Jesus Christ. A "couple of glasses of wine and a few pints of beer" and he still reckoned he could drive? That's basically how much I'd have if I was going for a piss-up.
People really should just stop drinking any alcohol if they're going to drive.
galmuth
joined 2 years ago
Homer (IT dept) is quietly watching his neighbours (dev team) from his window
I don't think there's a magic wand to stop it.. I just drown it out by listening to podcasts.
I was aware of the 7 year rule, but I believe the new tax rate would apply at the time of the death, rather than retrospectively applying the rate from the time of the gift. I could be wrong though.
Surely there is no Inheritance Tax applicable if the farm passes ownership - only if it passes as inheritance? So the new tax laws wouldn't have made any difference anyway?
Such a rubbish fine. It probably barely covers the cost of cleanup of dead fish by the Environment Agency, and the cleanup of private properties which had actual shit floating into them.
Not only was it an illegal discharge of sewage, but in an area they had absolutely no permit to do so, so it shouldn't have even been possible for sewage to discharge here. And it was directly into a public water supply, a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a beautiful National Park. They've clearly been extremely careless and/or nefarious when it comes to implementing the infrastructure.
The fine should have been at least ten times the amount.
Even though it looks kinda cool and cyberpunk, it's still gross that there's so many roads completely built over a city where people work and live, with a No Cycling sign suggesting cyclists and pedestrians are second class citizens here.
Reading these links, I don't really understand why, for example, Disability Rights UK are against the assisted dying bill. They don't say what's wrong with the bill, they just say it's bad. This bill is aimed at terminally ill people not disabled people, and its not clear from those links what the issue is.
The only links of yours that do explain in detail the issues with the bill, are relating to an unrelated Scottish bill.
I've never really thought of it as a bad thing. You can still say nothing, or "I want to speak with a lawyer before I answer any questions".
I've always considered it to be more about a line of questioning at trial. If you've invented an alibi, the prosecution can ask you "why are you only coming up with this excuse now but you didn't at the time?". You might then have a good reason for this, such as "I didn't think it was a good idea to answer questions without first consulting a lawyer".
The American model of having immunity if you just stay quiet is a bit odd in comparison.
When you get arrested in England, you do have a right to remain silent, but it might be used against you. The police will typically say:
You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court.
"There were some rare bats we were legally obliged to protect, but we just had to drive the tracks right through the woods. We couldn't come up with any viable solutions except an ugly shed, then when the council complained about how ugly it was, we went over their heads to central government and lawyered them into submission. Wow that was expensive, huh."
Fixing this problem requires more redistribution of wealth than degrowth. Workers should be paid appropriately for their work, and those at the top should get a smaller slice of the pie.
Capitalism which means that business owners are free to make billions yet those who produce the goods go hungry, is utterly intolerable.