Guest pelmetman Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 12:59 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:51 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-22 5:47 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-22 9:05 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 5:27 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-21 4:10 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 3:52 PM Tracker - 2018-09-21 12:10 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-21 11:55 AM I think it likely that the EU negotiators are happiest with no deal too Dave in the hope that it would make it more likely that parliament will vote to hold a second referendum. It has all the makings of a monumental cock up as a direct result of national disunity exacerbated by media paranoia and an opposition hell bent on not supporting the government and the democratic referendum vote. As I have said all along the only way to negotiate successfully, especially with an entity like the EU, is from a position of strength and national unity presenting a consistently strong and unified case. The 'national disunity' became apparent during the run up to the referendum which itself was a 'monumental cock up' and since the outcome result, has become even more crystal clear. How more divisive can you get with such a tiny miniscule percentage separating the two which not only split the country in half, but tore families apart? 17,410,742 .........If Corbyn got that many votes in an election, would you call it a "Tiny minuscule percentage"? ;-) ............... That's not the figure which separates the two though which was what i referred to in that post. It's 3.8% which is miniscule. So if Labour won by 3.8% would you still be calling it "Minuscule"? >:-) .......... Nah thought not *-) .............. What has Labour 'winning' got to do with the point being made here? Absolutely nothing at all. You cannot compare an election with the EU referendum as the two are completely different. The former can easily be changed every four years......the latter can not. You can continue using all kinds of excuses and deflections but it won't ever hide the fact the gap of just 3.8% is abysmal and indicative of a completely divided country. You need to start taking this matter a lot more seriously than some kind of game. The foolishness of Brexit has already cost the country more than it would have had we remained in the EU......and we haven't even left yet. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument ;-) ......... If Corbyn won by 00000.1% you'd be jumping up and down calling it a landslide *-) ........... That's where you are wrong because unlike you i wouldn't. I'd be very concerned and worried that a government had been elected on such a tiny weak majority You say that now ;-) ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-24 9:42 AM John52 - 2018-09-24 9:22 AM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:57 AM ....I apply common sense ;-) ............ .. If you don't fancy working for the Daily Mail you could use your l'common sense' to become a disability assessor (lol) They have just cut the benefits of a man with no legs and told him he is fit for work because he can climb stairs with his arms https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefits-man-julius-holgate-no-legs-cut-government-pip-climb-stairs-with-arms-dwp-a7606416.html So he couldn't work in telephone sales, or at the checkout in a Supermarket? :-| ........... This is just another example of a report in the papers relating to a scenario that seems too ridiculous for words to the uninformed reader including me. As that always sets an alarm bell ringing in my head I have researched Employment Support Allowance online and I find that it is not only available to those who are wholly unable to work. Simply put, there might be jobs this man can do but that does not mean he is not entitled to ESA whilst he tries to get one. Here's a link which explains eligibility for ESA. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/employment-and-support-allowance/before-you-apply-for-esa/eligiblility-for-esa/ The process by which someone's entitlement to ESA is determined appears to be flawed because it has been reduced to a tick box procedure performed by the odd numpty. What I draw from the news report is that the numpty assessments are subject to an expensive appeals procedure. I can't help thinking that it would be better spending the money upfront in order to ensure that the people conducting the assessments have the necessary intellect, qualifications and good judgement in order to get it right first time. I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. In the words of the great Neil Diamond "money talks". ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. .. but then that incentivises them to pay out all the claims and avoid any appeals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-24 1:17 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 12:59 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:51 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-22 5:47 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-22 9:05 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 5:27 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-21 4:10 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 3:52 PM Tracker - 2018-09-21 12:10 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-21 11:55 AM I think it likely that the EU negotiators are happiest with no deal too Dave in the hope that it would make it more likely that parliament will vote to hold a second referendum. It has all the makings of a monumental cock up as a direct result of national disunity exacerbated by media paranoia and an opposition hell bent on not supporting the government and the democratic referendum vote. As I have said all along the only way to negotiate successfully, especially with an entity like the EU, is from a position of strength and national unity presenting a consistently strong and unified case. The 'national disunity' became apparent during the run up to the referendum which itself was a 'monumental cock up' and since the outcome result, has become even more crystal clear. How more divisive can you get with such a tiny miniscule percentage separating the two which not only split the country in half, but tore families apart? 17,410,742 .........If Corbyn got that many votes in an election, would you call it a "Tiny minuscule percentage"? ;-) ............... That's not the figure which separates the two though which was what i referred to in that post. It's 3.8% which is miniscule. So if Labour won by 3.8% would you still be calling it "Minuscule"? >:-) .......... Nah thought not *-) .............. What has Labour 'winning' got to do with the point being made here? Absolutely nothing at all. You cannot compare an election with the EU referendum as the two are completely different. The former can easily be changed every four years......the latter can not. You can continue using all kinds of excuses and deflections but it won't ever hide the fact the gap of just 3.8% is abysmal and indicative of a completely divided country. You need to start taking this matter a lot more seriously than some kind of game. The foolishness of Brexit has already cost the country more than it would have had we remained in the EU......and we haven't even left yet. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument ;-) ......... If Corbyn won by 00000.1% you'd be jumping up and down calling it a landslide *-) ........... That's where you are wrong because unlike you i wouldn't. I'd be very concerned and worried that a government had been elected on such a tiny weak majority You say that now ;-) ............. Being desperate to try scoring a brownie point you used a hypothetical scenario that hasn't happened with Labour.....but it has with the Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour. You obviously are, just as you are with the miniscule percentage separating Leave and Remain. I can see why you are in fear of any possibility of Brexit being terminated because your 'win' (as you like to call it) was a very shallow victory achieved by a web of lies, deceit, and misinformation which many have seen through since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 9:42 AM John52 - 2018-09-24 9:22 AM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:57 AM ....I apply common sense ;-) ............ .. If you don't fancy working for the Daily Mail you could use your l'common sense' to become a disability assessor (lol) They have just cut the benefits of a man with no legs and told him he is fit for work because he can climb stairs with his arms https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefits-man-julius-holgate-no-legs-cut-government-pip-climb-stairs-with-arms-dwp-a7606416.html So he couldn't work in telephone sales, or at the checkout in a Supermarket? :-| ........... This is just another example of a report in the papers relating to a scenario that seems too ridiculous for words to the uninformed reader including me. As that always sets an alarm bell ringing in my head I have researched Employment Support Allowance online and I find that it is not only available to those who are wholly unable to work. Simply put, there might be jobs this man can do but that does not mean he is not entitled to ESA whilst he tries to get one. Here's a link which explains eligibility for ESA. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/employment-and-support-allowance/before-you-apply-for-esa/eligiblility-for-esa/ The process by which someone's entitlement to ESA is determined appears to be flawed because it has been reduced to a tick box procedure performed by the odd numpty. What I draw from the news report is that the numpty assessments are subject to an expensive appeals procedure. I can't help thinking that it would be better spending the money upfront in order to ensure that the people conducting the assessments have the necessary intellect, qualifications and good judgement in order to get it right first time. I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. In the words of the great Neil Diamond "money talks". ;-) Veronica......a few years ago a friend of mine was subjected to similar. Can't remember what benefit it was he was on but he got a letter stating it would be withdrawn from X date as they believed he was "fit for work". A couple of problems. He was partially disabled as the result of a stroke. Second 'problem' they had overlooked entirely. He'd been fully retired for five or six years at the time of this daft letter. He took it to his GP who rolled his eyes and said, "leave it with me, we get these all the time". Matter resolved. He was one of the many snared up in target driven lunacy where they just cast the net over everyone and hope to catch a few sprats in the process. He's dead now so isn't costing the country anything and the DWP can move on to the next poor sucker. "Care in the community"?? :-S Government are having a laugh. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:20 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 9:42 AM John52 - 2018-09-24 9:22 AM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:57 AM ....I apply common sense ;-) ............ .. If you don't fancy working for the Daily Mail you could use your l'common sense' to become a disability assessor (lol) They have just cut the benefits of a man with no legs and told him he is fit for work because he can climb stairs with his arms https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefits-man-julius-holgate-no-legs-cut-government-pip-climb-stairs-with-arms-dwp-a7606416.html So he couldn't work in telephone sales, or at the checkout in a Supermarket? :-| ........... This is just another example of a report in the papers relating to a scenario that seems too ridiculous for words to the uninformed reader including me. As that always sets an alarm bell ringing in my head I have researched Employment Support Allowance online and I find that it is not only available to those who are wholly unable to work. Simply put, there might be jobs this man can do but that does not mean he is not entitled to ESA whilst he tries to get one. Here's a link which explains eligibility for ESA. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/employment-and-support-allowance/before-you-apply-for-esa/eligiblility-for-esa/ The process by which someone's entitlement to ESA is determined appears to be flawed because it has been reduced to a tick box procedure performed by the odd numpty. What I draw from the news report is that the numpty assessments are subject to an expensive appeals procedure. I can't help thinking that it would be better spending the money upfront in order to ensure that the people conducting the assessments have the necessary intellect, qualifications and good judgement in order to get it right first time. I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. In the words of the great Neil Diamond "money talks". ;-) Veronica......a few years ago a friend of mine was subjected to similar. Can't remember what benefit it was he was on but he got a letter stating it would be withdrawn from X date as they believed he was "fit for work". A couple of problems. He was partially disabled as the result of a stroke. Second 'problem' they had overlooked entirely. He'd been fully retired for five or six years at the time of this daft letter. He took it to his GP who rolled his eyes and said, "leave it with me, we get these all the time". Matter resolved. He was one of the many snared up in target driven lunacy where they just cast the net over everyone and hope to catch a few sprats in the process. He's dead now so isn't costing the country anything and the DWP can move on to the next poor sucker. "Care in the community"?? :-S Government are having a laugh. :-( Why are you blaming the Tories? :-S ............ Was the benefit agency employee who issued the letter employed directly by the Tories? :-| ......... Perhaps it was sent out by a Left wing nut job who just wanted to make the Tory government look bad >:-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 1:17 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 12:59 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:51 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-22 5:47 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-22 9:05 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 5:27 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-21 4:10 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 3:52 PM Tracker - 2018-09-21 12:10 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-21 11:55 AM I think it likely that the EU negotiators are happiest with no deal too Dave in the hope that it would make it more likely that parliament will vote to hold a second referendum. It has all the makings of a monumental cock up as a direct result of national disunity exacerbated by media paranoia and an opposition hell bent on not supporting the government and the democratic referendum vote. As I have said all along the only way to negotiate successfully, especially with an entity like the EU, is from a position of strength and national unity presenting a consistently strong and unified case. The 'national disunity' became apparent during the run up to the referendum which itself was a 'monumental cock up' and since the outcome result, has become even more crystal clear. How more divisive can you get with such a tiny miniscule percentage separating the two which not only split the country in half, but tore families apart? 17,410,742 .........If Corbyn got that many votes in an election, would you call it a "Tiny minuscule percentage"? ;-) ............... That's not the figure which separates the two though which was what i referred to in that post. It's 3.8% which is miniscule. So if Labour won by 3.8% would you still be calling it "Minuscule"? >:-) .......... Nah thought not *-) .............. What has Labour 'winning' got to do with the point being made here? Absolutely nothing at all. You cannot compare an election with the EU referendum as the two are completely different. The former can easily be changed every four years......the latter can not. You can continue using all kinds of excuses and deflections but it won't ever hide the fact the gap of just 3.8% is abysmal and indicative of a completely divided country. You need to start taking this matter a lot more seriously than some kind of game. The foolishness of Brexit has already cost the country more than it would have had we remained in the EU......and we haven't even left yet. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument ;-) ......... If Corbyn won by 00000.1% you'd be jumping up and down calling it a landslide *-) ........... That's where you are wrong because unlike you i wouldn't. I'd be very concerned and worried that a government had been elected on such a tiny weak majority You say that now ;-) ............. Being desperate to try scoring a brownie point you used a hypothetical scenario that hasn't happened with Labour.....but it has with the Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour. You obviously are, just as you are with the miniscule percentage separating Leave and Remain. I can see why you are in fear of any possibility of Brexit being terminated because your 'win' (as you like to call it) was a very shallow victory achieved by a web of lies, deceit, and misinformation which many have seen through since. So Labour wouldn't do a deal if it got them into No 10? *-) ............ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40131538 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-24 7:48 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:20 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 9:42 AM John52 - 2018-09-24 9:22 AM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:57 AM ....I apply common sense ;-) ............ .. If you don't fancy working for the Daily Mail you could use your l'common sense' to become a disability assessor (lol) They have just cut the benefits of a man with no legs and told him he is fit for work because he can climb stairs with his arms https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/disability-benefits-man-julius-holgate-no-legs-cut-government-pip-climb-stairs-with-arms-dwp-a7606416.html So he couldn't work in telephone sales, or at the checkout in a Supermarket? :-| ........... This is just another example of a report in the papers relating to a scenario that seems too ridiculous for words to the uninformed reader including me. As that always sets an alarm bell ringing in my head I have researched Employment Support Allowance online and I find that it is not only available to those who are wholly unable to work. Simply put, there might be jobs this man can do but that does not mean he is not entitled to ESA whilst he tries to get one. Here's a link which explains eligibility for ESA. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/benefits/sick-or-disabled-people-and-carers/employment-and-support-allowance/before-you-apply-for-esa/eligiblility-for-esa/ The process by which someone's entitlement to ESA is determined appears to be flawed because it has been reduced to a tick box procedure performed by the odd numpty. What I draw from the news report is that the numpty assessments are subject to an expensive appeals procedure. I can't help thinking that it would be better spending the money upfront in order to ensure that the people conducting the assessments have the necessary intellect, qualifications and good judgement in order to get it right first time. I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. In the words of the great Neil Diamond "money talks". ;-) Veronica......a few years ago a friend of mine was subjected to similar. Can't remember what benefit it was he was on but he got a letter stating it would be withdrawn from X date as they believed he was "fit for work". A couple of problems. He was partially disabled as the result of a stroke. Second 'problem' they had overlooked entirely. He'd been fully retired for five or six years at the time of this daft letter. He took it to his GP who rolled his eyes and said, "leave it with me, we get these all the time". Matter resolved. He was one of the many snared up in target driven lunacy where they just cast the net over everyone and hope to catch a few sprats in the process. He's dead now so isn't costing the country anything and the DWP can move on to the next poor sucker. "Care in the community"?? :-S Government are having a laugh. :-( Why are you blaming the Tories? :-S ............ Because the government are responsible for the mess called the DWP headed by Esther McVey.....and the less said about her the better. Was the benefit agency employee who issued the letter employed directly by the Tories? :-| ......... It wasn't a benefit agency employee. It came from the DWP. Perhaps it was sent out by a Left wing nut job who just wanted to make the Tory government look bad >:-) ........ No it was sent out by a right wing nut job the extremists of a very nasty right wing government deem to be appropriate. One day i hope you might get a taste of it yourself, or close family member......and then you'd view matters very differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-24 7:51 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 1:17 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 12:59 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:51 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-22 5:47 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-22 9:05 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 5:27 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-21 4:10 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 3:52 PM Tracker - 2018-09-21 12:10 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-21 11:55 AM I think it likely that the EU negotiators are happiest with no deal too Dave in the hope that it would make it more likely that parliament will vote to hold a second referendum. It has all the makings of a monumental cock up as a direct result of national disunity exacerbated by media paranoia and an opposition hell bent on not supporting the government and the democratic referendum vote. As I have said all along the only way to negotiate successfully, especially with an entity like the EU, is from a position of strength and national unity presenting a consistently strong and unified case. The 'national disunity' became apparent during the run up to the referendum which itself was a 'monumental cock up' and since the outcome result, has become even more crystal clear. How more divisive can you get with such a tiny miniscule percentage separating the two which not only split the country in half, but tore families apart? 