Awol Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 He just said he did to appease to a Eurosceptic faction in his party and also to sell himself to a public that largely doesn't get the EU No, the public "get it" and are getting it more and more. That's the problem faced by the twunts who support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 4, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 4, 2012 I disagree. But I've no interest in arguing the toss so whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 I also disagree Chinders. But stoking up a 'debate' with AWOL really ain't worth it, as you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 I also disagree Chinders. But stoking up a 'debate' with AWOL really ain't worth it, as you say. If you had confidence in the factual and intellectual basis of your pro-EU stance then you'd be able to 'debate' your POV perfectly well. Easier to make it personal though, eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 I also disagree Chinders. But stoking up a 'debate' with AWOL really ain't worth it, as you say. If you had confidence in the factual and intellectual basis of your pro-EU stance then you'd be able to 'debate' your POV perfectly well. Easier to make it personal though, eh. I believe you were the one who used the word "Twunts". If you cant take it, then don't give it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAFC2000 Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 AWOL are you for Europe or against..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 AWOL are you for Europe or against..? You've not been reading this forum closely, have you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I also disagree Chinders. But stoking up a 'debate' with AWOL really ain't worth it, as you say. If you had confidence in the factual and intellectual basis of your pro-EU stance then you'd be able to 'debate' your POV perfectly well. Easier to make it personal though, eh. I believe you were the one who used the word "Twunts". If you cant take it, then don't give it. I made a generalisation (actually aimed at the politcal class, although I'll grant that wasn't clear) rather than posting purely to have a pop at an individual - against site rules, no? However your concern is appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 AWOL are you for Europe or against..? For 'Europe' and against the EU because it is wrecking the very democracy it is 'supposed' to protect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Government accounts show 'gobsmacking' costs Margaret Hodge, said the figures were staggering and it was important to make them publicContinue reading the main story Top Politics Stories Family at Ian Paisley's bedside Abu Qatada 'may yet be deported' Estimates showing £10.9bn in unpaid tax was written off and medical negligence could cost £15.7bn are "gobsmacking", says the Commons spending watchdog. The public accounts committee has published its verdict on the new Whole of Government Accounts (WGA). The report also predicts the long-term costs of decommissioning nuclear power stations could hit £56.7bn while public sector pensions could cost £1,132bn. Ministers said it was the world's most ambitious set of public accounts. The figures are a set of financial records for the entire UK public sector, from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010 - under the previous Labour government - based on commercial accounting principles. They are intended to show what the government owns, owes, spends and receives. The public accounts committee criticised the Treasury for providing figures that were "too dated", because of the 20 months it took to get them published, and complained that some major costs were omitted such as the publicly-owned banks and Network Rail. But its chairman, Labour's Margaret Hodge, told the BBC: "This is the first time they have been published and I think we should welcome that." The WGA included estimates for costs decades into the future, "and that's why we've got some really gob smacking figures", she told the BBC. 'Volatility' in rates Her committee's report flags up the £10.9bn tax figure - which the WGA figures published in November say is an estimate which also reflects the cost of legal proceedings against taxpayers - and says the Treasury "showed surprise" at the amount. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote We were surprised to find that the Treasury did not have a grip on trends in some key areas of risk or plans for managing them” Public Accounts Committee report It also says the Treasury "had no knowledge of recent trends in clinical negligence claims or whether plans were in place to reduce the estimated £15.7bn cost to taxpayers of meeting these claims". The WGA also shows the bulk of liabilities expected from "previous activities" - 56% - was the cost of decommissioning the UK's nuclear power stations, which over time is predicted to cost £56.7bn. The net liability of public sector pensions is predicted to be £1,132bn. But MPs on the committee pointed out that calculating such long-term costs in today's money was imprecise - because of "inconsistency" and "volatility" in the rates used to calculate the present value of future money. For example, different rates were used to calculate the pensions and nuclear costs and the rate used to calculate pensions changed during 2009-10 - which in itself increased the total by £300bn. The committee welcomed the potential for helping the government to identify the risks it "needs to manage". 'Generally poor' But evidence given by officials during hearings had suggested their understanding of some aspects was "poor". "The Treasury should use the WGA specifically to identify key risks to public funds and ensure bodies included in the WGA can demonstrate that they are addressing them effectively." Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote No other country has sought to fully consolidate all public sector bodies, including the local government sector, in one statement of accounts” Treasury spokesman The report added: "We were surprised to find that the Treasury did not have a grip on trends in some key areas of risk or plans for managing them." And Mrs Hodge said the Treasury had "departed from accounting standards by leaving out of the accounts such bodies as Network Rail and the publicly owned banks" - which led to the accounts being qualified by the National Audit Office. The MPs' report also raised concerns about the quality of data, saying the financial information provided by academies - which in 2009-10 accounted for £1.2bn of government spending - had been "generally poor". A Treasury spokesman said: "The government welcomes the public accounts committee's recognition that the publication of the Whole of Government Accounts represents a 'major step forward in improving transparency and accountability'. "This is the most ambitious public sector account prepared anywhere in the world. No other country has sought to fully consolidate all public sector bodies, including the local government sector, in one statement of accounts. "We will build on this first publication and are working hard to remove any qualifications." Wow Yes I am gobsmacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers :-) - but it certainly does explain some of the prejudices they show and their complete lack of understanding of what is right and correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 But right wingers are intelligent enough not to link to newspapers they spend 99 % of their life insulting the people that read it :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 :-) I knew the article would be a bit tough for you to understand Tony. See it wasn't the Mail that undertook the study it was somebody else. The two are not the same you know :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers :-) - but it certainly does explain some of the prejudices they show and their complete lack of understanding of what is right and correct. Seeing as millions voted for what is thought to be the right wing party and from different parts of the country, from different genders backgrounds and ethnicities. isn't that just a wee bit, well, prejudiced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Seeing as millions voted for what is thought to be the right wing party and from different parts of the country, from different genders backgrounds and ethnicities. isn't that just a wee bit, well, prejudiced? :-) - Obviously you have not read the article. What the heck has the fact that millions voted for the Tory party - and note many many more did NOT vote for them, have to do with this? How exactly is that prejudiced? As the article says and echoed across various other outlets that commented on it, the right wing and prejudice are seemingly interlinked. Some key phrases just from that article are Children with low intelligence grow up to be prejudiced Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, Conservative politics work almost as a 'gateway' into prejudice against others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Yeah I read the article a while back. And realised as its Canadian it wasn't refering to The UK Conservative Party, but conservatism in general. The prejudice I was talking about was your statement that they all have a complete lack of understanding of what is right and correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 the right wing and prejudice are seemingly interlinked Diane Abbot Labour supporters abandoning the party for the BNP yep those pesky right wingers but what makes it even more amusing is if you read up on the story in more detail you find that Liam has scored again A study by Bryan Caplan, an economist at George Mason University in Virginia, found that smart people tend to think like economists, being in favour of free trade, globalisation and free markets and against protectionism and state intervention in industry. This matches other findings that show that IQ correlates not with left-wing thinking as such, but with classic Enlightenment liberalism. So a smart person (all else being equal) will probably be in favour of capitalism generally, and free-trade in particular. He or she will distrust state intervention in the markets, probably be suspicious of welfarism and deeply dislike protectionism, union closed-shops and tariffs. The smart person will believe that the have-nots should be encouraged to become haves by dint of their own labours and by the levelling of economic playing fields, NOT by taking money off the haves and giving it to them. In other words, Thatcherism. Hardly something we equate with the left back of the net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazdavies79 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't know about intelligence, but I've always found lefty liberals have a far better sense of humour. Purely anecdotal, but nonetheless something I can't help to have noticed. Maybe because I'm a lefty liberal we share a common sense of humour. I have one 'friend' who's into UKIP and all that bollocks, I find his sense of humour cutting and quite cruel at times, it's all direct personal attacks without irony or self awareness. We're definitely not cut from the same cloth. Just thought I'd share that FWIW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I have one 'friend' not nit picking but from the way its written , is that one person which has enabled you to come to that conclusion ?? it's interesting though as I thought all lefty's wore sandals , had beards and enjoyed morris dancing whilst being able to recite the knights that go ni , Ad infinitum or this "left" v "right" thing could just be a complete load of bollocks .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 'smart people believe in (enter whatever I BELIEVE BECAUSE I'M RIGHT here)' people who use such arguments aren't smart to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts