Brexit: would you change your vote.
Discussion
skwdenyer said:
Unfortunately the "people" in "people power" seem not to have understood the limits of "expertise." All too often, we're dealing with probabilities, not certainties. An "expert" can tell you if a bridge will stand - but economics (say) is not engineering.
There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
The comment about 'experts' related to forecasters rather than bridge surveyors. I'm happy to believe a bridge surveyor but less enamoured with a 'clairvoyant'. There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
Robertj21a said:
skwdenyer said:
Unfortunately the "people" in "people power" seem not to have understood the limits of "expertise." All too often, we're dealing with probabilities, not certainties. An "expert" can tell you if a bridge will stand - but economics (say) is not engineering.
There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
The comment about 'experts' related to forecasters rather than bridge surveyors. I'm happy to believe a bridge surveyor but less enamoured with a 'clairvoyant'. There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
"THE Genoa bridge collapse was caused by a major flaw in the supporting piles meaning the structure could not support the weight of heavy traffic, engineer Saverio Ferrari claimed"
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1004080/Genoa...
skwdenyer said:
Robertj21a said:
I actually liken it to the lack of trust nowadays in all so-called 'experts' - all too often they've been wildly out on their thoughts, forecasts etc.
It's as if many people have come round to the idea that simple 'People Power' is just as effective, or better.
Unfortunately the "people" in "people power" seem not to have understood the limits of "expertise." All too often, we're dealing with probabilities, not certainties. An "expert" can tell you if a bridge will stand - but economics (say) is not engineering.It's as if many people have come round to the idea that simple 'People Power' is just as effective, or better.
There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
If your dentist had the same track record as these economic forecasters, you'd be left with half your teeth missing, and half of the remainder rotten to the core.
amusingduck said:
skwdenyer said:
Robertj21a said:
I actually liken it to the lack of trust nowadays in all so-called 'experts' - all too often they've been wildly out on their thoughts, forecasts etc.
It's as if many people have come round to the idea that simple 'People Power' is just as effective, or better.
Unfortunately the "people" in "people power" seem not to have understood the limits of "expertise." All too often, we're dealing with probabilities, not certainties. An "expert" can tell you if a bridge will stand - but economics (say) is not engineering.It's as if many people have come round to the idea that simple 'People Power' is just as effective, or better.
There's a desire for "experts" to give an opinion; when they do, when they are clear as to the limits of that opinion, they are nonetheless lambasted afterwards if their opinion doesn't match the observable outcome.
Just because expert opinion doesn't get it spot on in one given sample case, doesn't mean we should turn our back on learning and expertise.
Does it?
If your dentist had the same track record as these economic forecasters, you'd be left with half your teeth missing, and half of the remainder rotten to the core.
Then again maybe not.
To be fair BOE Rate ''forecasts'' aren't really forecasts, they are the central projection in a cone of ever widening possibilities, each one having a relatively low probability. If you read the actual inflation reports it's pretty clear, they even publish the cones and, certainly in Kings day he explained it many times to the TSC. Equally the ''market rates'' above are a sort of average view that almost no one shares.
ClaphamGT3 said:
Leicester Loyal said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
The irrational - almost visceral - opposition to a second referendum by Brexiteers is interesting.
Whilst, by and large, leave voters were less well educated and less intelligent than remain voters, I can't believe that they are so stupid that they believe the pro -Brexit nonsense that another vote by the electorate somehow betrays the wishes of the electorate.
That only leaves the conclusion that they aren't confident that, now, with better facts, they'd win.
Pathetic comment. Whilst, by and large, leave voters were less well educated and less intelligent than remain voters, I can't believe that they are so stupid that they believe the pro -Brexit nonsense that another vote by the electorate somehow betrays the wishes of the electorate.
That only leaves the conclusion that they aren't confident that, now, with better facts, they'd win.
So, given that we currently have an impasse on Brexit that may very well lead to no Brexit at all, why not solve the matter once and for all and have another referendum?
"Previous referendums in the UK
8 March 1973: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland sovereignty referendum on whether Northern Ireland should remain part of the United Kingdom or join the Republic of Ireland (yes to remaining part of the UK)
5 June 1975: UK – Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes)
1 March 1979: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendum on whether there should be a Scottish Assembly (40 per cent of the electorate had to vote yes in the referendum, although a small majority voted yes this was short of the 40 per cent threshold required to enact devolution)
1 March 1979: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a Welsh Assembly (no)
11 September 1997: Scotland – Scottish devolution referendums on whether there should be a Scottish Parliament and whether the Scottish Parliament should have tax varying powers (both referendums received a yes vote)
18 September 1997: Wales – Welsh devolution referendum on whether there should be a National Assembly for Wales (yes)
7 May 1998: London – Greater London Authority referendum on whether there should be a Mayor of London and Greater London Authority (yes)
22 May 1998: Northern Ireland – Northern Ireland Belfast Agreement referendum on the Good Friday Agreement (yes)
3 March 2011: Wales - Welsh devolution referendum on whether the National Assembly for Wales should gain the power to legislate on a wider range of matters (yes)
5 May 2011: UK – referendum on whether to change the voting system for electing MPs to the House of Commons from first past the post to the alternative vote (no, first past the post will continue to be used to elect MPs to the House of Commons)
18 September 2014: Scotland – referendum on whether Scotland should become an independent country (no, the electorate voted 55 per cent to 45 per cent in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK."
TX,
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff