My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.

My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user 
doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by author's 
name which are next to useless.

If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they 
can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.

In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk 
writes
>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>
>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user 
>doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by 
>author's name which are next to useless.
>
>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they 
>can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>
Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do that, 
please?
-- 
June Hughes

In message , June Hughes 
 writes
>In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk 
>writes
>>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
>>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
>>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>
>>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
>>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
>>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the 
>>user doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by 
>>author's name which are next to useless.
>>
>>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that 
>>they can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>>
>Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do 
>that, please?

The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one 
of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 'Reply' 
in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: address which 
works ........... for the time being!

You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
:-(

In message <iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting>, Malcolm Loades 
 writes
>In message , June Hughes 
> writes
>>In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk 
>>writes
>>>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
>>>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
>>>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>>
>>>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
>>>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
>>>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the 
>>>user doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by 
>>>author's name which are next to useless.
>>>
>>>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that 
>>>they can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>>>
>>Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do 
>>that, please?
>
>The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one 
>of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
>http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
>harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 
>'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: address 
>which works ........... for the time being!
>
>You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>:-(
If that is really you, Malcolm, yes I have indeed.  Sorry.  Put it down 
to old-age; over-work; daftness on my part.  Doh!!
-- 
June Hughes

"Malcolm Loades"  wrote in message 
news:iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting...
> In message , June Hughes 
>  writes
>>In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk 
>>writes
>>>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
>>>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
>>>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>>
>>>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
>>>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
>>>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user 
>>>doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by author's 
>>>name which are next to useless.
>>>
>>>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they 
>>>can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>>>
>>Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do that, 
>>please?
>
> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one of 
> my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 'Reply' 
> in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: address which 
> works ........... for the time being!
>
> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
> :-(
A reasonable assumption, I would have thought!
Graham

In message <jJjtk.124648$nD.35146@pd7urf1no>, Graham  
writes
>
>"Malcolm Loades"  wrote in message
>news:iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting...
>> In message , June Hughes
>>  writes
>>>In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk
>>>writes
>>>>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola
>>>>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not
>>>>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>>>
>>>>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid
>>>>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only
>>>>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user
>>>>doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by author's
>>>>name which are next to useless.
>>>>
>>>>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they
>>>>can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>>>>
>>>Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do that,
>>>please?
>>
>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one of
>> my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See
>> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily
>> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 'Reply'
>> in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: address which
>> works ........... for the time being!
>>
>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>> :-(
>A reasonable assumption, I would have thought!
>Graham
>
>
He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should 
have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is 
concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
-- 
June Hughes

"June Hughes"  wrote in message 
news:F0maLNTznctIFwQI@theacct.demon.co.uk...
> In message <jJjtk.124648$nD.35146@pd7urf1no>, Graham  
> writes
>>
>>"Malcolm Loades"  wrote in message
>>news:iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting...
>>> In message , June Hughes
>>>  writes
>>>>In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk
>>>>writes
>>>>>My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola
>>>>>Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not
>>>>>making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>>>>
>>>>>My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid
>>>>>seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only
>>>>>newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user
>>>>>doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by 
>>>>>author's
>>>>>name which are next to useless.
>>>>>
>>>>>If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they
>>>>>can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
>>>>>
>>>>Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do that,
>>>>please?
>>>
>>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one 
>>> of
>>> my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See
>>> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily
>>> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 'Reply'
>>> in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: address which
>>> works ........... for the time being!
>>>
>>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>>> :-(
>>A reasonable assumption, I would have thought!
>>Graham
>>
>>
> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should 
> have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is 
> concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
> -- 
And we have been assailed by a particularly obtuse one lately.
Graham

June Hughes wrote:

> In message <iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting>, Malcolm Loades 
>  writes

>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is one 
>> of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
>> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
>> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 
>> 'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: 
>> address which works ........... for the time being!
>>
>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>> :-(
> 
> If that is really you, Malcolm, yes I have indeed.  Sorry.  Put it down 
> to old-age; over-work; daftness on my part.  Doh!!

