the world's conventional oil production (which is what we mean when we talk about peak oil).

But that is as specific as the report gets. Does it or doesn't it mean that we have time to prepare? What does "towards the end of the projection period" mean? The agency has never produced a more precise forecast - until now. For the first time, in the interview I conducted with its chief economist Fatih Birol recently, it has given us a date. And it should scare the pants off anyone who understands the implications.

Birol, the lead author of the new energy outlook, is a small, shrewd, unflustered man with thick grey hair and Alistair Darling eyebrows. He explained to me that the agency's new projections were based on a major study it had undertaken into decline rates in the world's 800 largest oilfields. So what were its previous figures based on? "It was mainly an assumption, a global assumption about the world's oil fields. This year, we looked at it country by country, field by field and we looked at it also onshore and offshore. It was very, very detailed. Last year it was an assumption, and this year it's a finding of our study." I told him that it seemed extraordinary to me that the IEA hadn't done this work before, but had based its assessment on educated guesswork. "In fact nobody had done this research," he told me. "This is the first publicly available data."

So was it not irresponsible to publish a decline rate of 3.7% in 2007, when there was no proper research supporting it? "No, our previous decline assumptions have always mentioned that these are assumptions to the best of our knowledge - and we also said that the declines [could be] higher than what we have assumed."

Then I asked him a question for which I didn't expect a straight answer: could he give me a precise date by which he expects conventional oil supplies to stop growing?

"In terms of non-Opec [countries outside the big oil producers' cartel]," he replied, "we are expecting that in three, four years' time the production of conventional oil will come to a plateau, and start to decline. In terms of the global picture, assuming that Opec will invest in a timely manner, global conventional oil can still continue, but we still expect that it will come around 2020 to a plateau as well, which is, of course, not good news from a global-oil-supply point of view."

Around 2020. That casts the issue in quite a different light. Birol's date, if correct, gives us about 11 years to prepare. If the Hirsch report is right, we have already missed the boat. Birol says we need a "global energy revolution" to avoid an oil crunch, including (disastrously for the environment) a massive global drive to exploit unconventional oils, such as the Canadian tar sands. But nothing on this scale has yet happened, and Hirsch suggests that even if it began today, the necessary investments and infrastructure changes could not be made in time. Birol told me: "I think time is not on our side here."

When I pressed him on the shift in the agency's position, he argued that the IEA has been saying something like this all along. "We said in the past that one day we will run out of oil. We never said that we will have hundreds of years of oil ... but what we have said is that this year, compared with past years, we have seen that the decline rates are significantly higher than what we have seen before. But our line that we are on an unsustainable energy path has not changed."

This, of course, is face-saving nonsense. There is a vast difference between a decline rate of 3.7% and 6.7%. There is an even bigger difference between suggesting that the world is following an unsustainable energy path - a statement almost everyone can subscribe to - and revealing that conventional oil supplies are likely to plateau around 2020. If this is what the IEA meant in the past, it wasn't expressing itself very clearly.

So what do we do? We could take to the hills, or we could hope and pray that Hirsch is wrong about the 20-year lead time, and begin a global crash programme today of fuel efficiency and electrification. In either case, the British government had better start drawing up some contingency plans.

Posted by Interesting Times Ahead, 15th December 2008 12:00pm

@783 -> "Basically, they hold back on the said reduction so they can, in this case, make 5p per litre profit for TWELVE hours, then they dropped it a little, gained another 1p profit until 4:00pm then adjusted to 99.9p"

Whoopee. Jesus, would you take food out of their mouths? "You don't need to eat fish and chips, you can eat lard, it's cheaper, and you can take 0.005p per litre off the forecourt price".

If you were a builder, how would you like it if your clients nickled-and-dimed you to death, to the point where it's hardly worth getting out of bed in the morning?

To me the whole thing is simple. They charge a price, you decide whether you want to pay it, or shop elsewhere. Obsessing over whether a forecourt is making 1% more profit in a day (and lets face it, their operations *are* run to the wire) does not bode well for personal happiness. I'd rather they charged 1p/litre more and kept their toilets clean.

Posted by Bandidoz, 15th December 2008 11:11pm

RE 784 ITA, how are you?