17,410,742 .........If Corbyn got that many votes in an election, would you call it a "Tiny minuscule percentage"? ;-) ............... That's not the figure which separates the two though which was what i referred to in that post. It's 3.8% which is miniscule. So if Labour won by 3.8% would you still be calling it "Minuscule"? >:-) .......... Nah thought not *-) .............. What has Labour 'winning' got to do with the point being made here? Absolutely nothing at all. You cannot compare an election with the EU referendum as the two are completely different. The former can easily be changed every four years......the latter can not. You can continue using all kinds of excuses and deflections but it won't ever hide the fact the gap of just 3.8% is abysmal and indicative of a completely divided country. You need to start taking this matter a lot more seriously than some kind of game. The foolishness of Brexit has already cost the country more than it would have had we remained in the EU......and we haven't even left yet. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument ;-) ......... If Corbyn won by 00000.1% you'd be jumping up and down calling it a landslide *-) ........... That's where you are wrong because unlike you i wouldn't. I'd be very concerned and worried that a government had been elected on such a tiny weak majority You say that now ;-) ............. Being desperate to try scoring a brownie point you used a hypothetical scenario that hasn't happened with Labour.....but it has with the Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour. You obviously are, just as you are with the miniscule percentage separating Leave and Remain. I can see why you are in fear of any possibility of Brexit being terminated because your 'win' (as you like to call it) was a very shallow victory achieved by a web of lies, deceit, and misinformation which many have seen through since. So Labour wouldn't do a deal if it got them into No 10? *-) ............ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40131538 You really should READ the links you post up before posting them because you just end up shooting yourself in the foot and making yourself look very silly. "Scottish Labour said Jeremy Corbyn had "absolutely 100% refuted any prospect" of any deal or pact with the SNP. Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said her party would not work with the SNP. She said: [Jeremy Corbyn] has absolutely 100% refuted any prospect of a deal, a coalition or a pact with the SNP for two fundamental reasons. "One, he doesn't believe that the SNP are a progressive party, so you can't have a progressive alliance for a party that, for example, refuses to tax the rich and ask them to pay their fair share. Also Jeremy Corbyn accepts there is nothing progressive about trying to break up the United Kingdom." Clear now?? Have you got that?? *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour.. Indeed. 26 months in to a 33 months journey to Brexit and we are still at base camp, with a very weak and deeply divided leadership. Its very serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted September 24, 2018 Share Posted September 24, 2018 John52 - 2018-09-24 5:37 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. .. but then that incentivises them to pay out all the claims and avoid any appeals? Yeah you're right - but it might cost less in the long run to have a percentage of unworthy claims going through than a large number of worthy ones being turned over on appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 John52 - 2018-09-24 10:14 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour.. Indeed. 26 months in to a 33 months journey to Brexit and we are still at base camp, with a very weak and deeply divided leadership. Its very serious. And they can't even survive at base camp without the 'oxygen' of another party propping 'em up, totally unprepared to deal with an avalanche. Not just a deeply divided leadership but country too with an extremely narrow margin which (imo) has narrowed even further since the duplicitous conniving of the referendum became common knowledge. I feel more confident than ever if a second vote was called, there would be an overwhelming swing to Remain and Brexit would be confined to the bin. That's what worries the Brexit fanatics. They've never had a strong established support base and it was built on extremely weak foundations which are crumbling and sinking. Brexit has been an example of how to dupe a countries citizens with lies, deceit, and misinformation which has cost more than we would have paid by remaining in the EU. Utter madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 7:51 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 1:17 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 12:59 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-24 8:51 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-22 5:47 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-22 9:05 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 5:27 PM pelmetman - 2018-09-21 4:10 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-21 3:52 PM Tracker - 2018-09-21 12:10 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-21 11:55 AM I think it likely that the EU negotiators are happiest with no deal too Dave in the hope that it would make it more likely that parliament will vote to hold a second referendum. It has all the makings of a monumental cock up as a direct result of national disunity exacerbated by media paranoia and an opposition hell bent on not supporting the government and the democratic referendum vote. As I have said all along the only way to negotiate successfully, especially with an entity like the EU, is from a position of strength and national unity presenting a consistently strong and unified case. The 'national disunity' became apparent during the run up to the referendum which itself was a 'monumental cock up' and since the outcome result, has become even more crystal clear. How more divisive can you get with such a tiny miniscule percentage separating the two which not only split the country in half, but tore families apart? 