On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:


"
I think you meant you saw more of England than most English see in a
year (a somewhat strange claim; how in the space of two weeks do you
know what "most" English do in 52? ). But your little trip round just
*one* country doesn't really count as seeing "more of the UK".

Janet.

If you know anything at all about logistics you would readily see/know that
the majority of the UK residents (English + permanent interlopers) see very
little of the UK in a year...they just do not have the money....perhaps
someone like you might have the 'lolly' to roam around but there are many
that do not live in such luxury and scrape from hand to mouth each
week....no different in this country......over a lifetime I suspect I might
have seen more of England than you have me love....a roaming on foot thru
the lake districts on one trip of a month...riding a bicycle from the
Portsmouth area to Plymouth and then via a winding route to York on another
one of my trips over yonder.....that is just for a start.....H


Most Britons who take holidays try to get to the sun for the obvious reason
that it's v. unreliable here. Many of us deplore our own inclinations in
this respect and make a vow to 'stay in England' for our next holiday, only
to crave some real, lengthy, reliable sun and book yet another foreign
holiday.
The 'poverty' you cite as the 'reason' that the British don't travel around
their own country, would no doubt account for the hordes of packages holiday
makers flying out of Britain every year, bound for worldwide destinations!
I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s or even the Wilson years
of no more than £30 to be taken abroad - which led to the development of
package holidays in the first place. Your outlook is sadly old-fashioned
and out of date.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

Most Britons who take holidays try to get to the sun for the obvious
reason
that it's v. unreliable here. Many of us deplore our own inclinations in
this respect and make a vow to 'stay in England' for our next holiday,
only
to crave some real, lengthy, reliable sun and book yet another foreign
holiday.
The 'poverty' you cite as the 'reason' that the British don't travel
around
their own country, would no doubt account for the hordes of packages
holiday
makers flying out of Britain every year, bound for worldwide destinations!
I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s or even the Wilson
years
of no more than £30 to be taken abroad - which led to the development of
package holidays in the first place. Your outlook is sadly old-fashioned
and out of date.
--
I am fully aware of the travel habits .... at any given time it is estimated
that there are over 500,000 Brits in florida alone....here on the Cape we
see them all the time.....what do you have in England now...around the 60
million or so.....betcha 30million + cannot afford those holidays you refer
to.....yes I know some of the poorer ones do travel abroad....a great friend
of mine on social security travels to somewhere in Spain at least every
other year.....I suspect I am far from being naive.....this country is
touted to be the richest country in the world (if you believe that) and yet
there are millions that cannot afford what, per you, the majority in the UK
can afford....poppycock and balderdash.....England is no different than the
USA when it comes to affordabilty.....H

Harold Walker wrote:
Most Britons who take holidays try to get to the sun for the
obvious
reason
that it's v. unreliable here. Many of us deplore our own
inclinations in this respect and make a vow to 'stay in England'
for
our next holiday, only
to crave some real, lengthy, reliable sun and book yet another
foreign holiday.
The 'poverty' you cite as the 'reason' that the British don't
travel
around
their own country, would no doubt account for the hordes of
packages
holiday
makers flying out of Britain every year, bound for worldwide
destinations! [...]
--
I am fully aware of the travel habits .... at any given time it is
estimated that there are over 500,000 Brits in florida
alone....here
on the Cape we see them all the time.....what do you have in
England
now...around the 60 million or so.....betcha 30million + cannot
afford those holidays you refer to.....yes I know some of the
poorer
ones do travel abroad....a great friend of mine on social security
travels to somewhere in Spain at least every other year.[...]

An important factor is that accommodation in Britain is so expensive:
relatively poor people often can't afford holidays at home. This is
ridiculous, but there we go.

--
Mike.

An important factor is that accommodation in Britain is so expensive:
relatively poor people often can't afford holidays at home. This is
ridiculous, but there we go.

--
Mike.

Must admit Mike that for most of my time I spent "for free" so the expenses
amounted to little. The only two nights I had to pay for was one in
Cantebury and had a real nice B&B for 35 pounds and the Brigstow Hotel in
Bristol for 145 pounds....as to food I thought that was cheap...at least the
way I ate....pork pies, steak and kidney ones, sausage rolls , pastries etc.
and fish and chips without the chips...the piece of fish was so huge that is
all I could manage....after the first fish and chips and giving the chips to
the seagulls I ordered fish only.....back to my home style eating which is
the opposite of the pork pies and the likes.....my low fat healthy diet with
home baked bread and the likes and much use of shanks pony rather than those
wonderful trains of yours.....H

"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:



I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

On 27/7/05 10:20 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:



I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

I think you just enjoy being awkward, really. I spoke of the era of the
1920s or 1930s. Not much point in continuing this, is there?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

The message
from "Harold Walker" contains these words:

Kay wrote


OK, I apologise.
In that case, I just think you are wrong ;-)

me think not...also agreed
with by a few I met over there...aint like it used to be and will
never be
the same..

I hope they won't. Back in the good old days in 1950's industrial
Lancashire winters were blighted with thick filthy smog. Everyone I knew
had chilblains on their hands and feet because houses were so cold. In
Glasgow, malnutrition and rickets deformed many people for life and poor
children still went barefoot in the street in midwinter.

