RIB with 19 on board intercepted at 2am off Kent coast
Discussion
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Digga said:
Wrong. That is precisely my point; the QoL reflects advances in technology and medcine, but makes zero allowance for more subtle, humanitarian issues relating to community, overcrowding and actual perceived quality of existence.
But those advances are partly attributable to increases in population. Digga said:
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Here you are Budgie... WHO data published in 2018...
life expectancy in CUBA:
Male 76.8, Female 81.3
QoL eh?
Years and years of the trade embargo, and yet their women live almost as long as UK's, and men not a far way behind.
You should go there if you haven't, nicest people in the whole wide world.
And nobody sits at f keyboards all day moaning. We could learn something.
I'm off there again next chance I get. Nice cars too.
dandarez said:
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Here you are Budgie... WHO data published in 2018...
life expectancy in CUBA:
Male 76.8, Female 81.3
QoL eh?
Years and years of the trade embargo, and yet their women live almost as long as UK's, and men not a far way behind.
You should go there if you haven't, nicest people in the whole wide world.
And nobody sits at f keyboards all day moaning. We could learn something.
I'm off there again next chance I get. Nice cars too.
What’s your point?
rambo19 said:
Bloody home secretary about 10 years to late asking why they are not claiming asylum in the 1st safe country they come to!
Surprised this isn't getting more coverage on here to be honest. His comments were well phrased and clear in their meaning.Labour / Graun etc are going into full on attack mode about his comments.
I take this as a clear indication they have no sensible rebuttal to make, so decide to "play the man not the ball".
Yvette Cooper thinks it's normalising anti refugee rhetoric.
Well, if you change the word refugee to migrant, and change the word rhetoric to common sense, then: yes, yes it is.
The Liberals say it's typical Tory nasty hostile environment stuff about people fleeing war in Syria. But completely skip over the bit that France - and all the intervening countries - are in fact safe.
Dianne Abbot has labelled the comments "a disgrace", but chose not to offer any explanation of why this might be the case. I don't think we're missing much.
And the refugee council have tried to conflate Javid's message that the Home Office will try to turn down asylum claims with the entire process being illegal. So again, complete deflection about whether France constitutes a "safe" country or not.
The Guardian did acknowledge the French asylum system is a shambles, a situation which they probably engineered (obviously they did, as it's run by French bureaucrats after all).
But not even this obvious fact was allowed to provide even a shred of cover of the critisism for Javid's.
I wonder if Javid's is subtully plotting a course to another destination nearby Whitehall?
Helicopter123 said:
OK, convince me that humans living in the UK enjoyed a better QoL than today. What are the factors that you are thinking about? Let's have some examples.
Easy.Any old person will tell you people were "glad to be alive" when they were young.
Any millennial (or whatever kids are called now) will go on about being stressed, anxious, lactose /nut / cotton wool intolerant, and how the Tories have ruined their country.
2019 - nil
1911 - one
Helicopter123 said:
OK, convince me that humans living in the UK enjoyed a better QoL than today. What are the factors that you are thinking about? Let's have some examples.
You could possibly look at the suicide rates throughout recent history you would have thought that if standard of living where increasing these would decrease. Its currently at 10.5 to 100000 people in the uk and yes that's the best it's ever been but it's not that simple. In 1982 it was at 14.7 to 100000 but coincidentally that's when the use of antidepressants started to become common and the use as continued to increased in use dramatically ever since.
Over 4 million people in the UK are now long term users, if you say (and yes this is a guess) if we stopped all antidepressants and also returned the level of mental health support to how it was in the early 80s. I think you could make a conservative estimate that if even just 1 in 500 of the people on antidepressants ended up committed suicide it would put it at around 25 in 100000. That's pre WW2 great depression levels when you had loads of guys just come back from WW1 many no doubt suffering from PTSD with very little if any support in terms of counselling and one of the worst economic environments ever seen.
If living standards and people are happier now than ever we wouldn't have millions smashed of the face on things like antidepressants.
Now it's another thing altogether to argue this against immigration but I do think it as a small part to play.
Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Thursday 3rd January 00:30
Helicopter123 said:
dandarez said:
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Here you are Budgie... WHO data published in 2018...
life expectancy in CUBA:
Male 76.8, Female 81.3
QoL eh?
Years and years of the trade embargo, and yet their women live almost as long as UK's, and men not a far way behind.
You should go there if you haven't, nicest people in the whole wide world.
And nobody sits at f keyboards all day moaning. We could learn something.
I'm off there again next chance I get. Nice cars too.
What’s your point?
Ian Geary said:
rambo19 said:
Bloody home secretary about 10 years to late asking why they are not claiming asylum in the 1st safe country they come to!
Surprised this isn't getting more coverage on here to be honest. His comments were well phrased and clear in their meaning.Labour / Graun etc are going into full on attack mode about his comments.
I take this as a clear indication they have no sensible rebuttal to make, so decide to "play the man not the ball".
Yvette Cooper thinks it's normalising anti refugee rhetoric.
Well, if you change the word refugee to migrant, and change the word rhetoric to common sense, then: yes, yes it is.
The Liberals say it's typical Tory nasty hostile environment stuff about people fleeing war in Syria. But completely skip over the bit that France - and all the intervening countries - are in fact safe.
Dianne Abbot has labelled the comments "a disgrace", but chose not to offer any explanation of why this might be the case. I don't think we're missing much.
And the refugee council have tried to conflate Javid's message that the Home Office will try to turn down asylum claims with the entire process being illegal. So again, complete deflection about whether France constitutes a "safe" country or not.
The Guardian did acknowledge the French asylum system is a shambles, a situation which they probably engineered (obviously they did, as it's run by French bureaucrats after all).
But not even this obvious fact was allowed to provide even a shred of cover of the critisism for Javid's.
I wonder if Javid's is subtully plotting a course to another destination nearby Whitehall?
To all that!Of course you know it jars the hand wringers that Javid is brown too. They'd love to call the HOme secretary racist. But they can't as only white people can be racist in their tragic s
t filled minds.I bet old f
kfaceboy Sadiq Khan is calling him an Uncle Tom as we speak! 
The w
ky media seem to have decided this whole mess is somehow Javids fault anyway. Quite how I have no idea. The sooner the newspapers go out of business the better!p.s He's probably a bit too new for PM. But maybe over the next year or so he'll grow into the potential role.
Helicopter123 said:
dandarez said:
Helicopter123 said:
Digga said:
The issue with measurement of QoL is that there are no means to correct for gradual, technological progress, as opposed to mere inflation on GPD, earnings and population. It is a very blunt statistic and can be very badly misconstrued.
According to the ONS, in 1911 average life expectancy for men was 51.5 years, and for women 55.4 years in the UK.Today it is 79 for men and 82.8 for women.
We are living much longer and are materially massively better off.
I think we can conclude that equates to improves QoL?
Here you are Budgie... WHO data published in 2018...
life expectancy in CUBA:
Male 76.8, Female 81.3
QoL eh?
Years and years of the trade embargo, and yet their women live almost as long as UK's, and men not a far way behind.
You should go there if you haven't, nicest people in the whole wide world.
And nobody sits at f keyboards all day moaning. We could learn something.
I'm off there again next chance I get. Nice cars too.
What’s your point?
Ian Geary said:
rambo19 said:
Bloody home secretary about 10 years to late asking why they are not claiming asylum in the 1st safe country they come to!
Surprised this isn't getting more coverage on here to be honest. His comments were well phrased and clear in their meaning.Labour / Graun etc are going into full on attack mode about his comments.
I take this as a clear indication they have no sensible rebuttal to make, so decide to "play the man not the ball".
Yvette Cooper thinks it's normalising anti refugee rhetoric.
Well, if you change the word refugee to migrant, and change the word rhetoric to common sense, then: yes, yes it is.
The Liberals say it's typical Tory nasty hostile environment stuff about people fleeing war in Syria. But completely skip over the bit that France - and all the intervening countries - are in fact safe.
Dianne Abbot has labelled the comments "a disgrace", but chose not to offer any explanation of why this might be the case. I don't think we're missing much.
And the refugee council have tried to conflate Javid's message that the Home Office will try to turn down asylum claims with the entire process being illegal. So again, complete deflection about whether France constitutes a "safe" country or not.
The Guardian did acknowledge the French asylum system is a shambles, a situation which they probably engineered (obviously they did, as it's run by French bureaucrats after all).
But not even this obvious fact was allowed to provide even a shred of cover of the critisism for Javid's.
I wonder if Javid's is subtully plotting a course to another destination nearby Whitehall?
Totally agree that everyone else was doing everything possible to deflect the issue so they don't have to actually answer his question. The lefty
lesbian type with the half shaved head on the news just now was banging on about how everyone has the right to "self determination" but made no effort to address why someone with a genuine fear of persecution would not ask for asylum as soon as they possibly could!
Unfortunately, I can't see this ending well. He will be worn down under relentless berating from the left and will end up offering a grovelling apology which he doesn't mean by the weekend. I hope I'm proved wrong and he simply tells everyone to f
k right off but I know I won't be. Lucas Ayde said:
I don't hold with the 'no platform' BS - it's been used to silence way too much debate. Let people say what they want to say and make your argument against it instead of trying to conflate genuine concerns about economic migrants/ false asylum seekers with racist xenophobia.
Free speech? That makes you a xenophobic racist too.BlackLabel said:
No chance that the Home Secretary will apologise for that- if anything he will double down much like he did with the Pakistani grooming gangs comment. He knows that, because of his background, he can get away with saying things other politicians can’t.
I genuinely hope you're right. He does seem to be quite a rational guy who could probably do a very good job of replacing May. A reporter on ITV made a comment along the lines of "the Home Secretary has only just got round to coming here to the scene of the migrant crusts at Dover" as though it was some kind of requirement. But, to do what, precisely? I mean wtf would he actually have been able to achieve by going there any why is there any necessity for some border patrol guys to point out the sea, the fact that France is "just over there" and that some foreign blokes are coming here from there without permission.
Rich_W said:
The wky media seem to have decided this whole mess is somehow Javids fault anyway. Quite how I have no idea. The sooner the newspapers go out of business the better!
Diversion ky media seem to have decided this whole mess is somehow Javids fault anyway. Quite how I have no idea. The sooner the newspapers go out of business the better!They are no doubt aware most of the general public are not overjoyed migrants can simply bypass immigration control and cross the channel, whether that be under their own steam or in a "rescue" ship. So it is all Javid's fault...….somehow.
As Matt Goodwin recently said as part of his predictions for 2019
"Here on Twitter, the signalling, outrage olympics and witch hunts will reach dizzying new heights"
"The far left will continue to display as much intolerance as the far right"
Finally one that's not a prediction but just a statement of what's been the case for a long time.
"Twitter will continue to lose its value as a platform for reasoned debate"
Back to SJ, he's not going to apologise, nor should he, though the numbers crossing the channel by small craft are a drop in the ocean compared to overall numbers. Incidentally considering the two Border Force vessels he's recalled from the Med are still tied up alongside. Bit of a U-turn from SJ, turning down offer of help from the Andrew and now accepting HMS Mersey inbound. Bet they don't have their AIS lit up.
"Here on Twitter, the signalling, outrage olympics and witch hunts will reach dizzying new heights"
"The far left will continue to display as much intolerance as the far right"
Finally one that's not a prediction but just a statement of what's been the case for a long time.
"Twitter will continue to lose its value as a platform for reasoned debate"
Back to SJ, he's not going to apologise, nor should he, though the numbers crossing the channel by small craft are a drop in the ocean compared to overall numbers. Incidentally considering the two Border Force vessels he's recalled from the Med are still tied up alongside. Bit of a U-turn from SJ, turning down offer of help from the Andrew and now accepting HMS Mersey inbound. Bet they don't have their AIS lit up.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff