Zingari Posted 25 March 2008 Posted 25 March 2008 i 'm pretty sure whoever runs the club is a prawn sandwich short of a picnic hope this helps
Rincewind Posted 25 March 2008 Posted 25 March 2008 Easy Down up down up down up down up down down down. Job done.
cisono Posted 25 March 2008 Posted 25 March 2008 In simple terms, i aim to assess if the prawn sandwich brigade phenomenon exists at leicester. Basically its the changing of the game from a working class form of entertainment to that of one adapted to suit and be aimed more at the middle/ upper classes. I am not familiar with prawn sandwiches.... but I fail to see why you would need a study to determine if the game has changed from a working class form of entertainment to something more aimed at the middle/upper classes.... Just looking at ticket prices would seem sufficient...
Rincewind Posted 26 March 2008 Posted 26 March 2008 the lack of cloth caps is a big clue although I beieve L1 keeps up the tradition.
Guest Posted 26 March 2008 Posted 26 March 2008 the lack of cloth caps is a big clue although I beieve L1 keeps up the tradition. I knew we should have kept Frank Burrows and his flat cap!!
The People's Hero Posted 26 March 2008 Posted 26 March 2008 Criminology and Sociology? What do you do? Claim benefits you're not entitled to from the Social.
DB11 Posted 26 March 2008 Posted 26 March 2008 I filled it in I didn't know some of the answers though
!!Davio!! Posted 26 March 2008 Posted 26 March 2008 Lucky you for getting to do a dissertation on LCFC i have to do mine on the expansion of the EU an whether or not it will benefit countries to join!! serves me right for doing international business economics as a degree!!
cisono Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Lucky you for getting to do a dissertation on LCFC i have to do mine on the expansion of the EU an whether or not it will benefit countries to join!! serves me right for doing international business economics as a degree!! Again, an easy one. No, it will not benefit the people but it will benefit (or rather, it is already benefiting) some others. Off the top of my head: - MEPs (who make loads of money, even after their brief period of service... if you can call it that) - multinational companies (who have to lobby just the European community centrally instead of dozens of individual European countries individually). ie they save money as they need to bribe fewer people... In fact, was it them that pushed the EU on us? - The above also includes many supposedly "supernational" organisations supposedly aimed at protecting us from nasty herbs and traditional foods and pushing for "standardisation" - anyone who benefits from (or likes) bureaucracy - anyone who pushes for standardisation for their own economic advantage - gipsies - from places like Eastern Slovakia now have free reign in the whole of Europe... - illegal immigrants. Easier to get in and get about. A wider perimeter can be used as an entry point. - human traffickers for similar reasons It has not benefited the people already in the EU. When we switched to the Euro, prices shot up in Southern Europe and this was not matched by a rise in salaries. I expect the same rise in prices will happen in the countries that newly joined (after a brief transactional period)? I know property prices have increased in some Polish cities, also in central Prague, bringing them to levels that are just too high for locals. Or perhaps that explains why they always try to cheat on the bills these days... I think it is time to have lunch.
DB11 Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Again, an easy one. No, it will not benefit the people but it will benefit (or rather, it is already benefiting) some others. Off the top of my head:- MEPs (who make loads of money, even after their brief period of service... if you can call it that) - multinational companies (who have to lobby just the European community centrally instead of dozens of individual European countries individually). ie they save money as they need to bribe fewer people... In fact, was it them that pushed the EU on us? - The above also includes many supposedly "supernational" organisations supposedly aimed at protecting us from nasty herbs and traditional foods and pushing for "standardisation" - anyone who benefits from (or likes) bureaucracy - anyone who pushes for standardisation for their own economic advantage - gipsies - from places like Eastern Slovakia now have free reign in the whole of Europe... - illegal immigrants. Easier to get in and get about. A wider perimeter can be used as an entry point. - human traffickers for similar reasons It has not benefited the people already in the EU. When we switched to the Euro, prices shot up in Southern Europe and this was not matched by a rise in salaries. I expect the same rise in prices will happen in the countries that newly joined (after a brief transactional period)? I know property prices have increased in some Polish cities, also in central Prague, bringing them to levels that are just too high for locals. Or perhaps that explains why they always try to cheat on the bills these days... I think it is time to have lunch. Eh?
cisono Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Eh? When Continental EU countries switched to the Euro... (of course!) did you think you'd missed such an important piece of news? NOTE: I hope the statement you highlighted in your post will not be used against me should I ever apply for a British passport ....
James. Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Again, an easy one. No, it will not benefit the people but it will benefit (or rather, it is already benefiting) some others. Off the top of my head:- MEPs (who make loads of money, even after their brief period of service... if you can call it that) - multinational companies (who have to lobby just the European community centrally instead of dozens of individual European countries individually). ie they save money as they need to bribe fewer people... In fact, was it them that pushed the EU on us? - The above also includes many supposedly "supernational" organisations supposedly aimed at protecting us from nasty herbs and traditional foods and pushing for "standardisation" - anyone who benefits from (or likes) bureaucracy - anyone who pushes for standardisation for their own economic advantage - gipsies - from places like Eastern Slovakia now have free reign in the whole of Europe... - illegal immigrants. Easier to get in and get about. A wider perimeter can be used as an entry point. - human traffickers for similar reasons It has not benefited the people already in the EU. When we switched to the Euro, prices shot up in Southern Europe and this was not matched by a rise in salaries. I expect the same rise in prices will happen in the countries that newly joined (after a brief transactional period)? I know property prices have increased in some Polish cities, also in central Prague, bringing them to levels that are just too high for locals. Or perhaps that explains why they always try to cheat on the bills these days... I think it is time to have lunch. I can only assume you are being sarcastic by starting your post with the words "Again, an easy one" since it is a massively complicated issue. Not even 10 dissertations could cover the required arguments for and against in the necessary detail, nevermind one (although good luck to the person who's doing it!). Most of your arguments are total arse.
Master Fox Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Dissertation on Leicester City? I think I've got a school English project i did when i was 12. You can have that if you want? What an interesting thing to be doing while at Uni.
Thracian Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 What the fook is "Gentrification of football fandom " Exactly what I wondered. If that's the future of English I think I'll brush up on my French.
!!Davio!! Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Again, an easy one. No, it will not benefit the people but it will benefit (or rather, it is already benefiting) some others. Off the top of my head:- MEPs (who make loads of money, even after their brief period of service... if you can call it that) - multinational companies (who habenefits from (or likes) bureaucracy - anyone who pushes for standardisation for their own economic advantage - gipsies - from places like Eastern Slovakia now have free reign in the whole of Europe... - illegal immigrants. Easier to get in and get about. A wider perimeter can be used as an entry point. - human traffickers for similar reasons ve to lobby just the European community centrally instead of dozens of individual European countries individually). ie they save money as they need to bribe fewer people... In fact, was it them that pushed the EU on us? - The above also includes many supposedly "supernational" organisations supposedly aimed at protecting us from nasty herbs and traditional foods and pushing for "standardisation" - anyone who It has not benefited the people already in the EU. When we switched to the Euro, prices shot up in Southern Europe and this was not matched by a rise in salaries. I expect the same rise in prices will happen in the countries that newly joined (after a brief transactional period)? I know property prices have increased in some Polish cities, also in central Prague, bringing them to levels that are just too high for locals. Or perhaps that explains why they always try to cheat on the bills these days... I think it is time to have lunch. If only it were that easy, 1) MEPs are knobs who cant tell their arse from their elbow, and f**k up whenever they try to dabble in the EU economies, look at the current agricultural mess in the EU. 2) multinational companies have invested a hell of a lot of money (e.g. $5bn in Hungary in 2005 alone) and create jobs and improve infrastructure, but cause skill biased technological change that causes income inequality 3) the only people who gain economic advantage from expansion is the countries who join as they get more back than they put into the EU 4) gypsies - theres free movement of people from central and eastern europe up to 2009 and then only 75000 people a year from each country are allowed to move 5+6) illegal immigrants and traffickers - agree valid point 7) they only joined the EU so that they could spped up development post soviet union inflation has actually fallen in most economies was 17% in slovenia in 2001 and in 2006 was only 6%. i could go on and on but ive been doing this for the past 8 months and it drives me mental as there are so many diiferent factors and they all contradict each other. anything else you wish to know and i'll happily send you the 34 pages of work to read through!!
coale39 Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 Again, an easy one. No, it will not benefit the people but it will benefit (or rather, it is already benefiting) some others. Off the top of my head:- MEPs (who make loads of money, even after their brief period of service... if you can call it that) - multinational companies (who have to lobby just the European community centrally instead of dozens of individual European countries individually). ie they save money as they need to bribe fewer people... In fact, was it them that pushed the EU on us? - The above also includes many supposedly "supernational" organisations supposedly aimed at protecting us from nasty herbs and traditional foods and pushing for "standardisation" - anyone who benefits from (or likes) bureaucracy - anyone who pushes for standardisation for their own economic advantage - gipsies - from places like Eastern Slovakia now have free reign in the whole of Europe... - illegal immigrants. Easier to get in and get about. A wider perimeter can be used as an entry point. - human traffickers for similar reasons It has not benefited the people already in the EU. When we switched to the Euro, prices shot up in Southern Europe and this was not matched by a rise in salaries. I expect the same rise in prices will happen in the countries that newly joined (after a brief transactional period)? I know property prices have increased in some Polish cities, also in central Prague, bringing them to levels that are just too high for locals. Or perhaps that explains why they always try to cheat on the bills these days... I think it is time to have lunch. It hasnt benefited businesses? You sure?
cisono Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 It hasnt benefited businesses? You sure? I said "people" (the general public), not businesses...
!!Davio!! Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 It hasnt benefited businesses? You sure? I said "people" (the general public), not businesses... it has benefited business in economies that were already in the EU (e.g. UK, France, Germany, Italy etc) because of lower wages in the eastern european economies (Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland etc) and the abllity to take advantage of natural resources in the smaller economies. But economies outside the EU (USA, Canada, India etc) now have to pay extra in tariffs to trade with the economies that joined the EU, due to the EU's common external tariff.
cisono Posted 27 March 2008 Posted 27 March 2008 it has benefited business in economies that were already in the EU (e.g. UK, France, Germany, Italy etc) because of lower wages in the eastern european economies (Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland etc) and the abllity to take advantage of natural resources in the smaller economies. But economies outside the EU (USA, Canada, India etc) now have to pay extra in tariffs to trade with the economies that joined the EU, due to the EU's common external tariff. That is the generally-held view, though I haven't actually seen any figures.... Migration from new Eastern European countries towards countries already in the EU has provided extra workforce in some sectors but also created pressure on housing and other services (apparently). I tend to hear more about the latter than the former, though of course that does not mean much in itself.
Thracian Posted 28 March 2008 Posted 28 March 2008 In simple terms, i aim to assess if the prawn sandwich brigade phenomenon exists at leicester. Basically its the changing of the game from a working class form of entertainment to that of one adapted to suit and be aimed more at the middle/ upper classes. You've learned something already. Stick to "simple terms". Anything you submit will be a waste of effort if no-one can understand it.
James. Posted 28 March 2008 Posted 28 March 2008 I said "people" (the general public), not businesses... Can you not see the link between the two?
Zingari Posted 28 March 2008 Posted 28 March 2008 Can you not see the link between the two? yes, there is a link, but the benefits are not always directly proportional .
James. Posted 28 March 2008 Posted 28 March 2008 yes, there is a link, but the benefits are not always directly proportional . Well no of course not. This isn't communism. But to isolate businesses as beneficiaries at the expense of "the people" as cisono appears to have done is misleading.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.