Janet

"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 10:20 pm, in article ,
"Harold
Walker" wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article ,
"Harold
Walker" wrote:



I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as
some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level
over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

I think you just enjoy being awkward, really. I spoke of the era of the
1920s or 1930s. Not much point in continuing this, is there?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

Suspect Mike could have a good answer for you.....me being awkward....nea
lass...much of this has been the result of gals like you wearing rose
colored glasses and not looking at reliality...but do agree there is little
point in going on any further.....ta ta

On 27/7/05 11:14 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 10:20 pm, in article ,
"Harold
Walker" wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article ,
"Harold
Walker" wrote:



I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as
some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level
over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

I think you just enjoy being awkward, really. I spoke of the era of the
1920s or 1930s. Not much point in continuing this, is there?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

Suspect Mike could have a good answer for you.....me being awkward....nea
lass...much of this has been the result of gals like you wearing rose
colored glasses and not looking at reliality...but do agree there is little
point in going on any further.....ta ta



Aha. I wondered how long it would take you to get to mentioning Mike Crowe.
Thanks so much for proving my own suspicions to myself.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

The message
from "Harold Walker" contains these words:
"Sacha" wrote in message
.uk...
On 27/7/05 5:47 pm, in article , "Harold
Walker" wrote:



I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

but poverty in that context is nothing like the poverty of the 'twenties
and 'thirties.

--
Rusty
Emus to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co full-stop uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

"Janet Baraclough" wrote in message
...
The message
from "Harold Walker" contains these words:

Kay wrote


OK, I apologise.
In that case, I just think you are wrong ;-)

me think not...also agreed
with by a few I met over there...aint like it used to be and will
never be
the same..

I hope they won't. Back in the good old days in 1950's industrial
Lancashire winters were blighted with thick filthy smog. Everyone I knew
had chilblains on their hands and feet because houses were so cold. In
Glasgow, malnutrition and rickets deformed many people for life and poor
children still went barefoot in the street in midwinter.

Janet
I might very well be wrong but somehow suspect some similar conditions might
be around the coal area of Yorkshire with the closing down of the pits....I
hear many families without an income other than gov.support....perhaps I
hear wrong....I have not 'surveyed' areas like Birmingham but would suspect
some unsavoury conditions there....believe you me, for every one I suspect
exists in the UK I could name a dozen in this country....I do not deny the
truth nor cover it.....H

martin wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:00:25 +0100, Sacha
wrote:



The 'poverty' you cite as the 'reason' that the British don't
travel
around their own country, would no doubt account for the hordes of
packages holiday makers flying out of Britain every year, bound
for
worldwide destinations!

Oddly it's much cheaper to do that, than to have a holiday in
England.
Hotel prices in UK are higher than in most other places in the
world.

I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country
as
some kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of
impoverished stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly
compelling and your information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or
30s or even the Wilson years of no more than £30 to be taken
abroad
- which led to the development of package holidays in the first
place. Your outlook is sadly old-fashioned and out of date.

Package holidays predated Harold Wilson.

As, indeed, did the limit on money to be taken abroad; though ISTR it
had been lifted for a while.

--
Mike.

Package holidays predated Harold Wilson.

My first 'packaged holiday' was in 1943 at Billy Butlin's Holiday camp in
Skegness...courtesy of His Majesties Government.....six weeks of it......H

"
I don't know what your interest is in trying to show this country as
some
kind of hand-to-mouth world, composed almost entirely of impoverished
stay-at-homes but your arguments are not exactly compelling and your
information seems to be rooted in the 1920s or 30s

Just for the hec of it did a bit of a research into the poverty level
over
their...phasebase reports it as being 17 percent or roughly 10
million......certainly not the 20's or 30's as you infer.....when
researching I take off my rose tinted glasses...H

I think you just enjoy being awkward, really. I spoke of the era of the
1920s or 1930s. Not much point in continuing this, is there?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

Suspect Mike could have a good answer for you.....me being awkward....nea
lass...much of this has been the result of gals like you wearing rose
colored glasses and not looking at reliality...but do agree there is
little
point in going on any further.....ta ta



Aha. I wondered how long it would take you to get to mentioning Mike
Crowe.
Thanks so much for proving my own suspicions to myself.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

Sacha...I thought you were quitting.....'curiosity killed the cat -
satisafaction brought it back'...I wonder what be your suspicians...leaves
me cold I must admit

The message
from "Harold Walker" contains these words:


"
I think you meant you saw more of England than most English see in a
year (a somewhat strange claim; how in the space of two weeks do you
know what "most" English do in 52? ). But your little trip round just
*one* country doesn't really count as seeing "more of the UK".

Janet.

If you know anything at all about logistics you would readily see/know that
the majority of the UK residents (English + permanent interlopers) see very
little of the UK in a year...they just do not have the money....perhaps
someone like you might have the 'lolly' to roam around but there are many
that do not live in such luxury and scrape from hand to mouth each
week..

..no different in this country....

entirely different from America. In the US, 90 % of the population don't
own a passport and have never travelled abroad. In the UK, the vast
majority of people do have a passport and have used it to travelled
abroad. The majority of UK residents are not impoverished, and are in
work. For that work they disperse all over the country to live; many
people travel for work reasons and far more travel to see family
elsewhere.

Incidentally, The UK does not mean England., as you imply above

over a lifetime I suspect I might
have seen more of England than you have me love....

Since you know absolutely nothing about my lifetime, that's just
another example of you not having a clue what you're on about.

Janet.