Even the 'experts' are disagreeing now.
SSDD to that report. (same $hit - different day)
Also the same song sheet, different sermon.

RE 783 John Doe UK
I can sympathise with you.
Just imagine, taking food from the already very rich Mercedes driving profiteers.
Shame on you.

RE 785 Bandidoz, hiya,
Your response to JD UK was very....'Historian'......Just an observation.
Eat lard? Really eat lard?
I suppose it gives all your $hit an easy follow through ;-)

I couldn't believe you wrote,
"To me the whole thing is simple. They charge a price, you decide whether you want to pay it, or shop elsewhere."

Back in October I had said to drive the extra mile or so to buy cheaper fuel. Your response was,
"If your car does 32mpg that's about 7mpl (miles per litre), so 6 litres (about £6) would get you 40 miles. So 5 miles doesn't eat much out of that. However, if you could earn £30/hour, and the trip takes 10 minutes, then that's effectively cost you £5. So it's predominantly a question of "how much is your time worth".

Is it now OK to shop around?

You have followed that with,
"I'd rather they charged 1p/litre more and kept their toilets clean."

Do you know of a garage toilet door that has no sign hanging saying "out of order" ?
You have kept that secret for far too long.

I propose Bandidoz starts a new blog showing where the cleanest working garage toilets are situated.

Posted by Steve M, 16th December 2008 12:43pm

Hi Adrian,

A line from the very interesting report 784 ITA.

"So what do we do? We could take to the hills,"

Watch out Wales, the English are coming ! !

Posted by Steve M, 16th December 2008 1:05pm

@786

Hi Steve.

Yeah I suppose I did jump down his throat a bit; his post just reminded me a bit of how the Watchdog presenters behave sometimes (like when they bitched to Michael O'Leary about being charged a credit card handling fee for their "free flight" - they asked him how much the handling costs him and, quite rightly, he told them, "It's none of your business") and it grates.

I don't see what's inconsistent between the two quotes. Before I was merely pointing out that it's worth considering whether it's actually worthwhile to go out of your way to fill up; i.e. "is it a false economy?", rather than driving around for miles to find "cheaper" fuel when it isn't.

In other words, shop around, "if it's worth it"....

Posted by Bandidoz, 16th December 2008 1:26pm

@786 -> "I propose Bandidoz starts a new blog showing where the cleanest working garage toilets are situated."

Yeah I bet George Michael would be the first subscriber ;)

Posted by Bandidoz, 16th December 2008 1:27pm

787
I can only refer and add to post 240.
The best thing that ever came out of England was the road to Wales.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 16th December 2008 1:43pm

RE 788 Bandidoz,

That's the beauty of the fuel price search.

All shell garages in the Birmingham area;
Unleaded 86.9 ltr
Diesel 98.9
(the price difference has fallen quietly from 15p to 12p ltr)

On the 3rd Nov (blog 89) I asked if diesel would drop below £1.00 ltr before the end of the world, oops I mean the end of the year. Well I know the answer now.

Adrian, the beast road to Wales is the A458 from Halesowen through Welshpool on to Barmouth (via A470 over Dinas mountain). Beautiful drive. Well worth the effort. Shame it goes both directions.

I have not been on facebook Adrian, but over the weekend I will ask one of my daughters for a guided tour.

Adrian you have been shagging Brummies sister. Is the saying 'too much sex makes you forgetful'? So there you have it Bob.

Bandidoz,
Your sense of humour is dry, dry but funny.

Jack Daniels Cookies recipe.

1. Sample the Jack Daniels to check quality.
2. Take a large bowl, check the Jack Daniels again to be sure it is of the highest quality, pour one level cup and drink.
3. Turn on the electric beater.
4. Beat one cup of butter in a large fluffy bowl.
5. Add one teaspoon of sugar....
6. Beat again. At this point it's best to make sure the Jack Daniels is still okay. Try another cup, just in case.
7. Turn off the mixerer thingy.
8. Break 2 leggs and add to the bowl and chuck in the cup of dried fruit.
9. Pick the fcuking fruit off the floor.
10. Mix on the turner. If the fried druit gets stuck in the beaterers, just pry it loose with a drewscriver. Sample the Jack Daniels for tonsisticity.
11. Next, sift two cups of salt, or whatever. Check the Jack Daniels.
12. Now shift the lemon juice and strain your nuts. Add one table. Add a spoon of sugar, or Whatever you can find.
13. Greash the oven. Turn the cake 360 degrees and try not to fall over. Don't forget to beat off the turner.
14. Finally, throw the bowl through the window, finish the Dack Janiels and make sure to put the stove in the dishwasher.

