Discussion
Derek Smith said:
Well, there you go, you had a go at reading a post of mine. It wasn't so bad, was it.
I left the argument about Corbyn. The PH thread goes on and on and if you want to discuss it, that would be the proper thread. There is no definitive answer apart from there being no promise to wipe out the debt in the manifesto.
As for this post of yours, you either haven't grasped that you are not arguing about what I posted or else you are being deliberately obtuse. I was clear enough. Have another read and then come back to me on any criticisms of my post.
You were wrong, so I corrected you.I left the argument about Corbyn. The PH thread goes on and on and if you want to discuss it, that would be the proper thread. There is no definitive answer apart from there being no promise to wipe out the debt in the manifesto.
As for this post of yours, you either haven't grasped that you are not arguing about what I posted or else you are being deliberately obtuse. I was clear enough. Have another read and then come back to me on any criticisms of my post.
Derek Smith said:
Sticking to what I posted, the figures did not take into account the fact that the debt was sold on, and it would have been at a loss. But then, the figures were not published at the time and Private Eye couldn't get them. It may have been released since, but I've lost a bit of interest as I already know it was my money that they are wasting. If they didn't waste it all on that, they'd find some other pointless money pit. However, there is obviously no way that the debt was sold on at a profit.
You've done this sort of thing before and it means that it is pointless arguing with you. Read what I posted. Reply to what I posted.
One minute you are talking about the impact of the increase in fees bringing in no money, now you've suddenly moved the goalposts and want to discuss the ongoing sale of student debt.You've done this sort of thing before and it means that it is pointless arguing with you. Read what I posted. Reply to what I posted.
Regardless, once you actually read the IFS report about the impact of the change in fees (and look beyond the headlines at the assumptions used and the full detail), you'll see how wrong you were.
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
Well, there you go, you had a go at reading a post of mine. It wasn't so bad, was it.
I left the argument about Corbyn. The PH thread goes on and on and if you want to discuss it, that would be the proper thread. There is no definitive answer apart from there being no promise to wipe out the debt in the manifesto.
As for this post of yours, you either haven't grasped that you are not arguing about what I posted or else you are being deliberately obtuse. I was clear enough. Have another read and then come back to me on any criticisms of my post.
You were wrong, so I corrected you.I left the argument about Corbyn. The PH thread goes on and on and if you want to discuss it, that would be the proper thread. There is no definitive answer apart from there being no promise to wipe out the debt in the manifesto.
As for this post of yours, you either haven't grasped that you are not arguing about what I posted or else you are being deliberately obtuse. I was clear enough. Have another read and then come back to me on any criticisms of my post.
Derek Smith said:
Sticking to what I posted, the figures did not take into account the fact that the debt was sold on, and it would have been at a loss. But then, the figures were not published at the time and Private Eye couldn't get them. It may have been released since, but I've lost a bit of interest as I already know it was my money that they are wasting. If they didn't waste it all on that, they'd find some other pointless money pit. However, there is obviously no way that the debt was sold on at a profit.
You've done this sort of thing before and it means that it is pointless arguing with you. Read what I posted. Reply to what I posted.
One minute you are talking about the impact of the increase in fees bringing in no money, now you've suddenly moved the goalposts and want to discuss the ongoing sale of student debt.You've done this sort of thing before and it means that it is pointless arguing with you. Read what I posted. Reply to what I posted.
Regardless, once you actually read the IFS report about the impact of the change in fees (and look beyond the headlines at the assumptions used and the full detail), you'll see how wrong you were.
You keep mentioning the IFS report. It has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with my post. I'll repeat as it seems you missed it last time. It has nothing to do with my post. Reread it and you never know, the light might come on. It's easy enough to understand.
Derek Smith said:
It must be obvious to the meanest intelligence that the sale of debt, at a loss, is part of the overall cost of student debt. As I stated, I was unable to include that in my argument as it seems the cost of selling it on has not been published. At least I couldn't find it. But there's no point in looking as it obviously will be a cost
Not 'obviously' at all. But I wouldn't expect a police officer to understand the mathematics involved - what was that you said recently, people should stick to their own areas of expertise? Perhaps you should take your own advice!!And in any case, what does this have to do with the impact of the increase in tuition fees?
As a reminder:
Derek Smith said:
You keep mentioning the IFS report. It has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with my post. I'll repeat as it seems you missed it last time. It has nothing to do with my post. Reread it and you never know, the light might come on. It's easy enough to understand.
It appears you are going senile in your old age and have forgotten what you previously posted.As a reminder:
Derek Smith said:
Remember that the imposition of fees by Cameron brought in no money. Indeed, the suggestion is that in the long term it will cost.
Derek Smith said:
There have been a number of financial reports which supported that the increase in fees (from those imposed by labour) would bring in no money, due in part to the number of graduates who would not be able to repay in time. Again, it is all on the internet and available to anyone who is intelligent enough to use Google.
Derek Smith said:
It is fairly basic maths and some posters on here predicted that it would not make money.
Derek Smith said:
By indeed, I assume you are suggesting you are agreeing with me and that any savings are minuscule at best.
Reading (and understanding) the IFS report I linked to confirms that your claim was wrong (or at least that you don't understand the reports you read).Of course you conveniently refuse to post any links to these articles you've supposedly read so we've no idea why you got it wrong.
Of course you could just link to the articles concerned and then enter into a proposer discussion...!!!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 31st August 22:44
A few months ago:
"The attack on London Bridge shows there is “far too much tolerance” of Islamist extremism in Britain today, Theresa May has said. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lond...
Meanwhile next week we have this lovely chap below visiting - will the PM do anything about it? The Palestinians removed this man from his post due to his extremism and the French have banned him from entering France.
The Holocaust denying former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who has called for Britain to be destroyed, is set to visit Parliament next week. Sheikh Ekrima Sabri will be in Britain from 11 to 15 September, as guest of pro-Palestine group EuroPal to discuss the “recent escalation” in Israel with MPs. Sabri has a history of anti-Semitic and terrorist-supporting views, which led to his removal as Jerusalem’s Islamic leader by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in 2006.
"The attack on London Bridge shows there is “far too much tolerance” of Islamist extremism in Britain today, Theresa May has said. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lond...
Meanwhile next week we have this lovely chap below visiting - will the PM do anything about it? The Palestinians removed this man from his post due to his extremism and the French have banned him from entering France.
The Holocaust denying former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who has called for Britain to be destroyed, is set to visit Parliament next week. Sheikh Ekrima Sabri will be in Britain from 11 to 15 September, as guest of pro-Palestine group EuroPal to discuss the “recent escalation” in Israel with MPs. Sabri has a history of anti-Semitic and terrorist-supporting views, which led to his removal as Jerusalem’s Islamic leader by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in 2006.
Big cabinet meeting for May today. She’s got Boris talking to the press and generally backseat driving over Brexit. May telling everyone she’s driving the car (from the front) whilst being undermined by the election,
Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 21st September 09:47
El stovey said:
Big cabinet meeting for May today. She’s got Boris talking to the press and generally backseat driving over Brexit. May telling everyone she’s driving the car (from the front) whilst being undermined by the election,
Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
Seems to me the conflict is being talked up exclusively by people who want to see Brexit/the government fail. Nothing BoJo said in his article was particularly contrary to the government's stated position.Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
If they've got any sense, they'll remind everyone that as Johnson is the Foreign Secretary, he might be expected to have some opinions about foreign policy and might be expected to say them out loud once in a while. May should support him and just get on with it - she's not meant to be single handedly running the country, or the negotiations.
Everything Johnson said was within TM's Lancaster House speech. There's nothing new in what he said, don't know what the fuss is about other than the disgruntled stirrers who have contacts with the elite troublemakers. TM should get out the box with the axe in it - unopened and with the express intent obvious to those who think they are above cabinet collective responsibility. Give it pride of place, right in the middle of the cabinet table. If the self-righteous conscience objectors are brave enough, or stupid enough, to risk calling her bluff they deserve all they get. There is nothing more disgusting than falsely wrapping yourself in the flag to disguise treachery by claiming a higher motive and then plotting the downfall of a government. Then brazenly go on to bleat about that great impostor Democracy.
Edited by Thorodin on Thursday 21st September 19:20
El stovey said:
Big cabinet meeting for May today. She’s got Boris talking to the press and generally backseat driving over Brexit. May telling everyone she’s driving the car (from the front) whilst being undermined by the election,
Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
Good thing we had that referendum that was going to resolve Tory infighting over Europe once and for all.Conservatives again infighting over Europe and divided over Brexit.
Does she now need to get rid of Johnson or does she need to keep him onside?
Edited by El stovey on Thursday 21st September 09:47
don4l said:
I'm surprised that we don't already have a thread about this great woman.
Margaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Hero to Zero in a yearMargaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Weak leader whose party are a complete shambles. Jezza will be PM under her watch..
Jimboka said:
don4l said:
I'm surprised that we don't already have a thread about this great woman.
Margaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Hero to Zero in a yearMargaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Weak leader whose party are a complete shambles. Jezza will be PM under her watch..
His untimely death in a bizarre bed-wetting incident is as ironic as it is tragic.
eharding said:
Jimboka said:
don4l said:
I'm surprised that we don't already have a thread about this great woman.
Margaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Hero to Zero in a yearMargaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Weak leader whose party are a complete shambles. Jezza will be PM under her watch..
His untimely death in a bizarre bed-wetting incident is as ironic as it is tragic.
El stovey said:
eharding said:
Jimboka said:
don4l said:
I'm surprised that we don't already have a thread about this great woman.
Margaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Hero to Zero in a yearMargaret Thatcher took a couple of years to demonstrate her greatness. Theresa May only took a couple of hours.
Today, she is going to announce her intention to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act.
She has severly clipped the wings of the civil service.
Sir What'sHisName, the civil servant who used to chair many government commitees, is no longer even able to attend the meetings.
By God, this woman is impressive.
Weak leader whose party are a complete shambles. Jezza will be PM under her watch..
His untimely death in a bizarre bed-wetting incident is as ironic as it is tragic.
On the one hand, basic humanity requires sympathy for the wretch. On the other hand, simple hygiene practice implies you should kill it with fire.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff