Rebels have breached Col Muammar Gaddafi's compound in Tripoli, one of the few areas still under the Libyan leader's control, witnesses say.

Heavily-armed fighters had earlier streamed into the capital in dozens of pick-up trucks to attack the compound.

TV footage showed smoke rising from buildings across the city, and the sound of shelling could be heard.

Col Gaddafi's son Saif al-Islam appeared in Tripoli overnight, hours after rebels said he had been captured.

A rebel leader said his appearance was embarrassing, but would not stop their advance.

Bernice: Yes, the cycle of poverty. Difficult to break with so many entitlements making it attractive to be lazy (for some).

"Best before" date labels could be scrapped in an attempt to cut the £680 worth of food thrown away by the average UK household each year.

New government guidance to shops aims to put more focus on "use by" dates on items such as prawns and yoghurt which have a definite shelf life.

The initiative follows consultation with manufacturers and retailers. It will also target "sell by" and "display until" labels which it is thought add to consumers' confusion. These labels are generally used by shops for stock control.

The changes will be brought in over the next month and will not involve new legislation.

According to the advisory body Waste and Resources Action Programme, households can end up binning up to a quarter of their weekly food and drink purchases.

A spokesperson for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: "By law, pre-packed food must show a 'best before' date - even though many foods are still safe to eat after that date.

"This is very different from the 'use by' date that shows when food is no longer safe and should be thrown away. Being clear on the difference between the two could help us all to reduce our food waste."

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said: "I am dismayed so much food goes to waste and if the date labels are part of the problem, it's one thing we should be able to improve."


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment.....>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

147.
spitfirestudent
18th April 2011 - 12:29

Aw does that mean I can't get perfectly good discounted food at 7pm in my local shop anymore? How will a student survive!? I don't like that so much good food gets wasted or that most people don't understand that's what a freezer is for. I see use by dates as a good way to save money. I just bought fresh yoghurt yesterday for 19p! Bargain.

rod03801: as i said I wasn't sure.

**That mother nature does not say a cucumber is 25.56mm x 320.149mm.**

HUH?

Bernice: It could be, but it is also an American show, and it sounds like an episode I saw.

Unfortunately for Freegan's, small independent shops have started to eradicate the food waste that the chains have created. After top chef's have lived and seen the waste that too much packaging has created they are shocked how much perfectly good food is thrown away. One top TV chef commentated how it was stupid to through away a dozen eggs if only one was broken, fruit and veg through one out of 'six' being bruised... so the whole punnet has to be chucked. Meat... that somehow (as the chef's laughed) goes off at midnight... like Cinderella dress turning back... the big shops have brainwashed us into throwing food away and that is a disgrace.

Yet the smaller shops are bringing back the principles of buying loose. No longer packaged, the fruit is loose and not bound by the condition of it's neighbour. That mother nature does not say a cucumber is 25.56mm x 320.149mm.

Artful Dodger: I saw a show on Freegan's about 6 months ago...no it was a WIFE SWAP show, and one family lived as freegans.....living out of rubbish containers. They used to wait until the supermarkets had closed for the day and then rob the bins of any discards.....it was sickening and disgusting what they made the kids do and eat....also it was against the law ( well that is what was said in the show)....now I think it was an English show but can't be sure.:(

Artful Dodger: Australias minimum hourly rate is $13.74....I would NEVER work for that little amount of money. as for being unemployed, have never been unemployed and will never be unemployed. If there was ever a time of difficulty (I can't remember one but..if..) I would work for myself, and in fact the last 20 years that is just what I have done :)

I personally believe that the kids will be like the parents....you will have generation after generation of "unemployables"

(V): Yeah, Biden also promised everyone free college education during the campaign. What a loser.

United States Vice-President Joe Biden, who is visiting China, has said the US would never default on its debt.

In a speech on the last day of his visit, he reiterated that China's large holdings of dollar assets were safe.

His trip comes amid mounting tension between the two over America's debt.

Chinese officials have criticised the political row in the US over raising its borrowing ceiling, and expressed concern over the recent downgrade of the country's credit rating.

"You're safe," Mr Biden told university students in the south-western town of Chengdua, in answer to a question about Washington's ability to repay its debt.

Libyan rebels are battling troops loyal to Col Muammar Gaddafi for control of Tripoli, after they launched an assault on the capital from several directions.

Rebel commanders say they have taken control of about 80% of the capital, including the headquarters of state TV.

But fighting is still raging in parts of the city, and the rebels have not managed to find the Libyan leader.

World leaders have urged Col Gaddafi to step down. US President Obama said his 42-year rule "was coming to an end".

