Almost impossible to find 'em hereabouts.
And the brighter wits among us will note that I said nothing about numbers, but rather about words.
Looking for a fight?
Here's a notion. . .
Is it possible that electing a "Liberal Lite" Tory would help smooth a path to a more Tory Tory? That's the promise.
Of course, the risk would be that the Tories could get locked into "Lib Lite."
And to some, coal is also in that basket.
When I deal with language, I prefer to deal with words, not baskets. I'm sure that if your point were different, you'd be losing your damn mind screaming that NG is not oil
Haven't been paying much attention. As a general proposition, NG is big in the U.S. not only adding to the total capacity, but replacing coal, and to a lesser extent oil.
You did specify "oil" as the other 40% NG is not oil.
Could be. If he ain't your citizen, it ain't your problem.
As I said, I consider your solution to be wise and merciful. But I'd be tempted to just be shot of him.
I'm not a big fan of "tax policy" (bit of an oxymoron), but the theory is that you set taxes to encourage desired behaviors and to discourage undesired behaviors.
No worries. The thesis was that approximately 60% of your government budget is eaten up by the bureaucracy.
Be interesting to see services bought+goods bought+salaries paid+payments to citizens/the government budget.
Actually, completely aside from the Royal Grant, she's a billionaire.
Each year the UK government releases what the monarchy costs each person in the UK. Usually around 65-70 pence/head/year.