cherry Mistress

Posted by Steve M, 16th December 2008 3:48pm

791
Steve perhaps it was Bubbas sister as well I can't remember.
Tonight 8pm Sky 1, Jewel Staite now theres one girl I wouldn't forget,
the desk is rising in front of me now.

All the petrol stations down here 99.9p diesel & 88.9p petrol
even the ones with dirty toilets, and I wouldn't bare my ar$e to any of them!
Tried the Jack Daniels recipe many times and it always turns out the same way as your one.

Wales is so good that if you "come over" the severn bridges you have to pay to get in. (The bridges are however owned by the French)as is Cardiff airport.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 16th December 2008 4:16pm

Fi uoy nac dear siht ruoy neve erom dessip naht I ma.
Fi uoy ees a esroh ginnnur dellac yriah egnim d'uoy od llew ot tup emos yenom
no ti.
I kniht er'ew lla dekcuf pu no siht etis.
Lliw ereht eb a gniteem ta eht rebyc bup siht yadirf?
Ew dluoc lla knird emos shtem dna evah a doog emit.
Yb eht yaw I llits kniht kaep lio era ginklat a doal fo skcollob.Ym draobyek sah enog stit pu.
Nac ydobemos pleh.

Posted by Krzysztof Gorzynski., 16th December 2008 6:13pm

ADIDAS

At Dinner I Did a Sh*t

SADIDA

Soon After Dinner I Did Another.

Posted by Bandidoz, 16th December 2008 8:17pm

794 Llew dettops ym dneirf.

Posted by Krzysztof Gorzynski., 16th December 2008 9:13pm

"ecaf ym no emoC" "ecaf ym emoC"
gnimaercs stah ycnaf ni nemow esoht llA
hsinif eht ot ecar sesroh eht sa tsuJ
tocsA ta taerg eb dluow tI
"ecaf ym" ti llac dluow I esroh ecar a denwo I fI
etis siht no pu dekcuf lla era ew nairdA eerga tsum I

lla gninroM

5/4/397 ER

Posted by M Evets, 17th December 2008 9:55am

There is a suggestion of price 'fixing' between $50 and $75 a barrel.

This will be on the agenda at a meeting with OPEC and other oil producers in London next week.

"Iran and Venezuela, for instance, need a price of $90 a barrel to sustain current spending. Having grown accustomed to high prices, countries such as Russia and Nigeria also face difficult adjustments. The stage is set for a painful downturn and possible political unrest in 2009."

With light vehicles expected to almost double worldwide by 2030, there is as yet no alternative to mass produce cars to compete with combustion engines.
(Source; FT.com/Comment/Opinion)
* * * * * * * * *
Basically, unless this government get their fingers out of their arses and act NOW and build more refineries to mass produce 'greener diesel' (fazing out petrol cars altogether) before we all either choke to death, be fried or freeze.

I am not saying "cheap fuel rules OK" but a fair price in the UK will be a start and that can be achieved by meeting supply and demand.

Despite years and years of massive profit and only a small portion left for investment after obscene payments to directors and shareholders the oil companies are basically extending their begging-bowls and asking us for more.

Posted by Steve M, 17th December 2008 11:06am

Adrian,

"Coming over" the Severn bridge,
If you look over the side you can sometimes spot the seamen below.

It must be hard to pay to get into your own country and then see any profits go to the frogs.

Then again, the Royal Mail is set to be split and sold to foreign investors.
Losses of upto 50,000 jobs.
I won't start on the HP sauce thing. (the factory was demolished in the summer, yet another massive landmark gone)
Just like Rover at Longbridge, all gone, flattened.

Global warming, oil shortages, gas price increases, redundancies, weak sterling, Gordon Brown, recession, no white Christmas (again) and to top it off, Terry Wogan might be no;1 in the charts.