The rebels were met by jubilant crowds in central Green Square, which was previously the scene of nightly pro-Gaddafi demonstrations.


....A former British ambassador to Libya, Sir Richard Dalton, has told the BBC he trusts the rebel council to manage a transition: "I believe that the constitutional principles laid down by the Transitional National Council will be their guide, and that they will make their very, very best endeavours to realise all of them.".......

(V): It was dishonest. You linked it to minimum wage. It's NOT at $5.

Artful Dodger: It was not dishonesty.. can't you tell the difference? I was just making a point of low wages.

(V): Then why did you ask?

Artful Dodger: but we all know that is not true.

(V): If that's the case, why be dishonest and post $5???

Artful Dodger: The UK minimum wage this October is $10.02 dollars at current exchange rates.

(V): You know what I do for a living. I'm a model and drive a cab.

BTW, minimum wage is 8.67 as of next year.

(V): Most people make more than 5 dollars an hour.

Artful Dodger: What do you do and who for?

Artful Dodger: So... all the people getting $5 an hour are supposed to pay for more ed.. more training, etc.. two (or 3 jobs) and run a home while on a tight budget especially now while it is an employers market job wise?

"A small number. There are always exceptions. But exceptions are not the rule."

A small number... when did Jesus come back and change everything?

(V): you talk like an unemployed guy

you asked who I work for.... please stop getting personal. I will not post confidential info on this board.

N' no.. as I told Bernice I'm not unemployed. Read back

(V): "You've not answered the point.. If everyone is paying crap wages then what?"

Not everyone is paying "crap" wages. I've already pointed this fact out.

"While wages are low everywhere then what."

They aren't low everywhere.


"Now.. who I work for is my private life.. I mean.. are you going to advertise who you work for on the board??"

Unemployed then? Didn't ask for details. Just what line of work.

"That, I find a very limited interpretation of why someone might not have a good ed. I saw a story of lady who was made prisoner by 'daddy' over many years. People who've been undiagnosed with the likes of dyslexia, etc."

A small number. There are always exceptions. But exceptions are not the rule.

Artful Dodger: You've not answered the point.. If everyone is paying crap wages then what? Businesses are not going to hike prices re wage increases unless it is all at once. While wages are low everywhere then what. Yes.. change jobs... but then what about the jobs that people do that are essential?

Now.. who I work for is my private life.. I mean.. are you going to advertise who you work for on the board??

"And if you can't get a better job because you sat on your lazy butt and didn't better yourself with proper schooling, it's your own fault. "

That, I find a very limited interpretation of why someone might not have a good ed. I saw a story of lady who was made prisoner by 'daddy' over many years. People who've been undiagnosed with the likes of dyslexia, etc.

Now stop trying to get personal, I can have fun just posting political snips.

I remember years ago a prog about American car companies.. The cars were just not upto the standard that other countries insisted on regarding quality and safety. This caused them to have to spend extra time and money off the domestic market production lines making the cars exportable rather than make them exportable straight away.

(V): " Support as in making up the wages to a livable wage because the companies will not pay enough. Which is why low income families need support from the government via food stamps and tax credits. You may object to the word "support" but that is what the government is having to do."

If a company doesn't pay enough, don't work for them. I have tons of friends working for companies and they all own homes and cars and boats and are doing more than well. Yes there are some companies that don't pay well. But that's life. Get a second job. Many people complain about not having a livable wage but the reality is that they are irresponsible with money. I don't make a ton of money but my house is paid for. I have friends making the same amount of money as I make and they still how the banks (and credit cards) thousands. What's up with that? Live within your means. Most people don't. So what you mean by livable wage some mean earning a wage that supports their chosen lifestyle. A company isn't obligated to support your indulgences.

"... I've explained this several times, it is not hard to understand. It's why the UK gov introduced a minimum wage to stop companies exploiting workers just to maximize profits and dividends to stock holders. Not just 'blue collar' but as I've experienced, 'white collar' as well. Because of minimum wage law.. the amount of people needing support just so they can afford to live why working has decreased."

So what exactly do you do for a living Jules? Who do you work for?

"Then companies need to pay a fair wage that can be lived on then. And not as experienced here do everything they can to not pay a living wage. If not, then you just end up with one of your pet hates... illegal immigrants doing the work."

As I said, there are plenty of companies that pay excellent wages. Don't work for those that don't. And if you can't get a better job because you sat on your lazy butt and didn't better yourself with proper schooling, it's your own fault.


"Now... Dan.. can you stay on these points?"

Everyone knows who has a penchant for rabbit trails and word twisting. News Flash, it's a he and he lives at your address. But I must say, nice job this time. Your post is a perfect example (snipes aside) of how to hold a discussion. You stated your point without twisting mine. There's hope for you yet.

Übergeek 바둑이: You always take the side against big companies regardless of facts. The big auto companies were losing billions and there was little they could do to cut costs. So your idea that they were greedy is, no offense, dim. What do you think they are in business for? Here's a news flash for ya: They want to make money and lots of it.

But they were losing money. The unions were demanding more money so to compensate, the autos they produced were of lesser quality. Enter the Japanese autos, better and costing less, you had the recipie for disaster.

And labor costs are huge. When you add in all the benefits and when you consider the pay given out to all the retired workers and their spouses, it adds up big time. When you're a company that is losing money, you don't have many options. Big labor refuses to budge and big management has no vision for the future. The quality of foreign auto surpasses the quality if made in the USA so what would you do?

Meanwhile you have a great example of union thuggery in the CWA (where I was once an assistant VP). While on strike, they resort to destroying company property and disrupting service to its customers. You have union thugs threatening the lives of those who would dare cross the picket lines and one moron even went so far as to use his young daughter and place her in front of a truck that was delivering supplies to the company.

When a company makes money, it's their money to do with as they see fit. You can negotiate with them for a fair wage but in the end, walk away and find another job if you don't like what they have to offer. I worked for the phone company and they paid plenty. Then benefits were excellent and I made a very decent wage. They even paid for my schooling when I started college. They allowed me to work nights so I could go to school during the day. And they paid for all my college costs while I worked for them.

And I was just an average joe worker in the repair department answering the phone for business customers with phone problems. I dispatched repair workers. There were thousands like me across the country. And each one could have up to 2500 a year for college and night school expenses.

Not bad for a greedy big company.

Artful Dodger: Support as in making up the wages to a liveable wage because the companies will not pay enough. Which is why low income families need support from the government via food stamps and tax credits. You may object to the word "support" but that is what the government is having to do.

... I've explained this several times, it is not hard to understand. It's why the UK gov introduced a minimum wage to stop companies exploiting workers just to maximise profits and dividends to stock holders. Not just 'blue collar' but as I've experienced, 'white collar' as well. Because of minimum wage law.. the amount of people needing support just so they can afford to live why working has decreased.

"It's not the job of the government to make up the difference."

Then companies need to pay a fair wage that can be lived on then. And not as experienced here do everything they can to not pay a living wage. If not, then you just end up with one of your pet hates... illegal immigrants doing the work.

Now... Dan.. can you stay on these points?

Artful Dodger:

> Yeah, like the unions in Detroit that fought for a fair wage and managed to unemploy all the workers when the factories shut down. Bleeding the complain dry. That's the ticket.

Was it the unions? No offense but that is a very dim view of what happened. I wonder if it was because the companies were greedy and decided to move manufacturing to countries where they pay workers a pittance. I wonder how many jobs went to China and the like. Here is one easy way to get around paying the minimum wage. Let's move all the factories to Third World countries. Over there workers get paid peanuts. The average American worker in the auto industry is getting paid $38 per hour. In China they pay $0.17 per hour. It takes no genius to see why Detroit went bust. Not only did they get around the union complaints, they also got around the minimum wage, fired a lot of qualified workers, and made more money by manufacturing cheaper. But then, I am sure you knew that.

Artful Dodger: LOL

Vikings: That's probably it. And I wouldn't put it past the unions to issue complaints for the kids not using union labor.

Artful Dodger: I see lemon-aid stands all the time,three in the last day. One radio station here has a contest every year and advertises a lemon-aid stand for the winner, comps the lemon-aid and cups, and matches the take for the kids for a college fund.
most of the time I hear the harassed ones are in liberal towns with high taxes or neighborhood associations with by laws

Bernice: It used to be that having a lemonaid stand was something normal in the US. Kids could earn a few dollars. It should be no big deal. But the government likes to stick its nose into everything. On one level I understand it but where does all this government intrusion stop? It's gone too far.

Vikings: True. They were just trying to make a point but I don't think things like that are as effective as local inititives.