17,410,742 .........If Corbyn got that many votes in an election, would you call it a "Tiny minuscule percentage"? ;-) ............... That's not the figure which separates the two though which was what i referred to in that post. It's 3.8% which is miniscule. So if Labour won by 3.8% would you still be calling it "Minuscule"? >:-) .......... Nah thought not *-) .............. What has Labour 'winning' got to do with the point being made here? Absolutely nothing at all. You cannot compare an election with the EU referendum as the two are completely different. The former can easily be changed every four years......the latter can not. You can continue using all kinds of excuses and deflections but it won't ever hide the fact the gap of just 3.8% is abysmal and indicative of a completely divided country. You need to start taking this matter a lot more seriously than some kind of game. The foolishness of Brexit has already cost the country more than it would have had we remained in the EU......and we haven't even left yet. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument ;-) ......... If Corbyn won by 00000.1% you'd be jumping up and down calling it a landslide *-) ........... That's where you are wrong because unlike you i wouldn't. I'd be very concerned and worried that a government had been elected on such a tiny weak majority You say that now ;-) ............. Being desperate to try scoring a brownie point you used a hypothetical scenario that hasn't happened with Labour.....but it has with the Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour. You obviously are, just as you are with the miniscule percentage separating Leave and Remain. I can see why you are in fear of any possibility of Brexit being terminated because your 'win' (as you like to call it) was a very shallow victory achieved by a web of lies, deceit, and misinformation which many have seen through since. So Labour wouldn't do a deal if it got them into No 10? *-) ............ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40131538 You really should READ the links you post up before posting them because you just end up shooting yourself in the foot and making yourself look very silly. "Scottish Labour said Jeremy Corbyn had "absolutely 100% refuted any prospect" of any deal or pact with the SNP. Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said her party would not work with the SNP. She said: [Jeremy Corbyn] has absolutely 100% refuted any prospect of a deal, a coalition or a pact with the SNP for two fundamental reasons. "One, he doesn't believe that the SNP are a progressive party, so you can't have a progressive alliance for a party that, for example, refuses to tax the rich and ask them to pay their fair share. Also Jeremy Corbyn accepts there is nothing progressive about trying to break up the United Kingdom." Clear now?? Have you got that?? *-) .......and why did he say that? ;-) ............Coz he knew the thought of the Labour party needing to be beholden to the SNP would be a anathema to Labour voters South of the wall >:-) .......... One things for sure he'd of changed his tune if it mean't he got the keys to No 10 *-) ........and the SNP would of charged a dam sight more than a billion >:-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-25 12:26 AM an example of how to dupe a countries citizens with lies, deceit, and misinformation A perfect description of the Labour party conference >:-) ............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM It wasn't a benefit agency employee. It came from the DWP. DWP is the same as the benefit agency *-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM No it was sent out by a right wing nut job the extremists of a very nasty right wing government deem to be appropriate. One day i hope you might get a taste of it yourself, or close family member......and then you'd view matters very differently. Of course you have proof of that? ;-) ........... Currently you're only proving how nasty you left wing nut jobs are :D ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 John52 - 2018-09-24 10:14 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour.. Indeed. 26 months in to a 33 months journey to Brexit and we are still at base camp, with a very weak and deeply divided leadership. Its very serious. Seems to going great from where I'm sat B-) ........ Just another 185 days of Remoaner bitching and whinging to go >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 10:54 PM John52 - 2018-09-24 5:37 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. .. but then that incentivises them to pay out all the claims and avoid any appeals? Yeah you're right - but it might cost less in the long run to have a percentage of unworthy claims going through than a large number of worthy ones being turned over on appeal. Perhaps some are put off by the appeal process because only about 7% are taken to appeal. Of those 71% are successful. So the Disability charities say 71% of decisions overturned at appeal. Wheras the DWP say only 4% of decisions are changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W3526602 Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 <<< Wheras the DWP say only 4% of decisions are changed. >>> Hi, I make 71% of 7% to be 4.97% of the 100% we started with. But we all know I can't do sums. Er ... that 7% refers to all decisions, not the unknow percentage who felt agrieved but were detered from appealing. Perhaps we should have a "Don't Like" box? 602 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 John52 - 2018-09-25 9:22 AM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 10:54 PM John52 - 2018-09-24 5:37 PM Violet1956 - 2018-09-24 2:23 PM I would not be confident that a private company would see that as a priority unless there were financial penalties that took account of the number of successful appeals. .. but then that incentivises them to pay out all the claims and avoid any appeals? Yeah you're right - but it might cost less in the long run to have a percentage of unworthy claims going through than a large number of worthy ones being turned over on appeal. Perhaps some are put off by the appeal process because only about 7% are taken to appeal. Of those 71% are successful. So the Disability charities say 71% of decisions overturned at appeal. Wheras the DWP say only 4% of decisions are changed. 4% is pretty damn good mistake rate in my view B-) .......... So just another example of a Labour moral mole hill crusade...... that's nothing more than a loony lefty grump hump (lol) (lol) (lol) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-25 8:30 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM You really should READ the links you post up before posting them because you just end up shooting yourself in the foot and making yourself look very silly. "Scottish Labour said Jeremy Corbyn had "absolutely 100% refuted any prospect" of any deal or pact with the SNP. Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said her party would not work with the SNP. She said: [Jeremy Corbyn] has absolutely 100% refuted any prospect of a deal, a coalition or a pact with the SNP for two fundamental reasons. "One, he doesn't believe that the SNP are a progressive party, so you can't have a progressive alliance for a party that, for example, refuses to tax the rich and ask them to pay their fair share. Also Jeremy Corbyn accepts there is nothing progressive about trying to break up the United Kingdom." Clear now?? Have you got that?? *-) .......and why did he say that? ;-) ............Coz he knew the thought of the Labour party needing to be beholden to the SNP would be a anathema to Labour voters South of the wall >:-) .......... One things for sure he'd of changed his tune if it mean't he got the keys to No 10 *-) ........and the SNP would of charged a dam sight more than a billion >:-) .......... Quite squirming and trying to back track your way out because now you are contradicting yourself which not only looks desperate, but comes over as very silly. You previously implied that Corbyn would "do a deal" if it got him into No10. I showed (courtesy of the link you posted but never read *-)) where he wouldn't. So now you're trying another angle which contradicts what you initially said!! *-) Unlike the Tory party, Labour isn't a party which shells out billions of tax payers money to hop into bed with another in sheer desperation to cling to the keys of number 10 with an inept weak 'government'. It easy to see why and how Brexit quickly became a total shambles when they gave people like you a voting form! (lol)(lol)(lol)(lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-25 8:33 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-25 12:26 AM an example of how to dupe a countries citizens with lies, deceit, and misinformation A perfect description of the Labour party conference >:-) ............. Citation needed please. pelmetman - 2018-09-25 8:39 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM It wasn't a benefit agency employee. It came from the DWP. DWP is the same as the benefit agency *-) ........... An 'agency employee' suggests an agency worker answerable to the agency who set them on. The DWP is an official body employing full time staff and overseen by UK government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-25 8:43 AM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 9:23 PM No it was sent out by a right wing nut job the extremists of a very nasty right wing government deem to be appropriate. One day i hope you might get a taste of it yourself, or close family member......and then you'd view matters very differently. Of course you have proof of that? ;-) ........... No more than you have 'proof' of it being sent out by a 'left wing nut job who just wanted to make the Tories look bad'.........which given their history doesn't take much doing!! (lol)(lol) Currently you're only proving how nasty you left wing nut jobs are :D ........... Citation needed yet again. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-09-25 8:47 AM John52 - 2018-09-24 10:14 PM Bulletguy - 2018-09-24 7:06 PM Tory party who under Camerons term needed the LibDems, and now May bribing the DUP. It's a very fragile weak Government and i wouldn't be comfortable with that even if it was Labour.. Indeed. 26 months in to a 33 months journey to Brexit and we are still at base camp, with a very weak and deeply divided leadership. Its very serious. Seems to going great from where I'm sat B-) ........ Ever likely.....because you've never left this place. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-09-25 5:34 PM You previously implied that Corbyn would "do a deal" if it got him into No10. I showed (courtesy of the link you posted but never read *-)) where he wouldn't. So now you're trying another angle which contradicts what you initially said!! *-) I guess we'll have to wait until the next election and see if its another hung Parliament, and Corbyn get's enough to form a minority government with the SNP to see if he sticks to his word ;-) ........ Fancy a bet? >:-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.