<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.jockcoats.org.uk" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Jock&amp;#039;s Place - social enterprise - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/jocks_categories/social_enterprise</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;social enterprise&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>I&#039;m not asking &quot;them&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/co_op_group_somerfield_disposals_idea#comment-2226</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
I&amp;#39;m not asking &amp;quot;them&amp;quot; (being Co-operative Group) to do anyone any favours actually.  The best outcome from the point of view of this idea would I suspect, be that Co-op Group sell it to MidCounties Co-op and they help us create a new Headington shopping centre/market and take the rent from it.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I agree, especially with one of Britain&amp;#39;s cleverest property magnates selling it to them, that the Co-op Group will want to dispose of the surplus sites as soon as possible.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I&amp;#39;ve extended my idea anyway - the biggest problem in Headington centre is I believe the landlords who appear to have no interest in developing their properties to create an environment in which modern shopping can survive and thrive, so I reckon taking over Somerfield ought to be the first stage of a plan to assemble a site that would include all the shops and flats along the London Road and Old High Street frontages from Somerfield&amp;#39;s entrance round to the Bury Knowle Park entrance.  I already have a very beautiful idea in my head for a mixed development including arcades, new flats ovelooking the park and London Road and the &amp;quot;covered market&amp;quot; type idea roundn the back where Somerfield no is.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:29:17 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2226 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Great idea Jock. But</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/co_op_group_somerfield_disposals_idea#comment-2225</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Great idea Jock. But wouldn&#039;t they be more likely to sell it off?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:48:26 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>The Poet Laura-eate</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2225 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Nah ... leave it to the markets</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/co_op_group_somerfield_disposals_idea#comment-2219</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I covered &lt;a href=http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2008/05/economies-and-diseconomies-of-scale.html&gt;this topic&lt;/a&gt; a while back.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For some reason, retail mergers never go well ... see the Somerfield/Kwik Save and Morrisons/Safeway debacles, or Tesco and M&amp;amp;S expansion abroad, or the Sainsbury/Homebase takeover (Sainsbury sold Homebase again a few years later, having bought it from, rather bizarrely, Ladbrokes when it was still called Texas), the Woolworths/Kingfisher demerger (continued page 94).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So this does not bode well for the Co-op.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 20:16:53 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Mark Wadsworth</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2219 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Patronising sod!


In the</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2176</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
Patronising sod!
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
In the real world one expects one&amp;#39;s opponents to play the ball not the man.  I&amp;#39;ve seen innumerable complaints to police about election literature far less distorted than they put out against me.  If there was the remotest chance that they won by unfair tactics then I should have that tested, which it now has been and ruled &amp;quot;fair play&amp;quot; (though it still breaches my copyright, which I see has become an issue again in Crewe).  Such tactics only serve to prevent honest and open debate amongst opinion formers,
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
I don&amp;#39;t particularly care actually.  As a libertarian I&amp;#39;m much more enthused by the idea of delivering social and public goods without the dead hand of government at any level. 
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 22:28:48 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2176 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Greet, greet, greet. What a</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2175</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Greet, greet, greet. What a poor loser. If you think the words did you harm you shouldn&#039;t have used them. Welcome to the real world.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 19:12:35 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2175 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>If I was in your ward, you</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2174</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;If I was in your ward, you wouldn&#039;t have needed to knock on my door - that Labour leaflet would have persuaded me to vote for you!  Give it another go next time, either as a Lib Dem or a member of the Libertarian Party.  We need more real liberals in political office.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 20:22:24 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Citizen Stuart</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2174 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>tow = toe. I&#039;m ill today so</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2169</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;tow = toe. I&#039;m ill today so that&#039;s my excuse. Betty has none.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 15:17:13 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Philip Thomas</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2169 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>A sorry affair</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2168</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;God, I hate the leaflet that was put out against you.  Hopefully, some people read it and realised how much sense you were talking.  I worried a bit about the same thing during my campaign.  It is something any politician that doesn&#039;t tow the route of conventional ignorance risks.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 15:14:27 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Philip Thomas</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2168 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Evidence of what?  That an</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2166</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Evidence of what?  That an offence may have been committed?  The leaflet speaks for itself.  It is a clear breach of my rights as copyright owner under section 80 of the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act (1988?) which is the civil matter.  If I can make the case, however that that makes it a derivative work I will argue that it is therefore a statement of fact misrepresenting me or my position and could then fall under section 106 of RPA 1983.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 14:07:00 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2166 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>And the evidence?</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2164</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;And the evidence?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 13:30:05 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2164 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>I suspect the thick skin</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2163</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
I suspect the thick skin thing is one of those aspects of psychopathy that I do not share with most politicians,
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
But you are right - I need to get back onto that book which is now badly delayed.  I have to ask a few other contributers still for a start! 
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 13:54:02 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2163 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Bad luck Jock</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2162</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;A thick skin is required in politics - as I&#039;m sure you know! At least you now have plenty of time to re-focus your efforts on the assembly and production of the most important book on Liberalism since 1909. Every cloud and all that...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 13:37:01 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Andrew Duffield</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2162 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Yup - I&#039;m sure you&#039;re right</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2161</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Yup - I&amp;#39;m sure you&amp;#39;re right that it happens all over the place.  And were it purely a civil matter it would not be worth pursuing, except perhaps as a service to bloggers in general who might feel their words in future coming back to haunt them in a similar way.  But if there&amp;#39;s any chance of it being an election offense I think it&amp;#39;s worth checking because it was clearly done maliciously (despite there being no previous animosity between me and the Labour candidate, now councillor).&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 11:25:12 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2161 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Actually, that&#039;s a good</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2160</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
&lt;font&gt;Actually, that&amp;#39;s a good point - I don&amp;#39;t think I ever have really and I do get asked what it means.&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
When I adopted the tag I did a post about the various flavours of individualist-anarchist/libertarian &lt;a href=&quot;/journey_through_libertarian_anarchism&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; title=&quot;Wherein Jock examines various flavours of libertarianism and discovers he must be a &amp;quot;geo-mutualist&amp;quot;&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; .  But never really developed it further.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
However, during the election campaign I was in correspondence with a Labour member who is an academic and who let me have a copy of his latest paper, &amp;quot;Revolutionary Liberalism&amp;quot;, in which (though I haven&amp;#39;t finished it yet) he talks about the &amp;quot;ownership for all&amp;quot; policies of the post-war Liberals in the UK which made me feel right at home - what he was describing seemed to me to be what I understand by mutualism.  So over the next few days I will try and put together a posting on it.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 10:22:00 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jock</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2160 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Jock, 
Have you written</title>
 <link>http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/never_say_never_again#comment-2159</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Jock, &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Have you written about &quot;geo-mutualism&quot; in a specific post.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&#039;m very interested in: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;I believe sovereignty should lie with the individual and he or she should only cede power upwards to representatives over things that they cannot arrange for themselves or in small groups or local communities.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Can you (have you already) developed this? &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 09:41:15 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Aaron Heath</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 2159 at http://www.jockcoats.org.uk</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
