Continuous cruisers???????

[cotswoldsman]

 

Blimey John!

 

Have you considered Alcoholics Anonymous?

 

It certainly worked for us........hic..........hic. :-)

lol as it happens I have had quite a few visitors so seem to have spent a fortune on meals in pubs and yes about £150 on diesel I went mad yesterday at the butchers at Bewood who vacuum packs the meat so it lasts quite a while. 14 days at Norbury where I have quite a few friends was expensive and having to move from LTM to 48 hour moorings and 5 day moorings was hard work!!

[Doorman]

lol as it happens I have had quite a few visitors so seem to have spent a fortune on meals in pubs and yes about £150 on diesel I went mad yesterday at the butchers at Bewood who vacuum packs the meat so it lasts quite a while. 14 days at Norbury where I have quite a few friends was expensive and having to move from LTM to 48 hour moorings and 5 day moorings was hard work!!

 

If it's fine food you enjoy then look no further than the Oxtail & Trotter butchers if you pass through Audlem on your travels. In just over 12 months they have revitalised a dying butchery business with their wide selection of quality meats.

 

They also supply The Lord Combermere pub with their wares so you can kill two birds with one stone as it were. Fulfil your desire for good food and throw caution to the wind for that drinking problem.......lol

[nicknorman]

No Anarchy is an ideology that has yet to be tried on any great scale but, as I said, is doomed to fail as long as there are selfish people around to exploit the unselfish.

 

It has, however,proven very successful on a smaller scale.

I think you'll find that anarchy has been tried big-time. It was the default state before laws were invented! Funny how, when in this blissful state of anarchy, it was felt that there was a need for laws. But you have answered your own point, there will always be selfish people, even if there was a law against it. Edited June 19, 2013 by nicknorman

[cotswoldsman]

If it's fine food you enjoy then look no further than the Oxtail & Trotter butchers if you pass through Audlem on your travels. In just over 12 months they have revitalised a dying butchery business with their wide selection of quality meats.

 

They also supply The Lord Combermere pub with their wares so you can kill two birds with one stone as it were. Fulfil your desire for good food and throw caution to the wind for that drinking problem.......lol

Did go there and yes was a pleasant surprise to see the old butcher gone. As it happens when I reached the top of the flight I bought some great Scones and Cream and while talking to the lady (having told her off for not making tea) she told me it was her Daughter that owns the Oxtail and Trotter and they have plans now to add a Cafe. I expressed my views on the Sausage Factory and we were in 100% agreement!!!

[Hawkmoth]

I think you'll find that anarchy has been tried big-time. It was the default state before laws were invented! Funny how, when in this blissful state of anarchy, it was felt that there was a need for laws. But you have answered your own point, there will always be selfish people, even if there was a law against it.

[carlt]

I think you'll find that anarchy has been tried big-time. It was the default state before laws were invented! Funny how, when in this blissful state of anarchy, it was felt that there was a need for laws.

You evidently have little idea of what anarchy actually is.

 

Could I recommend "Anarchy and Other Essays" by Emma Goldman? It is available on Kindle for free.

[nicknorman]

You evidently have little idea of what anarchy actually is.

 

Could I recommend "Anarchy and Other Essays" by Emma Goldman? It is available on Kindle for free.

You could do, but I wouldn't be bothered to read it. I know exactly what anarchy is, and also that there are some unrealistic ideological distortions of it, the practice of which would be doomed to failure for the reason you gave, in the highly unlikely case where it was actually tried out.

[carlt]

You could do, but I wouldn't be bothered to read it.

I didn't think so.

 

"Someone has said that it requires less mental effort to condemn than to think."

 

The "unrealistic distortions" are what the people who condemn anarchy have done to attempt to change the meaning (started very effectively by Jonny Rotten in 1977).

[Doorman]

Did go there and yes was a pleasant surprise to see the old butcher gone. As it happens when I reached the top of the flight I bought some great Scones and Cream and while talking to the lady (having told her off for not making tea) she told me it was her Daughter that owns the Oxtail and Trotter and they have plans now to add a Cafe. I expressed my views on the Sausage Factory and we were in 100% agreement!!!

Yes, you were quite right to scold her for the lack of that vital ingredient, tea!

 

And yes, they are quite advanced in their cafe plans, together with adding a couple of studio apartments above the butchers shop. New blood (no pun intended) new ideas. They are a forward thinking couple with quality high on the agenda. The cafe is bound to be an equally successful venture too.

 

"Someone has said that it requires less mental effort to condemn than to think."

 

 

Was that Chris Pink by any chance?

[carlt]

Was that Chris Pink by any chance?

No, Emma Goldman

[bigste]

I cannot see the need for most of the short stay mooring limits, (24/48). It is only during peak summer that the canals get busy and I know that if I'd paid a grand or more to hire a boat I wouldn't be mooring it up for any longer than I really needed to.

[KevMc]

I think you'll find that anarchy has been tried big-time. It was the default state before laws were invented! Funny how, when in this blissful state of anarchy, it was felt that there was a need for laws. But you have answered your own point, there will always be selfish people, even if there was a law against it.

 

It was the default becuase no one needed laws - its only when someone wants to control the rest of the people that you need laws - laws are the tools by which we are controlled.. oh some of them pretend to be for our protection but that is a mirage to make us think we have any worth to the rulers other than as a means of production

[carlt]

I cannot see the need for most of the short stay mooring limits, (24/48).

The wholesale conversion of 14 day moorings to 24/48 hrs would seem to disadvantage everyone but the overstayer.

 

If someone is willing to overstay after 2 weeks then why should shortening the time period, before they start offending, discourage this activity?

 

It would seem to me that the biggest (if not only) complaint is against those who do not move for months, not those who want to hang around for a few days yet they are unaffected by these new draconian restrictions.

[nicknorman]

It was the default becuase no one needed laws - its only when someone wants to control the rest of the people that you need laws - laws are the tools by which we are controlled.. oh some of them pretend to be for our protection but that is a mirage to make us think we have any worth to the rulers other than as a means of production

A great conspiracy theory! But it could have been that people were fed up with having their villages raided, food and property stolen, wives adulterated etc and wanted some order brought into their lives. Anyway, I think rules are a natural thing. You only have to look at animals such as dogs, apes etc to see that they too have rules on hierarchy etc. The difference between laws and rules is only in the means by which the non-compliant are punished.

The wholesale conversion of 14 day moorings to 24/48 hrs would seem to disadvantage everyone but the overstayer.

 

If someone is willing to overstay after 2 weeks then why should shortening the time period, before they start offending, discourage this activity?

 

It would seem to me that the biggest (if not only) complaint is against those who do not move for months, not those who want to hang around for a few days yet they are unaffected by these new draconian restrictions.

Even I have to agree on that one. Personally I never want to stay in 1 place for more than 48hrs but I can appreciate that some do. There should be a mixture of 48hr and 7/14 day but as has been mentioned, in some places such as the rural isolation of the Shroppie (where it can be difficult to moor away from VMs) they all seem to be 48hr even those in the middle of no-where.

[carlt]

But it could have been that people were fed up with having their villages raided, food and property stolen, wives adulterated etc and wanted some order brought into their lives.

A great conspiracy theory which could almost be believable...if the rape and pillage had stopped with the adoption of laws.

[nicknorman]

A great conspiracy theory which could almost be believable...if the rape and pillage had stopped with the adoption of laws.

Not stopped but reduced.

[carlt]

Not stopped but reduced.

Really?

 

As there has yet to be a war started by Anarchists I would suggest that the rape, pillage and theft has increased exponentially, since the desire to displace one set of laws with another began.

[KevMc]

A great conspiracy theory! But it could have been that people were fed up with having their villages raided, food and property stolen, wives adulterated etc and wanted some order brought into their lives. Anyway, I think rules are a natural thing. You only have to look at animals such as dogs, apes etc to see that they too have rules on hierarchy etc. The difference between laws and rules is only in the means by which the non-compliant are punished.

 

 

 

Not a conspiracy theory, just a different take on how 'civilisation' has developed - as they say "History is written by the winners" and it looks like the law makers are the winners.

[Chris Pink]

A great conspiracy theory! But it could have been that people were fed up with having their villages raided, food and property stolen, wives adulterated etc and wanted some order brought into their lives. Anyway, I think rules are a natural thing. You only have to look at animals such as dogs, apes etc to see that they too have rules on hierarchy etc. The difference between laws and rules is only in the means by which the non-compliant are punished.

 

Bless. Such a lovely simplistic view of life. It must be a wonderfully peaceful and simple place in your head.

 

And who, Nicky, do you think are the people who 'protected' said villagers from having their villages raided, food and property stolen, wives adulterated etc if not the very same people who were now paid to prevent it.

 

Was that Chris Pink by any chance?

 

I shall take that as a great compliment.

 

ps I think your attitude to Sarah shows that underneath that raving bigot exterior beats a warm living heart. (mind I always suspected such was the case)

Edited June 19, 2013 by Chris Pink

[cotswoldsman]

Stop the peasants revolting I say

[Doorman]

I shall take that as a great compliment.

 

ps I think your attitude to Sarah shows that underneath that raving bigot exterior beats a warm living heart. (mind I always suspected such was the case)

Ah, the truth is out at last!

 

ETA living on the canal and away from the urban splash has tempered my bigotry somewhat. I've even grown to accept Yorkshire people as my superiors, given that I'm married to one! :-)

Edited June 19, 2013 by Doorman

[deckhand]

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/news-flash/5883-cart-refused-powers

 

Thought this was interesting read this morning

[PaulG]

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/news-flash/5883-cart-refused-powers

 

Thought this was interesting read this morning

I don't see why C&RT should have to "explain" anything about the Act. They didn't enact it - Parliament did. How can C&RT be expected to "explain" the actions of another, unrelated body?

Section 43 of of the 1962 Act says "[C&RT] shall have power to demand, take and recover [or waive] such charges for their services and facilities, and to make the use of those services and facilities subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit."

 

Now you can argue about the technicalities and fine points of the law if you like, but that wording "subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit." certainly does appear to endow C&RT with considerable powers.

[Chris Pink]

Now you can argue about the technicalities and fine points of the law if you like, but that wording "subject to such terms and conditions, as they think fit." certainly does appear to endow C&RT with considerable powers.

 

Which is the Mayall party line.

 

Nigel Moore, who has considerable experience in waterways law gives a much different perspective. To the effect that this piece of legislation was formulated to rationalise the mixture of charging regimes in place post-nationalisation, not to give carte blanche for any powers any time.

 

Something that it is self-evident that BW/CRT accepted at one stage otherwise why the 1995 Act?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

 

Which is the Mayall party line.

 

Nigel Moore, who has considerable experience in waterways law gives a much different perspective. To the effect that this piece of legislation was formulated to rationalise the mixture of charging regimes in place post-nationalisation, not to give carte blanche for any powers any time.

 

Something that it is self-evident that BW/CRT accepted at one stage otherwise why the 1995 Act?

... not to mention all the other BW Acts and Bye-laws.

 

The fact of the matter is that BW can be shown to have requested and been refused powers that it now claims it has anyway.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Allan(nb Albert)