Of course one could make an argument that even an innocent lemonaid stand could pose a health risk. After all, it's a very different world from even 20 years ago. And 40 years ago, when I was a young kid, we could go anywhere in the neighborhood and even to the lake a few miles away and mom never worried. Today, you have to keep your eyes glued to your kids there are so many sicko's out there.

rod03801: I did mention community but of course family should be on the list too. We need to look out for our own. I help my kids out a lot. I pay for special things like dance lessons and preschool costs, clotihng, you know, stuff grandparents are supposed to help with. They can't afford everything that goes into raising a family. If they were down and out, I'd do whatever it took to help them get back on their feet. My daughter and her hubby are hard workers and not lazy about their responsibilities. My son is studying to become an audioologist. When people are willing to do the hard work required in getting ahead, helping them out in the process feels good and right. ;)

Vikings: legal porno? if it was legal then it was legal, and it should be allowed to be sold....unless it had a health risk hahahah.

You wouldnt be allowed to sell lemonade in Australia like that because of the health risks...but I always thought the lemonade stands were part of the American way of life....so sad :(

Artful Dodger: I agree about shutting down kids lemonade stands in front of their own home,that is clearly wrong, but this was a public place, what if they were selling legal porno

Artful Dodger: I would say I agree with all of that. EXCEPT, I think there are many times when people could turn to their own families for help. Seems to me thats how it used to be, from what I've heard. Or local communities helping their own too.

Of course I'm mostly Libertarian and feel the federal govt should only be involved where absolutely necessary. And to me, that's limited to Defense, border control, and probably a couple other things I can't think of right now, because TV is distracting me.

Vikings: I agree that cops were just doing their jobs and I also agree that the people selling the lemonade were only interested in making a point. However, when I was little, we used to have lemonade stands all the time. Some kids still do this in their neighborhoods. But in the news there are dozens of situations where the authorities shut down little kid’s lemonade stands because the children were operating without a food permit etc. Sometimes government takes itself too seriously.

As for that lady cop, she was cute. But she was out of line. There was no need for her to put her hand in front of the camera. It goes with the job of protecting the rights of others. Which she was only there to enforce the law (the lemonaid stand clearly violated the law) she was out of line in her attempts to get the camera person to stop filming her. She should have been as concerned about the rights of the person behind the camera as she was concerned about the violation of selling goods on the Capitol grounds. The protesters got to her and she lost her cool.

" I did ask you if you thought it was OK for the government to support low wage employees via food stamps and welfare instead of the companies paying what people need to live on."

Is it "OK" for the government to subsidize people who have jobs but don't make enough money at those jobs to live on?

No. Not entirely. First, I object to the word, "support." It's not clear exactly what you mean by that.

I think it's necessary that government has SOME programs that offer "help" (different from support) for people who REALLY NEED it. If a person has a job but can't make ends meet, they need another job. It's not the job of the government to make up the difference. If the person has just fallen on hard times, the government can offer some help in the gap, but it shouldn't be a long term situation.

Where there are children in the equation, then yes, the government ought to help with some support mechanisms (again, different from support-define your terms- I mean temporary help). People need to learn personal responsibility.

In SOME cases this help will be long term. There are always situations that deem long term help necessary. And wherever children are concerned, help should always be available. It's not a kids fault that his/her parents are losers. Still, situations ought to be properly evaluated and it should never be a given that you get food stamps cuz you have hungry kids. Maybe just feed the kids and let the lazy parents go hungry.

That said, it's NOT the governments responsibility to feed starving kids. It is however the responsibility of ALL OF US. Communities ought to have MANY failsafe mechanisms in place to help feed the needy (this includes individuals, businesses, and certainly churches). Community outreach should be the front lines and the government should serve to catch those that fall between the cracks.

Lazy people who refuse to work should go hungry.

I've been on food stamps a couple of times in my life (after married with kids). We've had people buy us groceries (unsolicited) because they knew we were in need). But in the cases where I was on food stamps (due to a lay off) I NEVER collected my full allotted amount. Why? Because I didn't sit on my lazy bum and do nothing. I went out and found a job. Once while my kids were young I had THREE different jobs. I worked full time during the week and two part time jobs at night and weekends. It's MY JOB to care for MY FAMILY and not the job of any government.

The government was there to offer HELP to get me through a difficult period. But I did my part by seeking UNTIL I found a new job. And I took whatever was offered. That's how the government should operate. Offer help but expect the recipient to do their part. Help should have an ending period.

Bernice: Actually that had nothing to do with free enterprise, that was a blatant attempt to get arrested and make a point, they had every right to set up a stand LEGALLY and make as much as they could, unfortunately their point was apples and oranges, citing Martin Luther King as an example, If they wanted to make public speeches like King that would have been alright, the only thing that the police did wrong may have been the lady cops pushing the camera, but that is questionable as it is hard to tell from the camera angle how close the camera was to being in her face (interfering with police business).
You will notice that the police did first ask them to stop or to give it away, so they tried

(V):