UK Future

[Jacob]

.....
The press recently reported on a lay about who has fathered 15 offspring, with another on the way, that he pays no support for nor sees very frequently.
He lives on benefits.
....

If you focus attention on oddities like this chap, who lets face it is extremely unusual, then life is going to appear to be an unpleasant freak show.
Which of course, for Daily Mail and NOTW (et al) readers is exactly how it seems.
Something which has to be considered in debates like this where many participants have allowed themselves to be conditioned into whichever weird or miserable view of the world most turns them on.

 

[Digit]

Thanks for the lecture Jacob, now about the question I put to you.
As regards a wierd and gloomy etc, try the Guardian on Climate Change.

Roy.

 

[Jacob]

Thanks for the lecture Jacob, now about the question I put to you.
As regards a wierd and gloomy etc, try the Guardian on Climate Change.

Roy.

What is the question?
nb I don't think the Guardian has a line on climate change does it? It just reports the scientific view fairly objectively.

 

[Digit]

Other than as the other day as I reported to you that the Guardian published the BEST report in an edited format that ignored the co editors reservations without even mentioning her name, that Jacob, is not objectivity! The DM reported BOTH sides of the co authors views, pro and con, now that is objectivity.
The question was should such as that lay about be supported by tax payers.

Roy.

 

[Modernist]

Other than as the other day as I reported to you that the Guardian published the BEST report in an edited format that ignored the co editors reservations without even mentioning her name, that Jacob, is not objectivity! The DM reported BOTH sides of the co authors views, pro and con, now that is objectivity.
The question was should such as that lay about be supported by tax payers.

Roy.

But I thought Tories were great supporters of religion :?:

 

[Jacob]

Other than as the other day as I reported to you that the Guardian published the BEST report in an edited format that ignored the co editors reservations without even mentioning her name, that Jacob, is not objectivity! The DM reported BOTH sides of the co authors views, pro and con, now that is objectivity.
The question was should such as that lay about be supported by tax payers.

Roy.

Is that the one where the co editor was a climate change sceptic? That's OK, balance doesn't entail an obligation to include loony views.
You wouldn't expect every suggestion that the earth was round to be accompanied by a balancing comment from a flat earther. Be realisitic! Mind you, the DM probably would, but that's another story. :lol:

 

[Digit]

Best ask them I guess Brian.

Roy.

 

[Digit]

balance doesn't entail an obligation to include loony views.

True Jacob, but who is to decide what is loony? I would point out that the co-editor is vastly better qualified in climate research than you, you are a damn good wood worker, how would you rate the opinion on the subject from someone who couldn't drive a nail straight?
The Guardian repeatedly reported on the 'Hockey Stick' Jacob, despite objections from those same loons. The IPCC has now dropped the stick BTW, had the Guardian not been soon biased it would have reported the alternatives and thus not look quite as silly as it now does.
So which one was loony?

Roy.

 

[devonwoody]

Some economist last night on Panorama said the Euro is doomed and it will crash and break up again.
So DC was correct in not cooperating.

 

[Digit]

Unless they break all their own rules DW I can not see how they can possibly get the necessary institutions up and running for months, or more. Remember, this is the group that took 13 years to define a lawn mower for manufacturing purposes.

Roy.

 

[Jacob]

balance doesn't entail an obligation to include loony views.

True Jacob, but who is to decide what is loony? I would point out that the co-editor is vastly better qualified in climate research than you, you are a damn good wood worker, how would you rate the opinion on the subject from someone who couldn't drive a nail straight?
The Guardian repeatedly reported on the 'Hockey Stick' Jacob, despite objections from those same loons. The IPCC has now dropped the stick BTW, had the Guardian not been soon biased it would have reported the alternatives and thus not look quite as silly as it now does.
So which one was loony?

Roy.

Guardian did report "the alternatives" though alternatives is the wrong word - it's on ongoing study (within the scientific community) subject to continuous re-assessment, not just a simple choice between alternatives.
If you are interested in this Digit - keep looking at the Guardian and also the scientific press, New Scientist, Scientific American etc on or off line . It will certainly sharpen your ability to spot a loony!
And do yourself a favour, don't read the Mail!

 

[Modernist]

An interesting snippet from David Gow in today's Graun

>>David Gow says I may have underplayed the significance of Jose Manuel Barroso's comments earlier.

Barroso has blown apart Dave's main justification that he was "defending the single market" by saying his six-point demand threatened it - and he, Barroso, tabled a compromise talking about protecting the single market and, specifically, financial services. The pent-up venom towards the UK is also now spewing out in the European Parliament - including from anglophiles.

What people don't seem to get is that Merkel also went out of her way to help Dave as she doesn't want Germany irrevocably tied to France and is closer on economic policy etc to the UK. But the demands he tabled at 3am on Friday last week, senior sources say, were for an effective veto on all single market legislation: "obviously, out of the question." What if Merkel had demanded special protection for the German car industry - VW (soon to be the world's biggest car-maker), Mercedes and BMW? Or Sarko for the French energy sector - EDF/GDF Suez/Areva? Cameron would have gone crazy...>>

 

[Blister]

I wont use the words UK ( United KINGDOM )

I will use Britain

and in my opinion Britain is a sinking ship weighed down with the burden of others

I have a life jacket ready for the day it goes down

 

[WoodMangler]

An interesting snippet from David Gow in today's Graun
>>David Gow says I may have underplayed the significance of Jose Manuel Barroso's comments earlier.
Barroso has blown apart ...>

The important thing to remember about Barroso is that he's a communist warmonger with a history of being two-faced...

