Arrrgh, Danny Brough! I took the kids on the supporters bus to Wakey about ten years ago and he beat us with a touchline conversion on the last kick of the game. I believe he hasn’t made the best career choices over the years off the pitch, but what a talent on it. Shame Abdull was so quiet for us last night.
Cheered myself up afterwards by watching the Roosters tearing it up!
This has been a long time coming. My brother lived around the corner from Gigg Lane in the early 90s. United reserves used to play there and they were getting bigger crowds than Bury, twice as many if a star like Giggs was coming back from injury. Bury market would have nothing related to the club, but you could get United or City clocks, towels, mirrors etc. We went to a few games where the stands had a few older guys clustered together while their sons and grandsons, in United, City, Liverpool shirts played football behind the stand. Us in a decade? We have to do more to hook teenagers and make going to a game their habit not a family duty.
Had one cracking night there, 2-0 in the league cup when we were third in the league and they were in the fourth division. Thumping Peacock header and an over the shoulder Bradley Allen volley, both in the last ten minutes. There was a bonus in the club shop afterwards, we picked up a leaflet for Euro96 priority tickets that was only supposed to be for referees and other officials. Result.
I'd love to see the evidence for that Mexican claim. This report from the UK parliament doesn't support it. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN00290#fullrep The Mexican state spends 2.0% of GDP on public pensions, compared to 5.2% in the UK. GDP per head is much lower in Mexico.14% of UK pensioners live in poverty as defined officially, compared to 25% in Mexico. State pension isn't the sole source of pension provision; some countries such as the UK encourage employer and personal pensions to a greater degree than others. The Greeks spend the most on public pensions in the OECD (13.8% of GDP), but is that the right model for us?
Why is a slowing rate of growth of life expectancy necessarily indefensible? If smoking is the major reason, a slowdown would be inevitable. About 50% of adults smoked in the early 70s, and the number is below 15% now.
International comparisons are interesting. Many countries a bit longer than ours but some less. No surprise from the US, opioid deaths just the latest contributory factor, but surprise to see the Danes below us.
Since the welfare state was established, there has been an unprecedented spell when average life expectancy was rising about 3-4 months every year (much of it due to lower smoking), though it's now flattening out. I believe that people who got to 60 could only expect to live to 68 on average, and now it's 91. Add in the fact that investment returns are so low, and it's clear that the old arrangements are unsustainable. I wouldn't be surprised to see euthanasia pushed as a civic duty within a couple of decades.