Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
.. One would've hoped that certain things might be beyond attempts to use them for political arguments but there we go.
spankers.
..not sure that's really "ironically" either is it ..?
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
They're struggling to recruit teachers again. ... ...
If you're outside the London area, a starting teacher does all that for £23K, before tax. Ready for that? That why something like half of new teachers have packed it in within 2 years. If only it were as easy as politicians, the newspapers and ignorant public tell us.
To put £23K salary in perspective, you are entitled to about £150 a month in social security if you're on that low a salary.
Minimum wage over 40 hours a week is about £14.5k. And you can do that anywhere, potentially get a staff discount and don't need to supply your own pencils or only holiday when the kids are everywhere.
I think I'd probably like teaching, but would I feth do it for that money.
If you're outside the London area, a starting teacher does all that for £23K, before tax. Ready for that? That why something like half of new teachers have packed it in within 2 years. If only it were as easy as politicians, the newspapers and ignorant public tell us.
And it's even worse for the STEM fields as most good graduates in these fields will be able to find jobs at a higher starting salary (or simply train as accountants!).
Personally I can only think of one reason to train as a STEM teacher...to leave the country and find one that appreciates that individual more.
Science has to have the ability to repeat tests under controllable circumstances. Otherwise it can't prove anything. Good luck proving the molecular composition of water when all you have to go on is a thirdhand hundred year old account of what it looks like.
That's not a problem at all. All you need is a starting point so you can formulate the first test, the rest of the data comes from the *tests* not the historical reference(s). In Astronomy some of the data is billions of years old, that doesn't stop scientists theorising how it effects the universe now and testing them.
And with that recognition you've pointed out the glaring flaw in trying to treat history like science. The simple fact that history can't be tested. You can't generate new data, or new studies, because it's already happened, and only happens in that precise context with those precise factors once. And you don't even have a fraction of the data from that one occurrence.
That doesn't matter in the slightest. An analogy here is the weather which also can't generate new data because it has the same linear timeframe (you can't repeat the past and you can't exactly predict the future because the of those 'precise' factors. Yet you can still make predictions as to what the weather will do. You might not be able to predict exactly how much rain will fall, where the April showers will occur and so on - simply because we do not have enough data to predict this. It's the same with history, you can consider the human race as the weather, with different precise factors apply at different times. However we are still subject to physical, chemical and by association biological laws. That we can't predict with much certainty what will happen next is a lack of data to be able to refine the theories to allow further testing. You gain that by creating a theory and then testing it to get the new data you need. New data is not going back to old data and reviewing it in light of the theory as that leads to selective biases. All studies of social sciences (so how people react in a crisis for example) is 'historical and the individual circumstances are unlikely to be repeated - however you can still make predictions about what people might do in similar circumstances and then test those theories.
The wonderful thing about history is that additional time passing makes less data available. Not more. Eyewitnesses die. Original documents are lost. Terrain changes, governments meddle. Artifacts disintegrate. So actually, you tend to lose data as opposed to gaining it. Meaning your 'multiple lab tests' are working off less and less data as time goes on.
This happens in science too, it's not the data that is important it is the theories that are because they are the ones that are tested (for example a lot of Newton's data is surely lost, but his theories remain and is still testable) - as long as the theory remains the data is largely irrelevant because you want to go and gather new evidence to prove or disprove it. Most scientist's data is lost to time, yet the theories remain. Your example is largely irrelevant because it's just reviewing historical events but isn't particularly relevant for future predictions (other than perhaps the frequency of such people living). All you are doing is reviewing what has happened. It makes no prediction for the future to test and gain actual new data and that's where the scientific evidence/method has the advantage.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/24 20:07:53
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Think most people could figure the car one out no ?
Or if they didn't they could, say, read about it in a newspaper or that papers' website maybe ?
One could even say that if you were really shocked by this information it might be a bad idea to let people know this information is out there ..?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/24 21:11:29
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
That doesn't matter in the slightest. An analogy here is the weather which also can't generate new data because it has the same linear timeframe (you can't repeat the past and you can't exactly predict the future because the of those 'precise' factors. Yet you can still make predictions as to what the weather will do. You might not be able to predict exactly how much rain will fall, where the April showers will occur and so on - simply because we do not have enough data to predict this.
Firstly, before anything else, I like this. It's inaccurate when you consider the matter in depth (it doesn't take account for the thirdhand nature of the data gathered to formulate the theory), but I like it as a visualisation. I might rework it slightly and steal it for some undergrad classes in the future. Cool stuff. Ta.
That's not a problem at all. All you need is a starting point so you can formulate the first test, the rest of the data comes from the *tests* not the historical reference(s). In Astronomy some of the data is billions of years old, that doesn't stop scientists theorising how it effects the universe now and testing them.
.... It's the same with history, you can consider the human race as the weather, with different precise factors apply at different times. However we are still subject to physical, chemical and by association biological laws. That we can't predict with much certainty what will happen next is a lack of data to be able to refine the theories to allow further testing. You gain that by creating a theory and then testing it to get the new data you need. New data is not going back to old data and reviewing it in light of the theory as that leads to selective biases. All studies of social sciences (so how people react in a crisis for example) is 'historical and the individual circumstances are unlikely to be repeated - however you can still make predictions about what people might do in similar circumstances and then test those theories.
This happens in science too, it's not the data that is important it is the theories that are because they are the ones that are tested (for example a lot of Newton's data is surely lost, but his theories remain and is still testable) - as long as the theory remains the data is largely irrelevant because you want to go and gather new evidence to prove or disprove it. Most scientist's data is lost to time, yet the theories remain. Your example is largely irrelevant because it's just reviewing historical events but isn't particularly relevant for future predictions (other than perhaps the frequency of such people living). All you are doing is reviewing what has happened. It makes no prediction for the future to test and gain actual new data and that's where the scientific evidence/method has the advantage.
I get everything you're saying here, but you've not addressed the fundamental issue which I keep pointing out, and which sabotages the entire argument. Namely, the fact that your theory itself is entirely predicated upon what I've demonstrated as being interpretative and flawed grounds. You can come up with your grand theory of what causes the rise of dynastic government, but if the evidence upon which you came up with theory is completely flawed, you effectively have no theory beyond 'I made a random connection'.
It's a bit like me theorising that the reason apples fall to the ground is due to worm infestation, because someone told me that they read about how someone else dropped an apple and it had a worm in it. Or because it was coloured red. Or because it had a stalk of exactly 32cm. All of these are theories, but utterly useless, and none of them would get us anywhere near to the reason why that apple falls to the ground. It's just correlating random facts based off of a thirdhand description.
Likewise for these 'lessons' drawn from history. You're pulling random facts out of a thirdhand account to formulate your theory. You don't know if those 'facts' are even true. You're just saying 'I read a book by some dude who said that he thinks that something happened seventy years ago, and because of that I'm formulating a theory about manking generally to apply to society today'.
I mean, yeah, great for you, but if you think you're going to create a theory worth a damn or of any sort of potential real life application, you're just kidding yourself. You're no closer to the 'truth' than the kid who says that the reason facist governments rise is because they're wearing brown coloured shirts.
Ukip: Access to European single market 'critical' for Welsh farmers post-Brexit
..creeping realisation begins in Wales.
.. Cornish have realised they will be worse off too...
from the Brexpress :
Spoiler:
..who could've known that ?
Spoiler:
..oh.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Think most people could figure the car one out no ?
Or if they didn't they could, say, read about it in a newspaper or that papers' website maybe ?
One could even say that if you were really shocked by this information it might be a bad idea to let people know this information is out there ..?
I would be more suspicious of the motives. Google is not the Daily Fails friend. It provides easy access to the other forms of news. It effectively argues for control and censorship over the internet over what the public can see by trying to turn the public against such freedom of access to information. That then puts more power into the hands of the such papers and reducing the ability to challenge what they say. Google is being attacked because of this would be my view (I'm sure you could do the same search on Yahoo, bing or whatever) , but they fail to point out is that if you Google "How to become a charity worker" or "how to bake a cake" you would get equally accurate results.
Firstly, before anything else, I like this. It's inaccurate when you consider the matter in depth (it doesn't take account for the thirdhand nature of the data gathered to formulate the theory), but I like it as a visualisation. I might rework it slightly and steal it for some undergrad classes in the future. Cool stuff. Ta.
Glad to be of some help.! Just a point to note, there is still a lot of thirdhand data in weather forecasting though. It particularly applies in areas where events are seen less frequently. For example the "mini ice-age in Europe" type of events, large volcanic eruptions and their impacts, the 1859 Carrington effect and impacts on the weather, potential long term solar cycles, even long term trends in the El Nino effect etc. All lot of this data is all third hand because a lot is from perceptions and reports from the those times. Yes in the last 30 years or so our ability to collate and analysis vast amounts of data has been impressive, but the long term trends are still very much reliant on such third party information.
I get everything you're saying here, but you've not addressed the fundamental issue which I keep pointing out, and which sabotages the entire argument. Namely, the fact that your theory itself is entirely predicated upon what I've demonstrated as being interpretative and flawed grounds. You can come up with your grand theory of what causes the rise of dynastic government, but if the evidence upon which you came up with theory is completely flawed, you effectively have no theory beyond 'I made a random connection'.
It's a bit like me theorising that the reason apples fall to the ground is due to worm infestation, because someone told me that they read about how someone else dropped an apple and it had a worm in it. Or because it was coloured red. Or because it had a stalk of exactly 32cm. All of these are theories, but utterly useless, and none of them would get us anywhere near to the reason why that apple falls to the ground. It's just correlating random facts based off of a thirdhand description.
Likewise for these 'lessons' drawn from history. You're pulling random facts out of a thirdhand account to formulate your theory. You don't know if those 'facts' are even true. You're just saying 'I read a book by some dude who said that he thinks that something happened seventy years ago, and because of that I'm formulating a theory about manking generally to apply to society today'.
This doesn't actually matter. It's a testable theory that is important, not the accuracy, or validity of the previous data. The examples you provide are all testable. For example finding an apple without a worm infestation to see whether they fell to the floor. The initial data you could have could be from someone that viewed the event and just made it up that the apple was infested for example. The initial data is completely wrong (and perhaps made up) but that doesn't stop you testing it. You could run tests and gather new data on thousands of non-infested and infested apples to either prove or disprove the theory (and the third-hand account). It's not the accuracy (or correctness) of the data that you base you initial assumptions on, it's the ability to produce a testable theory that is the strength of scientific theory. If the evidence was made up or inaccurate then by testing it you just prove it was wrong, but that doesn't stop you making then a new theory based on this newly gathered data to refine the theory.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/25 09:57:36
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
UKIP's Douglas Carswell is quitting the party to become an independent MP and says he is doing so "amicably".
The party's only MP defected from the Conservatives to UKIP in 2014.
Former leader Nigel Farage recently called on Mr Carswell to quit accusing him of "actively working against UKIP".
A spokesman for UKIP donor Arron Banks, who had suggested he would stand against Mr Carswell, said a by-election should be called and the Clacton MP had jumped before he was pushed.
Andy Wigmore said: "The net has been closing in - there is a UKIP National Executive Committee meeting on Monday and he knew he was for the chop, so jumped.
"He should call a by-election and Arron will stand against him."
Mr Banks, who previously indicated he could stand against Mr Carswell at the next election, did so amid a long-running feud over the party's future direction and strategy.
Writing on his blog, Mr Carswell said: "I switched to UKIP because I desperately wanted us to leave the EU. Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have decided that I will be leaving UKIP.
"I will not be switching parties, nor crossing the floor to the Conservatives, so do not need to call a by election, as I did when switching from the Conservatives to UKIP. I will simply be the Member of Parliament for Clacton, sitting as an independent.
"I will leave UKIP amicably, cheerfully and in the knowledge that we won."
Mr Carswell said: "I will be putting all of my effort into tackling some of the local problems affecting the NHS in our part of Essex... Local comes first."
Speaking to the BBC, Mr Carswell declined to comment on where his decision left UKIP, saying there was a "political cartel" in the UK and he wanted to be part of "far-reaching change" as an independent MP.
Mr Carswell, 45, first entered the Commons in 2005 as MP for Harwich, defeating Labour's candidate by just 920 votes. By 2010 he defeated the same opponent by 12,000 votes - although boundary changes had seen the seat renamed Clacton.
After defecting to UKIP he stood down to seek re-election in a by-election, which he won by 12,404 votes in October 2014. At the general election in 2015, he retained the seat with a 3,437 majority.
UKIP MEP Bill Etheridge said he was "delighted" at the announcement.
"It's a lovely, sunny day and someone I believe was not genuinely interested in representing UKIP in Westminster but has been the focus of serious infighting in the party has gone.
"But I think he needs to step down and call a by election... He was elected twice on a UKIP ticket, with UKIP resources and the hard work and shoe leather of UKIP activists."
Speaking earlier this month, Mr Carswell had vowed to "absolutely" fight the next general election as a UKIP candidate.
He was speaking after UKIP leader Paul Nuttall urged senior figures to "stick together". Mr Nuttall, who unsuccessfully stood at Stoke by-election, said he needed time to sort out the "mess" his party was in.
It is a mess isn't it? Carswell is an opportunist 'Politcial cartel' indeed.
We're pulling out the EU, Farage is gone, preferring to swan around US chat shows.
Eddie Hitler is on the ropes and widely discredited after his Hillsborough comments, and now Carswell is jumping ship.
Plus the main party donor has declared war on his own party
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch.
I've met some UKIP voters in my time, and for the most part (odd idiot aside) they are a decent, normal bunch, and not the 'loons' some sections of the media portray them as.
They're just ordinary people with normal concerns.
They deserve better than this shambles...
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
This doesn't actually matter. It's a testable theory that is important, not the accuracy, or validity of the previous data. The examples you provide are all testable. For example finding an apple without a worm infestation to see whether they fell to the floor. The initial data you could have could be from someone that viewed the event and just made it up that the apple was infested for example. The initial data is completely wrong (and perhaps made up) but that doesn't stop you testing it. You could run tests and gather new data on thousands of non-infested and infested apples to either prove or disprove the theory (and the third-hand account). It's not the accuracy (or correctness) of the data that you base you initial assumptions on, it's the ability to produce a testable theory that is the strength of scientific theory. If the evidence was made up or inaccurate then by testing it you just prove it was wrong, but that doesn't stop you making then a new theory based on this newly gathered data to refine the theory.
Sadly, I still disagree. To keep going with the apple analogy, the reason why running fresh tests is impossible isn't just because you don't know if the original data was a lie or not. The problem also lies within the fact that you don't know when doing your new test if what you're testing is actually an apple, as you're unaware of all relevant current contemporary factors. You have no idea if the fruit/scenario in your hand is the same as that which was involved in the previous thirdhand occurrence. That in turn means that you can't trace with any real precision the outcome of the test, as your limited perspective and unawareness of all contemporary factors even after the test means that the apple may well only be falling at your perspective. In reality, the apple might well be levitating if you had more knowledge of the scenario/a broader field of vision.
Essentially, you don't know if the apple existed (thirdhand account), you don't know if any of the data contained in the original story is true (interpretation), you can't tell if what you're testing is actually an apple or identical to the one in the story (too many unknown contemporary factors/variables), and you can't really gauge what the 'result' of your test was afterwards (did the apple land or fly off into space?). It's like Schrodinger's cat (or apple) squared.
There is nothing stopping you coming up with a hypothesis and attempting to test it out, but I maintain that it leaves you essentially groping in the dark, mistaking correlation for causation, and so heavily subject to the interpretations of you and everyone else involved that anything that comes out of it will be by pure random chance instead of design.
We're pulling out the EU, Farage is gone, preferring to swan around US chat shows.
Eddie Hitler is on the ropes and widely discredited after his Hillsborough comments, and now Carswell is jumping ship.
Yeah, they're done. Nuttall couldn't win with a good edge on his side, they've no money, no MP's, no real reason to exist, and therefore no hope of really carrying on.
What will be interesting to see is which way the UKIP voters will flood.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/03/25 16:35:12
We're pulling out the EU, Farage is gone, preferring to swan around US chat shows.
Eddie Hitler is on the ropes and widely discredited after his Hillsborough comments, and now Carswell is jumping ship.
