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.
In a similar way Theresa May followed that ridiculous script saying ‘strong and stable’ over and over until people were mocking her for it. I doubt that did her party much good at the polls.
Don’t politicians have any conviction or ideas of their own? Do they value themselves so little that they don’t give an honest impression of themselves? It’s like they don’t have the awareness or nous to know when their guidance is poor, they just follow whatever they are told to say.
Our top politicians shouldn’t have to be micromanaged through the campaign process like an idiotic band going on tour, having lines fed to them and being told how to put on a front in order to appeal to the public.
Yea and if a policy is sold to me in a way where I can see the benefits to me, I'm much more likely to be supportive.
Take the recent rise in minimum pension contribution for example. If I paid the minimum in then it would make me worse off every month, but I can see the benefit it gives me later. That's an easy sell.
Tuition fees are the same, I'm worse off in the short term for paying them, but I understand that in order to have such top notch universities they need to have money and I don't mind investing in my own future because I know I can make a success of it.
The problem is how do you represent something that if you are unlucky you will use or be affected by? Take unemployment benefits - not many people want to think that their life might come crashing down because of a random occurrence and most of us will happily ignore such concepts. How do you sell funding to help troublesome families when you may or may not be affected by them subject to where they live or act? How do you persuade a populace to explain that the money is put there to prevent/minimise such issues in the extremely unlikely event you are as an individual are affected. Pensions and University fees are easy relatively because it is still a direct consequence of what you are spending the money on. What it harder is those aspects that people don't want to confront and for the majority will never have to (fortunately).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: Strong and Stable got the Tories from 36% of the vote in 2015 to 48% in 2017. The trouble was that Corbo got Labour from 26% to 40%
I like to think Ed's performance at the GE was because somebody was saying "you must act like this" etc etc. He seems a far more interesting person after the event from various tv appearances and his podcast.
I'd like to see Ed back as head of Labour. I think he learnt a lot from not winning.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/04/10 12:39:09
"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
Yea and if a policy is sold to me in a way where I can see the benefits to me, I'm much more likely to be supportive.
Take the recent rise in minimum pension contribution for example. If I paid the minimum in then it would make me worse off every month, but I can see the benefit it gives me later. That's an easy sell.
Tuition fees are the same, I'm worse off in the short term for paying them, but I understand that in order to have such top notch universities they need to have money and I don't mind investing in my own future because I know I can make a success of it.
The problem is how do you represent something that if you are unlucky you will use or be affected by? Take unemployment benefits - not many people want to think that their life might come crashing down because of a random occurrence and most of us will happily ignore such concepts. How do you sell funding to help troublesome families when you may or may not be affected by them subject to where they live or act? How do you persuade a populace to explain that the money is put there to prevent/minimise such issues in the extremely unlikely event you are as an individual are affected. Pensions and University fees are easy relatively because it is still a direct consequence of what you are spending the money on. What it harder is those aspects that people don't want to confront and for the majority will never have to (fortunately).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: Strong and Stable got the Tories from 36% of the vote in 2015 to 48% in 2017. The trouble was that Corbo got Labour from 26% to 40%
I'd like to see Ed back as head of Labour. I think he learnt a lot from not winning.
Only if he leaves engraving commandments on massive stone tablets to Moses this time The real question is why the prodigal son David Miliband hasn't returned?
Leadership of the International Rescue Committee On 26 March 2013 the Daily Mirror reported that Miliband would be announcing the following day that he intended to resign as an MP and leave politics altogether. He announced that he was taking up the post of head of the International Rescue Committee in New York, for which his remuneration would be £300,000 ($450,000) a year.[5][67][68]
Miliband became the President and CEO of the International Rescue Committee on 1 September 2013. At the IRC, Miliband will be overseeing humanitarian aid and development programs in 40 countries, a global staff of 12,000 and 1,300 volunteers, and an annual budget of $450 million.[69] Near the top of the IRC, Miliband again installed his former Special Political Advisor from London, Madlin Sadler. She became the aid agency's Chief of Staff.[70] In 2015 it was revealed that Miliband's salary at the IRC was $600,000 per year, almost $200,000 more than his predecessor.[71]
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/04/10 13:07:19
Whirlwind wrote: In other news....we now have flag burning in the UK....all encouraged by Farage
So? Thats freedom of speech. No matter which flag is being burned, the British Flag, EU, America...
A bit of a silly stunt though.
It's not a question of freedom of speech. It's the implication that they would quite happily burn and the people that walk under it whether government or individual.
If you don't like something please feel free to argue against it, but burning a flag is all the more concerning because of the implications. Might as well ask them to start burning books whilst they are at it...
"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
Although...some books are more equal than others it seems.
Yet book burning usually represents censorship in some form. It's all well and good saying that it is the freedoms of those burning it; but what about those that want to read them. That option is gone. By enacting a type of freedom of speech they have denied it to others.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/10 13:11:25
"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
Whirlwind wrote: Yet book burning usually represents censorship in some form. It's all well and good saying that it is the freedoms of those burning it; but what about those that want to read them. That option is gone. By enacting a type of freedom of speech they have denied it to others.
People can do what they like with their own private property. Thats Freedom of Speech. If I choose to destroy my own copy of a book, I'm not denying other people the chance to read it. They've got their own copies, or can obtain them.
Confiscating books from other people and burning them is theft and criminal damage. That is not Freedom of Speech.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/10 13:35:06
Yet book burning usually represents censorship in some form. It's all well and good saying that it is the freedoms of those burning it; but what about those that want to read them.
From what I hear, you could fire up several hundred thousand copies of Twillight or the Da Vinci Code and that wouldn't be a problem.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: People can do what they like with their own private property. Thats Freedom of Speech. If I choose to destroy my own copy of a book, I'm not denying other people the chance to read it. They've got their own copies, or can obtain them.
Yes you can, but that doesn't stop it being a representation of what a mass book burning represents.
From what I hear, you could fire up several hundred thousand copies of Twillight or the Da Vinci Code and that wouldn't be a problem.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Why would you want to burn two books of literacy genius the likes of which we have never seen before?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/10 15:15:27
"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
Compel wrote: Great... Now I've got the Thunderbirds theme in my head...
"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
I think this is a social rather than a strictly political topic, but it touches on law and order, so...
A weird "tributes" war seems to have broken out around the place in London where a burglar got fatally stabbed by the OAP he was trying to extort at weapon point.
He tried to rob an OAP and his family. He got what he deserved, death is a risk that comes with the job of stealing other people's stuff.
If someone wants to leave tribute flowers, that's on them, but personally I think he deserves no tribute, and certainly don't leave the flowers on someone's fence. Leave it on a lamppost, or some other piece of public property.
iGuy91 wrote: You love the T-Rex. Its both a hero and a Villain in the first two movies. It is the "king" of dinosaurs. Its the best. You love your T-rex.
Then comes along the frakking Spinosaurus who kills the T-rex, and the movie says "LOVE THIS NOW! HE IS BETTER" But...in your heart, you love the T-rex, who shouldn't have lost to no stupid Spinosaurus. So you hate the movie. And refuse to love the Spinosaurus because it is a hamfisted attempt at taking what you loved, making it TREX +++ and trying to sell you it.
Elbows wrote: You know what's better than a psychic phase? A psychic phase which asks customers to buy more miniatures...
the_scotsman wrote: Dae think the company behind such names as deathwatch death guard deathskullz death marks death korps deathleaper death jester might be bad at naming?
Whilst the friends and family of the deceased have the right to grieve for him like anyone, there is something quite perverse about leaving flowers and tributes to a deceased burglar across the street from the home of his victim, who killed him in self defense. That is not the appropriate place, leave them at the burglar's own home, not the home of his victim.
Its tantamount to intimidation.
The victim and his wife can't return home, because friends and family of the burglar have "taken over the street" and are seeking revenge. If he shows his face, he's dead. So the victim and his wife are now living in a safe house under Police protection.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/10 20:13:36
"He wasn't a murderer, he wasn't a rapist, they're putting him as a monster."
No, he wasn’t those things. But he did extort thousands from vulnerable OAPs and he attacked an old man in his house with a screwdriver in the middle of the night.
What the family are doing amounts to intimidation. The neighbours in the area don’t want these tributes being attached to their fences, the victims are in hiding because of the risk of reprisal by the burglar’s relatives. It’s shocking.
If that was my fence, I would take the tributes down and deliver them to the local Police Station for the owners to retrieve them; then put up a sign warning that any further tributes will be thrown in the trash.
On the other hand, that would put me at risk of violent retaliation, given that the burglar was from a known "crime family" and the Police fear that they're seeking revenge against the Victim.
Probably not the sort of people you want to cross.
Well, everybody knows where I stand on law and order in this country. If the do gooders hadn't ruined the nation, then we wouldn't be in this mess.
From what I've read, the victim and his family have been in and out of the system for years with fines here, six months there, despite the severity of their crimes.
If a judge had had the guts to give them 10-20 years, and none of this only serve half your sentence for good behaviour bollocks, then the victim would probably be alive, and the home owner would have been spared from this hell.
Add that to an utter buffoon of a Home Sec. who claims that police cuts have no impact, and you can see that Britain's streets are turning into a war zone with crime gangs roaming around with impunity, London being a prime example.
"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
I'm going to post some statistics that contradict Do_I_Not_Like_That, which is hardly surprising. Since this is DINLT I'm just going to assume that he'll neither read past the first few sentences nor think in any way about such numerical piffle. But for those who do consider the statistics I'd like to emphasise that these statistics are not drawn from police statistics. They are derived by surveying the public about their own experiences of crime. As such they capture crimes which are not reported to the police or are not recorded for one reason or another. Such figures are also very difficult to massage, an accusation often levelled at statistics derived from police records of crime.
But in two graphs here's how thoroughly "do-gooders" have ruined this nation:
Main points Our assessment of the main data sources is that levels of crime have continued to fall consistent with the general trend since the mid-1990s. However, these figures cover a broad range of offence types and not all offence types showed falls.