June, old age is only in the mind, I am on my own again (wife is in 
Portsmouth, child minding) and I have been wondering about what would 
happen if I should die on my own, I don't want to cause a problem with 
this. As at the age of 62, death might not be too far away. My mother 
died just after her 61 st birthday and I have had chest problems since 
birth. This was why I took voluntary early retirement. I have developed 
a very strong bond between myself and g children, despite the distance 
we are apart.

Over-work can be cured by reaching out for a glass of your favourite 
wine, instead of going overboard on your physical/mental capacity. And a 
glass of red wine has been proved to be good for you.

I don't think daftness comes into this. Our daughter is one of the 
deftest persons I have met, but boy, is she intelligent.

Daft.
To give you an example, she had a job at the local Spar shop before she 
went to uni and was showing the rest of the staff in the store room how 
to look up and hold an upright broom handle to your fore head and spin 
round to see how dizzy you got. (Very)

Intelligence.
She had an old VW golf when she was at uni and complained to me that the 
oil warning light was not working. She had already wrecked the engine 
before, by not filling it up with oil. I drove down to Portsmouth (266 
miles) to try and sort it out. I diagnosed the fault as being the light 
in the dash and tried to get it off the car to get to the light. I had 
to give up. Now, I am a trained engineer and very much used to pulling 
complex things apart. She went out and had the dash panel off within 5 
minutes.  :-(
Did wonders for my confidence.  :-(

I retired from full time work in 1999 and I have never regretted it. I 
Have had part time jobs at B and Q for 6 months and the local primary 
school as site supervisor, but have packed them in for B & Q's bad 
management and later, over worked at school. New site supervisor got an 
initial extra hour a day after I left and another later on for changes 
to the school. Tells a story.

In other words, chill out June.

Dave

Graham wrote:
> "Malcolm Loades"  wrote in message
> news:iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting...
>> In message , June Hughes
>>  writes
>>> In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>, devnull@spam-trap.org.uk
>>> writes
>>>> My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola
>>>> Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm
>>>> not making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
>>>>
>>>> My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid
>>>> seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only
>>>> newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the
>>>> user doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill
>>>> by author's name which are next to useless.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that
>>>> they can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail
>>>> me.
>>> Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do
>>> that, please?
>>
>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is
>> one of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See
>> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily
>> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking
>> 'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To:
>> address which works ........... for the time being!
>>
>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>> :-(
> A reasonable assumption, I would have thought!
> Graham

I agree!  I was trying to figure out what he meant too.

-- 
Real friendship is shown in times of trouble;
prosperity is full of friends.
* Euripedes

June Hughes wrote:
> In message <jJjtk.124648$nD.35146@pd7urf1no>, Graham
>  writes
>>
>> "Malcolm Loades"  wrote in message
>> news:iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting...
>>> In message , June Hughes
>>>  writes
>>>> In message <fTLQ+xgfnRtIFwAZ@news.posting>,
>>>> devnull@spam-trap.org.uk writes
>>>>> My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark,
>>>>> Lola Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary
>>>>> - I'm not making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal
>>>>> choice. My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can
>>>>> avoid seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't
>>>>> the only newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out
>>>>> postings the user doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules
>>>>> which simply kill by author's name which are next to useless.
>>>>>
>>>>> If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so
>>>>> that they can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please
>>>>> e-mail me.
>>>> Unless 'spam'trap' is your real address, how are we expected to do
>>>> that, please?
>>>
>>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is
>>> one of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See
>>> http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily
>>> harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking
>>> 'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To:
>>> address which works ........... for the time being!
>>>
>>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>>> :-(
>> A reasonable assumption, I would have thought!
>> Graham
>>
>>
> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should
> have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is
> concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.

June, we have been trolled so much it was not an unreasonable thought.


-- 
Real friendship is shown in times of trouble;
prosperity is full of friends.
* Euripedes

In message , Dave 
 writes
>June Hughes wrote:
>
>> In message <iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting>, Malcolm Loades 
>> writes
>
>>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is 
>>>one  of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
>>>http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
>>>harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 
>>>'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: 
>>>address which works ........... for the time being!
>>>
>>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>>> :-(
>>  If that is really you, Malcolm, yes I have indeed.  Sorry.  Put it 
>>down to old-age; over-work; daftness on my part.  Doh!!
>
>June, old age is only in the mind, I am on my own again (wife is in 
>Portsmouth, child minding) and I have been wondering about what would 
>happen if I should die on my own, I don't want to cause a problem with 
>this. As at the age of 62, death might not be too far away. My mother 
>died just after her 61 st birthday and I have had chest problems since 
>birth. This was why I took voluntary early retirement. I have developed 
>a very strong bond between myself and g children, despite the distance 
>we are apart.
>
>Over-work can be cured by reaching out for a glass of your favourite 
>wine, instead of going overboard on your physical/mental capacity. And 
>a glass of red wine has been proved to be good for you.
>
>I don't think daftness comes into this. Our daughter is one of the 
>deftest persons I have met, but boy, is she intelligent.
>
>Daft.
>To give you an example, she had a job at the local Spar shop before she 
>went to uni and was showing the rest of the staff in the store room how 
>to look up and hold an upright broom handle to your fore head and spin 
>round to see how dizzy you got. (Very)
>
>Intelligence.
>She had an old VW golf when she was at uni and complained to me that 
>the oil warning light was not working. She had already wrecked the 
>engine before, by not filling it up with oil. I drove down to 
>Portsmouth (266 miles) to try and sort it out. I diagnosed the fault as 
>being the light in the dash and tried to get it off the car to get to 
>the light. I had to give up. Now, I am a trained engineer and very much 
>used to pulling complex things apart. She went out and had the dash 
>panel off within 5 minutes. :-(
>Did wonders for my confidence.  :-(
>
>I retired from full time work in 1999 and I have never regretted it. I 
>Have had part time jobs at B and Q for 6 months and the local primary 
>school as site supervisor, but have packed them in for B & Q's bad 
>management and later, over worked at school. New site supervisor got an 
>initial extra hour a day after I left and another later on for changes 
>to the school. Tells a story.
>
>In other words, chill out June.
>
Eh?  You are retired and younger than me.  Have you been at the juice or 
what?  I am quite chilled out thanks:)
-- 
June Hughes

June Hughes wrote:
> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should
> have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is
> concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.

But he might have been a forgery:))))

-- 
Real friendship is shown in times of trouble;
prosperity is full of friends.
* Euripedes

In message , June Hughes 
 writes
>In message , Dave 
> writes
>>June Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> In message <iIXv4OnulbtIFwmZ@news.posting>, Malcolm Loades 
>>> writes
>>
>>>> The Reply To: address on my postings works!!   spam-trap.org.uk is 
>>>>one  of my domains and is, to use your words, a real address.  See 
>>>>http://www.spam-trap.org.uk for details.  From: addresses are easily 
>>>>harvested so the From: address will not work.  However, clicking 
>>>>'Reply' in any newsreader will reply by e-mail to the Reply To: 
>>>>address which works ........... for the time being!
>>>>
>>>> You've jumped to a conclusion without first checking it out
>>>> :-(
>>>  If that is really you, Malcolm, yes I have indeed.  Sorry.  Put it 
>>>down to old-age; over-work; daftness on my part.  Doh!!
>>
>>June, old age is only in the mind, I am on my own again (wife is in 
>>Portsmouth, child minding) and I have been wondering about what would 
>>happen if I should die on my own, I don't want to cause a problem with 
>>this. As at the age of 62, death might not be too far away.

Snip

>>
>>I retired from full time work in 1999 and I have never regretted it. I 
>>Have had part time jobs at B and Q for 6 months and the local primary 
>>school as site supervisor, but have packed them in for B & Q's bad 
>>management and later, over worked at school. New site supervisor got 
>>an initial extra hour a day after I left and another later on for 
>>changes to the school. Tells a story.
>>
>>In other words, chill out June.
>>
>Eh?  You are retired and younger than me.  Have you been at the juice 
>or what?  I am quite chilled out thanks:)

Sorry to follow my own post.  I forgot to say - The original post was a 
joke Dave - remember them?

And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to 
the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they 
reach retiring age, where would we all be?  No money to finance any of 
the state services etc, etc.  Better not go any further down that route 
-  I may say something I regret later.
-- 
June Hughes

In message , Ophelia 
<Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>June Hughes wrote:
>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should
>> have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is
>> concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>
>But he might have been a forgery:))))
>
Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)
-- 
June Hughes

June Hughes  wrote:

> In message , Ophelia 
> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
> >June Hughes wrote:
> >> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I should
> >> have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of thing is
> >> concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
> >
> >But he might have been a forgery:))))
> >
> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)

I suspect his method is what I've used. It does work, though it might
mean having to whitelist a few posters (hasn't happened yet though.)
It's why I've never seen Corey's posts, whether crossposted or not...

-- 
(*) of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate 
www.davidhorne.net (email address on website) 
"The fact is that when I compose I never think of and never 
have thought of meeting the listener."  -George Perle

June Hughes wrote:
> In message , Ophelia
> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>> June Hughes wrote:
>>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I
>>> should have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of
>>> thing is concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>>
>> But he might have been a forgery:))))
>>
> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)

Yers but......... he might have been:)

-- 
Real friendship is shown in times of trouble;
prosperity is full of friends.
* Euripedes

The message 
from June Hughes  contains these words:

> And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to 
> the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they 
> reach retiring age, where would we all be? 
> No money to finance any of 
> the state services etc, etc.

   A low-paid worker might work to 65, and still have contributed far
less tax to the nation's finances, than a  higher earner who retired at 
50. The early retiree continues to pay tax  on their retirement income,
(possibly a great deal  more tax than a same-age  person still working
for basic wage) and  to buy (taxed)  goods and services, and to pay
council tax  just like  when they were working. 

   As for  "expecting state pensions",  early retirees get only what
they paid for, no more or less. A retired worker  who hasn't accrued
enough years of  NI contributions/credits to qualify for a  full state
pension  (because they started work late or retired early)  will either
get a reduced pension, or have to pay up the  missing contribution years
to get the full basic pension. Early retirees don't get free credits. 

  Janet

June Hughes wrote:


> Eh?  You are retired and younger than me.

Probably. I retired in October 1999 and my 53rd birthday was at the 
beginning of June that year. I was chuffed to bits. The ceremonial 
burning of the work coat and bag took place after I was de badged when I 
got home the same day. There is a bit of a story about this, but only if 
you really want to know.

Daughter got pregnant shortly after and I have, considering the 266 mile 
separation, got a very good bond with our g children. Much better than I 
could hope if they lived in the next street.

> Have you been at the juice or 
> what?

As always  :-)
No hic though.

> I am quite chilled out thanks:)

Well, that is just how you should be, what's your poison?
Or don't you drink?

Dave

June Hughes wrote:


> Sorry to follow my own post.  I forgot to say - The original post was a 
> joke Dave - remember them?
> 
> And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to 
> the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they 
> reach retiring age, where would we all be?  No money to finance any of 
> the state services etc, etc.

>  Better not go any further down that route 
>  I may say something I regret later.

If I had not got out then, my final salary pension would have not been 
available later. Also, I was born with asthma and I don't expect a long 
life. Don't forget Gordon ruined the final salary pension pots of 
everyone in the country. BAe systems, as they are known now have reduced 
the pensions of those I left behind, so I am not much a parasite on the 
state.

Did you read in the news this week that the over 60's, or was it the 
over 65's outnumber the countries children?

Dave

Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message 
> from June Hughes  contains these words:
> 
> 
>>And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to 
>>the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they 
>>reach retiring age, where would we all be? 
>>No money to finance any of 
>>the state services etc, etc.
> 
> 
>    A low-paid worker might work to 65, and still have contributed far
> less tax to the nation's finances, than a  higher earner who retired at 
> 50. The early retiree continues to pay tax  on their retirement income,

Regrettably  :-(

> (possibly a great deal  more tax than a same-age  person still working
> for basic wage) and  to buy (taxed)  goods and services, and to pay
> council tax  just like  when they were working. 
> 
>    As for  "expecting state pensions",  early retirees get only what
> they paid for, no more or less. A retired worker  who hasn't accrued
> enough years of  NI contributions/credits to qualify for a  full state
> pension  (because they started work late or retired early)  will either
> get a reduced pension, or have to pay up the  missing contribution years
> to get the full basic pension. Early retirees don't get free credits.

Quite correct Janet. When us early retirees were took into the 
conference to tell us what we were entitled to from the state, it became 
obvious that I was 4 years short of a full set of stamps. At first I was 
not that bothered, but I got bored and took a job on as a shelf stacker 
at B & Q. I fell out with the management and then got a job as site 
supervisor at a primary school and got my 4 years stamps back. Now the 
department for pensions have informed me that I have now earned the full 
entitlement for the state pension.

Dave

On Wed 27 Aug 2008 02:09:51a,  told us...

> My choice is not to see postings from Corey, Blinky the Shark, Lola 
> Stonewall Riot and similar others.  Others mileage may vary - I'm not 
> making a judgement here, simply stating my own personal choice.
> 
> My newsreader is Turnpike and using four specific rules I can avoid 
> seeing *anything* posted by them.  I'm sure Turnpike isn't the only 
> newsreader in which rules can be crafted to strip out postings the user 
> doesn't want to see and I don't mean rules which simply kill by author's 
> name which are next to useless.
> 
> If anyone is interested to know what these rules look for, so that they 
> can incorporate them in their own newsreader, please e-mail me.
> 

I use Xnews, and unless I'm unaware of how to construct that type of 
filter, it is incapable of scanning the body content of a post for quoted 
text.  Quoted text is the only time I see content from offensive posters.

-- 
             Wayne Boatwright             

*******************************************
Date: Thursday, 08(VIII)/28(XXVIII)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
         Countdown till Labor Day         
             3dys 9hrs 45mins              
*******************************************
     Lightning is one hell of a murder     
    weapon -- and the best part is, it    
             can't be traced.

In message <g95sh3$t26$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia 
<Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>June Hughes wrote:
>> In message , Ophelia
>> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I
>>>> should have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of
>>>> thing is concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>>>
>>> But he might have been a forgery:))))
>>>
>> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)
>
>Yers but......... he might have been:)
>
<G>  Where will it all end?  He's a very nice man:))
He's a very, very nice man.  Groan.
-- 
June Hughes

In message , Janet Baraclough 
 writes
>The message 
>from June Hughes  contains these words:
>
>> And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to
>> the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they
>> reach retiring age, where would we all be?
>> No money to finance any of
>> the state services etc, etc.
>
>   A low-paid worker might work to 65, and still have contributed far
>less tax to the nation's finances, than a  higher earner who retired at
>50. The early retiree continues to pay tax  on their retirement income,
>(possibly a great deal  more tax than a same-age  person still working
>for basic wage) and  to buy (taxed)  goods and services, and to pay
>council tax  just like  when they were working.
>
>   As for  "expecting state pensions",  early retirees get only what
>they paid for, no more or less. A retired worker  who hasn't accrued
>enough years of  NI contributions/credits to qualify for a  full state
>pension  (because they started work late or retired early)  will either
>get a reduced pension, or have to pay up the  missing contribution years
>to get the full basic pension. Early retirees don't get free credits.
>
>  Janet
>

You are missing the point.  It is not how much you contribute that 
counts, it is the fact that you contribute for the whole of your working 
life.
-- 
June Hughes

June Hughes wrote:
> In message <g95sh3$t26$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia
> <Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>> June Hughes wrote:
>>> In message , Ophelia
>>> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I
>>>>> should have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of
>>>>> thing is concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>>>>
>>>> But he might have been a forgery:))))
>>>>
>>> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)
>>
>> Yers but......... he might have been:)
>>
> <G>  Where will it all end?  He's a very nice man:))
> He's a very, very nice man.  Groan.

So is Dave:)  Rough edges I grant you, but he never means any harm

-- 
Real friendship is shown in times of trouble;
prosperity is full of friends.
* Euripedes

In message <g9842o$gda$3@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia 
<Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>June Hughes wrote:
>> In message <g95sh3$t26$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia
>> <Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>> In message , Ophelia
>>>> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>>>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I
>>>>>> should have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of
>>>>>> thing is concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>>>>>
>>>>> But he might have been a forgery:))))
>>>>>
>>>> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)
>>>
>>> Yers but......... he might have been:)
>>>
>> <G>  Where will it all end?  He's a very nice man:))
>> He's a very, very nice man.  Groan.
>
>So is Dave:)  Rough edges I grant you, but he never means any harm
>
I am now confused.  I am sure I have never said Dave is not a pleasant 
person.
-- 
June Hughes

The message 
from June Hughes  contains these words:

> In message , Janet Baraclough 
>  writes
> >The message 
> >from June Hughes  contains these words:
> >
> >> And another thing - if everyone retired early instead of contributing to
> >> the nation's finances, all the while expecting a state pension when they
> >> reach retiring age, where would we all be?
> >> No money to finance any of
> >> the state services etc, etc.
> >
> >   A low-paid worker might work to 65, and still have contributed far
> >less tax to the nation's finances, than a  higher earner who retired at
> >50. The early retiree continues to pay tax  on their retirement income,
> >(possibly a great deal  more tax than a same-age  person still working
> >for basic wage) and  to buy (taxed)  goods and services, and to pay
> >council tax  just like  when they were working.
> >
> >   As for  "expecting state pensions",  early retirees get only what
> >they paid for, no more or less. A retired worker  who hasn't accrued
> >enough years of  NI contributions/credits to qualify for a  full state
> >pension  (because they started work late or retired early)  will either
> >get a reduced pension, or have to pay up the  missing contribution years
> >to get the full basic pension. Early retirees don't get free credits.
> >
> >  Janet
> >

> You are missing the point.  It is not how much you contribute that 
> counts, it is the fact that you contribute for the whole of your working 
> life.

 What is the difference between,  a working person contributing  X
amount, and a retired person contributing the same amount? 

    Janet

June Hughes wrote:
> In message <g9842o$gda$3@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia 
> <Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
> 
>> June Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> In message <g95sh3$t26$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Ophelia
>>> <Ophelia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>>
>>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message , Ophelia
>>>>> <Opheilia@nix.?.uk.invalid> writes
>>>>>
>>>>>> June Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is right, Graham.  As soon as I saw who he was, I realised I
>>>>>>> should have replied.  I am rather green as far as that sort of
>>>>>>> thing is concerned. OTOH, he could have been a troll.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But he might have been a forgery:))))
>>>>>>
>>>>> Could have been but he wasn't - I emailed him:)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yers but......... he might have been:)
>>>>
>>> <G>  Where will it all end?  He's a very nice man:))
>>> He's a very, very nice man.  Groan.
>>
>>
>> So is Dave:)  Rough edges I grant you, but he never means any harm
>>
> I am now confused.  I am sure I have never said Dave is not a pleasant 
> person.

My ears seem to be burning, I don't know why though.

Dave