Plus the main party donor has declared war on his own party
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch.
I've met some UKIP voters in my time, and for the most part (odd idiot aside) they are a decent, normal bunch, and not the 'loons' some sections of the media portray them as.
They're just ordinary people with normal concerns.
They deserve better than this shambles...
They were a one issue party that achieved its party, and is now struggling to find its own niche.
I'm not sure what people were really expecting from UKIP really. There is no place for a another major party until one of the big two Labour or Tories collapses and creates a power vacuum. Ideally I want both of them to collapse to make way for new parties, they're both out of touch and no longer represent their traditional voter bases.
I don't like the lib dems but they could fill the void left by one of the other parties should they collapse.
As for Carswell, my low opinion of him has only been confirmed. He's a self serving opportunist who wanted to be a big fish in a little pond, and joined UKIP thinking he would be allowed to take over as leader, being the party's only MP. He used UKIP for his own ends then ditched them when they wouldn't play ball.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Yeah
, they're done. Nuttall couldn't win with a good edge on his side, they've no money, no MP's, no real reason to exist, and therefore no hope of really carrying on.
What will be interesting to see is which way the UKIP voters will flood.
Speaking for myself, I'd rather abstain than vote for any of the fethers in Westminster. Theresa May is at least trying to fulfill Brexit, but I still don't like the rest of her partys policies.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/25 17:16:11
Plans to address gaps in the capability of the civil service are not keeping pace with the growth of the challenges the civil service faces, according to the National Audit Office. Government needs to prioritise its projects, activities and transformation programmes and stop work on those projects it is not confident it has the capability to deliver.
Government is asking the civil service to manage important reforms even though it has reduced in size by 26% since 2006 and with smaller budgets. At the same time there has been no reduction in the overall workload of the civil service, an increase in the number of infrastructure and capital projects, increasing demand for digital projects and the decision to leave the European Union. Responding to these challenges requires new skills, particularly in managing transformation.
Departments know they do not have the specialist capability they need and are seeking more senior leaders with specialist expertise to achieve their objectives. They require greater strength in project planning, benefits realisation and contract management. Departments also reported that they would need around 2,000 additional staff in digital roles within five years’ time, although those responsible for government’s digital skills believe this is an underestimate.
Government is seeking to deliver a challenging portfolio of major projects, including Hinkley Point C, High Speed 2, and the Trident renewal. While the civil service has skilled people, many of these projects draw on the same pool of skills. For example, in rail projects such as Crossrail and Thameslink, skilled civil servants have performed a number of project roles or have been moved to fill skills gaps for new priorities or projects. While the NAO has recently seen improvements in how some departments manage projects, it continues to regularly report on troubled projects.
Traditionally, government’s workforce planning has focused on the number of people in posts and tended to treat these as generic. As a result, it has not assessed the skills of the current workforce in a comparable or structured way. This means they do not know what skills they have, whether these are in the right place and what additional skills they need. Government has acknowledged that it needs to do more on workforce planning and has committed all departments to producing workforce plans by March 2017. The ten drafts that the National Audit Office has seen show considerable improvement on previous attempts, but remain focused on staff in post and contain only a high level view of how staffing requirements are likely to change.
Government has a plan to fill its capability gaps, based on growing skills in the civil service, developing clear career paths and encouraging a talent ‘pipeline’. It is seeking to develop specialist capability through the cross-government areas of specific expertise that provide professional support and services to departments – known in government as ‘functions’. According to the NAO, however, greater urgency is needed as these initiatives will take time to mature, and the pace of change will not match the growth in the challenges government is facing. Government also needs to integrate the work of these specialist functions more effectively with that of departments, so that skills development in departments is strongly supported.
In addition, people with the skills required to carry out highly-technical projects are scarce in the economy in general and the NAO found that government does not fully understand the private sector’s capacity to supply skills. Today’s report found, for example, that around one in four senior recruitment competitions run by the Civil Service Commission in 2015-16 resulted in the post not being filled.