The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) shows that many of the high-volume crimes, such as lower harm violent crime, criminal damage and most types of theft, were either estimated to be at levels similar to the previous year or to have fallen. It also shows that crime is not a common experience for most people, with 8 in 10 adults surveyed by the CSEW not being a victim of any of the crimes asked about in the survey.
Other data sources including police data on the number of crimes recorded, show evidence of increases in some of the less frequently occurring, but higher-harm offences. These rises were relatively low in volume and were more than offset by falls seen across other higher-volume offence types shown by the CSEW.
[...]
Police recorded crime statistics must be interpreted with caution. The police can only record crimes that are brought to their attention and for many types of offence these data cannot provide a reliable measure of levels or trends. However, for some offences, police figures can be useful in informing our understanding of the general picture of crime. This is especially the case for those crimes that generally have high levels of reporting to the police and where audits of recording practices have not highlighted significant concerns about the reliability of the data.
Police recorded crime showed continuing rises in a number of higher-harm violent offences that are not well-measured by the CSEW as they occur in relatively low volumes. This was most evident in offences of knife crime and gun crime; categories that are thought to be relatively well-recorded by the police. The occurrence of these offences tends to be disproportionately concentrated in London and other metropolitan areas.
Police figures also suggest rises in vehicle-related theft and burglary. These are offence types that are less likely to be affected by changes in policing activity and recording practice and are therefore likely to reflect some genuine increases. While these rises have not previously been reflected in the CSEW there are some signs that these increases in vehicle-related thefts may be beginning to appear in the latest estimates.
England and Wales? No good if you're in the middle of the Scottish Highlands!
On a serious note, it's all about the perception. It's all very well sitting in your Ivory Tower and banging on about stats, bar graphs, and pie charts,
but up here, the thin blue line is nowhere to be seen.
Post Offices have been turned over, ATMs ripped from the walls of corner shops (by gangs coming up from the SE of England) and if farm equipment is not nailed down, it's getting lifted
Fear has gripped the countryside. We're in the middle of a rural crime wave and that's official.
What do I, a hard working tax payer of many years have for protection? A dedicated and efficient police force? A government serious about property and law and order?
No, a sturdy oak club and a loyal bull terrier is all I can draw on.
That's what being a tax payer gets you. Nothing!
The first duty of government is defence of the realm and upholding law and order. It's turned into a bad joke.
"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
monarda wrote: I'm going to post some statistics that contradict Do_I_Not_Like_That, which is hardly surprising. Since this is DINLT I'm just going to assume that he'll neither read past the first few sentences nor think in any way about such numerical piffle. But for those who do consider the statistics I'd like to emphasise that these statistics are not drawn from police statistics. They are derived by surveying the public about their own experiences of crime. As such they capture crimes which are not reported to the police or are not recorded for one reason or another. Such figures are also very difficult to massage, an accusation often levelled at statistics derived from police records of crime.
But in two graphs here's how thoroughly "do-gooders" have ruined this nation:
Main points Our assessment of the main data sources is that levels of crime have continued to fall consistent with the general trend since the mid-1990s. However, these figures cover a broad range of offence types and not all offence types showed falls.
The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) shows that many of the high-volume crimes, such as lower harm violent crime, criminal damage and most types of theft, were either estimated to be at levels similar to the previous year or to have fallen. It also shows that crime is not a common experience for most people, with 8 in 10 adults surveyed by the CSEW not being a victim of any of the crimes asked about in the survey.
Other data sources including police data on the number of crimes recorded, show evidence of increases in some of the less frequently occurring, but higher-harm offences. These rises were relatively low in volume and were more than offset by falls seen across other higher-volume offence types shown by the CSEW.
[...]
Police recorded crime statistics must be interpreted with caution. The police can only record crimes that are brought to their attention and for many types of offence these data cannot provide a reliable measure of levels or trends. However, for some offences, police figures can be useful in informing our understanding of the general picture of crime. This is especially the case for those crimes that generally have high levels of reporting to the police and where audits of recording practices have not highlighted significant concerns about the reliability of the data.
Police recorded crime showed continuing rises in a number of higher-harm violent offences that are not well-measured by the CSEW as they occur in relatively low volumes. This was most evident in offences of knife crime and gun crime; categories that are thought to be relatively well-recorded by the police. The occurrence of these offences tends to be disproportionately concentrated in London and other metropolitan areas.
Police figures also suggest rises in vehicle-related theft and burglary. These are offence types that are less likely to be affected by changes in policing activity and recording practice and are therefore likely to reflect some genuine increases. While these rises have not previously been reflected in the CSEW there are some signs that these increases in vehicle-related thefts may be beginning to appear in the latest estimates.
A very good friend of mine, he is an ex policeman, it wasn’t his job to “distort” the crime figures to make them fit with government policy, your statistics are totally unreliable and untrustworthy, even though I agreee with what you are saying, the police are bare faced lying when it comes to their rights own statistics.