 

[Digit]

Dodging again Jacob, I stated that the Guardian failed to report the paper's co editor's concerns and that the DM did. No amount of prevarication by you alters that fact.
You, I believe, consider yourself to be liberal in your views, as does the Guardian....

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j& ... Qw&cad=rja

from above....

"tolerant of his opponent's opinions"

.. yet you frequently refer to those whose hold different views to your own as 'morons' or 'loonies'.
I live at the bottom of a narrow valley, to three sides are low hills will the Preseli hills to the fourth. I see the sun rise in the south east and set in the south west. I see trees and fields all about me.
I am a dedicated 'flat Earther', now using what evidence you can, show me the error of my ways.
But before you start let me explain one thing to you. For you to have the slightest chance of changing my view it is essential that I be prepared to listen to what you have to say. Not to dismiss you as a moron, or a loony, but to demonstrate an open mind and to learn.
Liberal Jacob? Actually you are one of the most illiberal people I know of.
That co editor probably knows as much about woodwork to judge you as you know about climatology.

Roy.

 

[BigShot]

Blister - "Britain" is ambiguous. Being a bit of a libertarian in my spare time I find the "Kingdom" part objectionable, but UK has a very specific meaning. I'll refrain from going into detail here, but this page is pretty useful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminolog ... tish_Isles


Digit - you've got to remember that "liberal" is a hijacked term.
There's nothing liberal about modern liberalism. Compare almost any self-proclaimed liberal with what it means to be a classic liberal or (perish the thought) a libertarian and you'll see a stark difference.
For "liberal" as used by most today, submit a word to suggest something leaning towards statist/authoritarian (invariably with a socialist slant) and you're closer to the mark. In short - very illiberal.

 

[Jacob]

... I stated that the Guardian failed to report the paper's co editor's concerns and that the DM did. No amount of prevarication by you alters that fact.

What is this about? Do you have any links?

.....

"tolerant of his opponent's opinions"

I wouldn't be here if I wasn't

.. yet you frequently refer to those whose hold different views to your own as 'morons' or 'loonies'.

No I don't. It's the ideas which are "loony" not necessarily the people holding them. We can all be confused, deluded, deranged, at some point. It's not the fact that they are "different" views - it's more to do with people relying and dubious sources. I think it is important to speak a bit plainly as many wrongly think they are being well served by the media. It's the emperor's new clothes scenario - sometimes there is little point in debate you just have to bang home a few points.

I live at the bottom of a narrow valley, to three sides are low hills will the Preseli hills to the fourth. I see the sun rise in the south east and set in the south west. I see trees and fields all about me.
I am a dedicated 'flat Earther', now using what evidence you can, show me the error of my ways.

I'd immediately suggest that you walk to the top of the nearest hill on a clear day - and you would see the curvature for yourself directly. Yes thats it - get out of the shady valley and have a look around!

.... For you to have the slightest chance of changing my view .........

Entirely up to you, I don't care either way, I'm merely expressing my own views.

 

[Digit]

What if Merkel had demanded special protection for the German car industry - VW (soon to be the world's biggest car-maker), Mercedes and BMW? Or Sarko for the French energy sector -

Brian, for one who is such an avid supporter of Das Klub I have to tell you that your lack of knowledge concerning it is shocking.
Vis a vis your comment above, DC's veto was permitted under an agreement arrived at some years ago. It arose as a result of the fact that at that time agreements within the Council had to be unanimous. A heated debate resulted in one delegate storming out and leaving the 'empty chair'.
From there it was decided that hence forth certain agreements would be decided by majority votes, treaties were exempt.
The agreement is known as the 'Luxemburg Accord,' the situation that produced it was France's refusal to agree to modifications to the CAP as the good General was that year facing an election and he wished to keep his farmers off the streets.
Sound familiar at all?
The words 'hoist' and 'petard' spring to mind.

Roy.

 

[Sawyer]

I wont use the words UK ( United KINGDOM )

I will use Britain

and in my opinion Britain is a sinking ship weighed down with the burden of others

I have a life jacket ready for the day it goes down

Ironically, next April is the centenary of the Titanic disaster!

Then as now, those who are wealthy have the better chance of keeping everything, whilst the rest founder. Titanic survival figures are interesting; given that women & children got first chance on lifeboats:

First Class passengers paying up to £800 (in 1912 money - around 7 years' wages for a skilled manual worker): all the children and 97% of the women survived.
Third Class passengers. Fare about £7: only 46% women and 34% children survived.

Before anyone asks, no, I don't subscribe the view that 3rd class folk were forcibly kept back to allow 1st class people onto the lifeboat.

Had Fred 'The Shred' Goodwin been around in 1912, I wonder if he'd have got himself on to a lifeboat. He certainly managed it in 2008!

 

[Digit]

What is this about? Do you have any links?

Thank you Jacob, you have now confirmed what many of us thought. You don't have to know what you are talking about to disagree!

Bigshot. Yep! The other hijacked term is 'diversity', most of its supporters have no time or respect for any who display different views, ie, their support for diversity extends only to those who agree with them.
Not my understanding of the word.

Roy.