In addition, the Cabinet Secretary has referred to the United Kingdom’s decision to withdraw from the EU as ‘the biggest, most complex challenge facing the civil service in our peacetime history’. It will create new capability needs across the civil service and will affect most departments. The immediate impact was the creation of two new departments. Government has also started to identify and plan for the capability needs of exiting the EU across the other departments. Departments which have had large amounts of EU-derived funding and legislation, for example, will need legal, economic and sector experts to deal with the implications of leaving the European Union, and will have to do so using their remaining staff while also seeking to achieve pre-existing priorities. As of February 2017, the civil service has created more than a thousand new roles in the new departments and elsewhere to prepare for exiting the EU and negotiating new trade agreements; two-thirds of the roles have been filled.
Notes for Editors
£405bn
Whole-life cost of projects in the Government Major Projects Portfolio (September 2015)
26%
Reduction in the number of civil servants since 2006 (in full-time equivalents)
2.1
Average score (out of five) departments gave themselves for their current capability in workforce planning
3
Main areas where the civil service needs to increase its capability
11
Functions in government: areas of expertise that provide professional support and services to departments
14,100 – 47,000
The range of estimates of the total number of civil servants in the commercial, digital, data & technology, and project delivery functions, 2016
25
Professions in government that develop capability standards and training
2,000
Additional staff with digital skills needed within five years
£145 million
Minimum annual cost of these additional digital staff
22%
Of posts unfilled for senior recruitment competitions chaired by the Civil Service Commission in 2015-16
The new departments are the Department for Exiting the European Union and the Department for International Trade
Press notices and reports are available from the date of publication on the NAO website. Hard copies can be obtained by using the relevant links on our website.
The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Sir Amyas Morse KCB, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 785 people. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice help government improve public services, and our work led to audited savings of £1.21 billion in 2015.
Great, we've trimmed the civil service so much we cannot in fact even shoot ourselves in the foot anyway.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Unfortunately I knew we were going to get this same impasse we've had before on this issue!
To keep going with the apple analogy, the reason why running fresh tests is impossible isn't just because you don't know if the original data was a lie or not. The problem also lies within the fact that you don't know when doing your new test if what you're testing is actually an apple, as you're unaware of all relevant current contemporary factors. You have no idea if the fruit/scenario in your hand is the same as that which was involved in the previous thirdhand occurrence. That in turn means that you can't trace with any real precision the outcome of the test, as your limited perspective and unawareness of all contemporary factors even after the test means that the apple may well only be falling at your perspective. In reality, the apple might well be levitating if you had more knowledge of the scenario/a broader field of vision.
Essentially, you don't know if the apple existed (thirdhand account), you don't know if any of the data contained in the original story is true (interpretation), you can't tell if what you're testing is actually an apple or identical to the one in the story (too many unknown contemporary factors/variables), and you can't really gauge what the 'result' of your test was afterwards (did the apple land or fly off into space?). It's like Schrodinger's cat (or apple) squared.
I can only repeat that the veracity of the original data doesn't matter, it's the ongoing application of scientific method that matters. You can take the examples of Haruko Obokata and the stem cell research or Andrew Wakefield and the 'anti-MMR' results. These data from these were either poorly executed or even fabricated. That still didn't stop scientists using this data as a basis of further studies which in the end found both original tests to be complete hokum (or badly implemented). the same goes with the apple. If the historic records show that 'bob' reported that a red apple fell upwards and there was a grub in it doesn't stop anyone hypothesising that "red apples fall upward with grubs in them". You can then test this (e.g by letting go of red apples with grubs in them). From these results you then reformulate a new theory if the data doesn't corroborate the first, or you plan another test to further test the theory (lets say you test just red apples with no grubs to see whether the redness makes a difference). In some ways science moves forward because of *not* being correct and not having 'correct' data (though in most cases this is due to lack of precision/accuracy) rather than being made up
Trying to determine the validity of the original data is using it to make historically accurate. It does not however stop you theorising and testing on that data regardless of whether it is correct or not.
There is nothing stopping you coming up with a hypothesis and attempting to test it out, but I maintain that it leaves you essentially groping in the dark, mistaking correlation for causation, and so heavily subject to the interpretations of you and everyone else involved that anything that comes out of it will be by pure random chance instead of design.
I think you are missing that the scientific method though is about a continuous method of test and theorise. Yes you might have one incident and another that aren't related and occur from chance, but that's why you then test it again and again and again and so on. It's the weight of being able to reaffirm the theory and revise it that gives scientific theory its strength.
For example suppose I theorised based on a 1930s interpretation that "Financial woes of a country increase anti-immigration feelings in the populace/government". OK so it *might* have happened in the 1920s/1930s in Germany depending on the historical records. Current financial woes might be increasing the anti immigration rhetoric. The current data supports the hypothesis but doesn't prove it. Now you have to test and test again. 2 such incidents could just be random chance. If the same happens three times then it might still just be chance, but what happens if the same thing happens a hundred or thousand times as you keep testing the theory -at that point the statistics do point to a causality, but you don't stop there, you keep testing, keep refining the theory. Yes it may take hundreds of years to build up the statistical weight of evidence. What you don't do however is go back into the historical records to find evidence as that's not new data and can be prone to unknown biases (i.e. only financial collapses with associated anti-immigration rhetoric were recorded and not the ones where there was a financial collapse and no anti-immigration rhetoric.
If the original data was flawed all it that actually happens is that the theory is likely disproved earlier (but noting you still need enough statistical evidence, if two incidents show different things then that could be the statistical fluke rather than the 'norm'). But then that allows you to produce a new theory and you start retesting and so on.
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
As you know, I voted leave, but I was never a UKIP supporter. None the less, I'm not that ungrateful in overlooking the part they played and giving them credit for panicking Call me Dave into holding the referendum. For that reason, their place in British history is assured, but to be brutally honest, I really can't see where they go from here. They're a single issue party, and that issue has been brought to a successful conclusion. Their civil war will only splinter them further and marginalize them even more.
I suspect a lot of their supporters will drift back to the Tories, but I don't blame you for not supporting Con/Lab/Lib. They are a wretched bunch...
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Ketara.
Like I said to Shadow Captain, I suspect that UKIP supprters will drift back to the Blue side, although there is talk of making UKIP more 'left' and the champion of the working classes, as they feel they can take on Labour here, but I can't see it myself.
Thing is though, some UKIP supporters either left the Tories or were pushed out, as the feeling was they were considered the 'lunatic fringe' of the Tories. Cameron's infamous comment springs to mind.
If they go backto the Tories, , bed in, influence Tory policy at the local level/councils, and add that to the fact that the Tories look like they will run Britain for at least 10 years, due to the feebleness of Labour,
God knows what damage will be done to Britain
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/26 13:20:12
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
She's correct about a great many things. The preoccupation of the left wing with popularist identity politics in place of supporting the working classes, the mindset many Londoners have over the rest of the UK. Spot on.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: Just found this on Youtube, seems interesting. Haven't watched all of it myself yet, I'm off to Karate.
If you haven't watched it, why post it? Whats the gist of the video? Looks like some conservative conference slagging off the left, no surprise there.
[Edit]
I've just watched it through, she starts off well with her analysis about London and the rest of the UK, and it sounds promising, but then disappears up the Tory spout pretty quickly, and inconsistently. For example, whilst recognising that driverless cars are likely to make many thousands of low skilled individuals redundant, she criticises the RMT for defending it's workers against increased automation. Blaming them for somehow taking jobs from the "driverless" industry. Unfortunately the video then stops without resolving that argument. Does anyone know who she is, perhaps we could find out what she was saying at the end?
EDIT after a little research I found the video with an ending, and the last part is telling about what this speech is about. It has nothing to do really with BREXIT but more to do with;
"We will have lost an entire generation who will never vote conservative, which is why we cannot afford to fail."
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/26 17:34:04
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
The general gist of the video is that London is out of touch with the rest of England.
As for why I haven't watched all of it, I found it 5min before I left for karate and didn't have the time to watch a 12 min video. I posted it because I thought it'd be of interest to people here.
Howard A Treesong wrote: She's correct about a great many things. The preoccupation of the left wing with popularist identity politics in place of supporting the working classes, the mindset many Londoners have over the rest of the UK. Spot on.
Ehm, you realize that "supporting the working classes" is in itself identity politics, right?
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: The general gist of the video is that London is out of touch with the rest of England.
As for why I haven't watched all of it, I found it 5min before I left for karate and didn't have the time to watch a 12 min video. I posted it because I thought it'd be of interest to people here.
Watch to the end, it's revealing.
EDIT after a little research I found the video with an ending, and the last part is telling about what this speech is about. It has nothing to do really with BREXIT but more to do with;
"We will have lost an entire generation who will never vote conservative, which is why we cannot afford to fail."
It's also incredibly amusing that, as a Tory App designer in London she is actually the definition of "Liberal London Elite". I'm not sure how she thinks a cabbage picker in rural Lincolnshire is going to embrace the "Tech IT revolution" once automation has negated their role altogether.
Howard A Treesong wrote: She's correct about a great many things. The preoccupation of the left wing with popularist identity politics in place of supporting the working classes, the mindset many Londoners have over the rest of the UK. Spot on.
Ehm, you realize that "supporting the working classes" is in itself identity politics, right?
She is a bit all over the place with identity politics, criticising the left for focusing on diversity to the detriment of class, for example. Basically it's just right wing guff that sounds like it's going somewhere, but is just about trying to keep the party together against the threat posed by a failure of Brexit which she believes, and rightly so, will be blamed on the tories.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/26 17:44:50
"All their ferocity was turned outwards, against enemies of the State, foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals" - Orwell, 1984
They really should divest all interests in companies before they fill positions like this. Otherwise you have to question who exactly they are working for (and not even in asubtle way)
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Seriously, the Walter Mitty group are British military and intelligence vets who spend their time hunting down military charity scammers and fake military veterans. They do good work. If she's shrugging them off as associates of Russian hackers making up 'fake news' about her, it says more about her then it does them. I mean, even the legal firm she's employed, Carter-Ruck, are the ones always employed by dodgy politicians and businessmen to go after Private Eye (who correspond so regularly with them they have their own ruder name for the firm based on a letter change).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/27 10:23:39
Carter-Ruck are sleeze. These are the people that got a super injunction to prevent newspapers reporting on a report about Trafigura dumping toxic waste. And then when it was mentioned in the House of Commons, then told papers that they'd be in contempt of court if they repeated what was said there, despite it being on public record!
Political Sex Pistol: Johnny Rotten backs Brexit and Trump!
Godfather of punk, anarchist and former Sex Pistol John Lydon, AKA Johnny Rotten, was on the show this morning promoting his limited edition new book Mr Rotten's Songbook. Having built a career on his anti-establishment views, he didn't shy away from talking about todays political landscape.
Lydon came out in support of Brexit claiming the working class had spoken and that he would stand by them. He also claimed he could see a possible friendship in Trump, praising his ability to terrify politicians. Rotten himself inspired a generation of anarchists.
Watch the full interview in the link posted above.
Political Sex Pistol: Johnny Rotten backs Brexit and Trump!
Godfather of punk, anarchist and former Sex Pistol John Lydon, AKA Johnny Rotten, was on the show this morning promoting his limited edition new book Mr Rotten's Songbook. Having built a career on his anti-establishment views, he didn't shy away from talking about todays political landscape.
Lydon came out in support of Brexit claiming the working class had spoken and that he would stand by them. He also claimed he could see a possible friendship in Trump, praising his ability to terrify politicians. Rotten himself inspired a generation of anarchists.
Watch the full interview in the link posted above.
This reminds me of an article in the Spectator criticizing this punk magazine for posting another article telling its readers how they can cope with the emotional trauma of Brexit. Brexit is the most punk thing to happen in years. It's a brick through the window of the establishment.
Howard A Treesong wrote: Carter-Ruck are sleeze. These are the people that got a super injunction to prevent newspapers reporting on a report about Trafigura dumping toxic waste. And then when it was mentioned in the House of Commons, then told papers that they'd be in contempt of court if they repeated what was said there, despite it being on public record!
Thats as much a reflection on the Court and Judge that granted the injunction.
tags fixed.
reds8n
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/27 19:16:24
.@Nigel_Farage: 'If Brexit is a disaster I'll go and live abroad - but it's not going to be'
*looks at first quote in own sig*
.. la plus ca change.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/27 19:25:08
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