Happy days eh?

Posted by Steve M, 17th December 2008 11:47am

A man walks into a bar, late one night completely knackered, dripping with sweat, gasping for air and orders 5 whiskies.
"What's wrong with you?" The landlord says.
"I've got a nymphomaniac in the car - you couldn't satisfy her if you were there 'til Christmas, I've been at it for five and a half hours" he said, totally breathless.
"We'll see about that," says the landlord, off to the car park.
He has been in the car with the woman for a while when there is a knock on the window and a policeman shines his torch in.
The landlord jumps up, winds down the window to talk to the policeman.
"It's all right officer, I'm just shagging my wife," he says.
"Oh, I'm sorry sir, I didn't know it was your wife"
"Nor did I 'til you shone your torch in!"

Hi
Anyone in on Friday evening?

Posted by Steve M, 18th December 2008 1:18pm

J uijol bmm dbnq c nfncfst bsf gvdljoh xbolfst.
boe qfbl pjm bsf ubmljoh uispvhi ijt bstf.
R pmld yzmwrwla droo dlip gsrh lfg svh z xovei ufxpvi.
BKC & TUFWF N njhiu em ju bt xfmm.

Posted by Kbdltpo., 18th December 2008 8:37pm

Kbdltpo,

opu cbe gps tpnfpof xjui pof csbjodfmm ;-)
mpm

Posted by Tufwf N, 18th December 2008 9:56pm

Tufwf N
Zpt njttfe uif gpmmpjoh.

R pmld yzmwrwla droo dlip gsrh lfg svh z xovei ufxpvi.
BKC & TUFWF N njhiu em ju bt xfmm.

Posted by Opu Kbdltpo., 18th December 2008 10:34pm

Hi Steve
I made 800 way too easy really well except for:-
R pmld yzmwrwla droo dlip gsrh lfg svh z xovei ufxpvi.

It's good fun though we'll call it brain training.
I'll give you a clue. R pmld=I Know.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 18th December 2008 10:47pm

hi,

Not Jackson, you missed the 'v' out of gpmmpjoh.

Bandidoz appears to be an educated bloke. Even a clever fcuker.

Adrian, how you doing?

Posted by Steve M, 19th December 2008 7:33pm

Htqa gos ol wxsslioz

eqdh w qkt wxssliozzofu xl

vt qkt wtofu kohhtr gyy

Posted by Lztct D, 19th December 2008 9:42pm

805
Hi Steve
Only just got in.
Am on it now.

Seems quiet tonight.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 19th December 2008 10:33pm

O.K Steve 805
Shouldn't id be\\\\;
"VT QKT WTOFU KOHHTR GYY"

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 19th December 2008 10:56pm

Adrian,

Very impressed.

But its true, VT QKT WTOFU KOHHTR GYY.

Even though the price of oil is still falling despite a 2.5 million barrel a day cut in production, fuel prices in the UK are still high.

Even though prices of oil have fallen 22% since Wednesday, when this desision was announced by OPEC, I just bet that in six weeks the price of fuel will not almost be a quater cheaper.

Even though this government con us with stealth taxes and nothing but bull$hit the price of fuel will not fall.

Even though, after all this, have a Merry Christmas.

Posted by Steve M, 20th December 2008 7:29pm

Gordon Brown has been told by oil producers he must cut fuel taxes before demanding they increase output to drive down prices.

A senior OPEC figure branded the Prime Minister "confused" for urging the cartel to maintain production levels to control prices rather than reducing domestic duty.

At a major oil summit organised by Mr Brown, the PM warned that volatility in prices could cost the global economy trillions of dollars over the coming decades.

But OPEC secretary-general Abdullah al Badri turned the tables on Mr Brown, criticising British tax policy.

Earlier this week, OPEC cut another 2.2 million barrels per day from production in a bid to bolster falling prices.

Dare I say camp B-ites will be sending out their usual mixed messages.

Some 'B'-ers have said the taxes are fair, others have suggested not high enough in this country.
BUT their equivalent of a playboy mag (OPEC weekly (with a full colour pop out of Mr Campbell)) have stated the opposite.

Should they to$$ with their left hand or their right?
Do themselves or each other?
Question questions.

Posted by Steve M, 20th December 2008 8:04pm

Hi Steve and a
Good evening to all.
Steve I hang my head in shame that it took me 23 minutes to work that code out, I'll try and do better next time.
Gordon Brown told quite bluntly by an outsider that it is his fault the fuel is so dear in U.K. you couldn't make it up, Gordon Brown saves the world (his own words) and blames everybody else that it's their fault.
He's even telling the gas/electric companies to lower their prices and if they don't he'll stamp his both feet after Christmas. They must be running scared now. General election May 2009 (pencilled in but subject to change).
VT QKT WTOFU KOHHTR GYY big time.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 20th December 2008 8:31pm

Diesel prices down here: 97.9p
Unleaded :87.9p
Cardiff area.
The gap is narrowing but only in $hits & fartes whereas it should be closer to parity. (like the pound and the euro) Gordon Brown will lumber us with that soon as well. Why should he leave office with most of the country fcuked up when with a little more effort it can be completely bolloxed.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 20th December 2008 8:51pm

hiya,

Election May 2009?
It might be held on a Saturday next time, apparently it will give workers more time to vote during shopping trips.
Not very well thought out (again).
There won't be hardly anyone at work by May.
They may as well leave it alone and not pay teachers for the day off when their school is used for the big X in the square with a blunt black crayon.

Look at the money the country would save.

Thousands of teachers staying home so not being paid.
Thousands of litres of oil (petrol/diesel) saved by the same teachers.
Hundreds of teachers will stay off push-bikes so freeing up road space and allowing traffic to run smoothly, cutting wasted waiting times and burning less fossil fuel.
A few less teachers will require an ambulance after being hit by an irate motorist for holding up the flow of the traffic.
Saving on diesel for an ambulance.
Not having a lane blocked by an unconscious teacher, allowing free flowing traffic.
Thus saving thousands of pounds in NHS treatment for broken bones.
The amount of wasted paper would dramatically reduce so saving a rain-forest and improving air quality.
The supply/demand of apples would fall, causing a drop in prices (although stealth tax would increase, killing hopes of saving money)

Basically, the recession is caused by teachers.

Posted by Steve M, 20th December 2008 9:01pm

Prices in Birmingham showing at ;

86.8 for unleaded
98.9 for diesel

Posted by Steve M, 20th December 2008 9:04pm

TEACHERS:- Another bone of contention.
Have you noticed that they are pre-programmed to say "We're marking books til 9 o'clock every night" When questioned about their 13 weeks paid holidays per year.
And why do they always have "Teacher Training" on the first or last day of term?
No doubt someone of camp B's ilk will say that teachers have a difficult job to do
and perhaps we should try it for a day.
Whoever taught Gordon Brown failed miserably.
Still this time next week Christmas will be over and a very bleak new year seems the prospect for a great many people. None of our jobs are safe, and to anyone reading this now, if you've lost or are about to lose your job then
I'm sure that ALL contributors to this blog offer you our most sincere sympathies and hope that your/our Christmases will be a chance to briefly forget our predicament and get well and truly pi$$ed. We're all suffering and we're all aware of the hardships to come. Merry Christmas to all and for one day at least put the depression on hold.

Posted by Adrian John Bell, 20th December 2008 9:32pm

Adrian,
I can only echo your words and hope anyone who may find themselves unemployed will not suffer too many hardships.

Teachers do have a hard job in a way, deciding what to wear, what to have for lunch, and who to chat up today.

Training days; When We were at school, the teachers knew what to teach, they did not need teaching themselves.

Yet another waste of public money. Ofstead, a bunch of self important twits giving marks to schools depending on how much the headteacher can lick arse and suckle up.
Also depending how well the kitchen staff are ordered to feed the pompous, pretentious, puffed up arrogant $hitheads.
(does it show I do not like ofstead officials?)

Perhaps Gordon Brown would like to swap jobs with one of us for a day.

Posted by Steve M, 20th December 2008 10:31pm

Showing: 751 to 825 of 1214

« ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... »

Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.

Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of PetrolPrices.com (Fubra Ltd)

« Go Back to Main Blog