The Post General Election Thread

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Let me say this as clearly as I can:

You have absolutely no ability to determine the accuracy of that figure.

Literally, unless you work for the ONS and are the one guy in charge of the statistical analysis that results in that figure who also has the ability to check data collection practices.

None. Not even a bit.

Your knowledge on this specific figure, unless you happen to be that one guy who I'm almost certain given your past posts that you're not, is imaginary and subjective.

You picked the wrong fight here, I can only imagine that you got a bit drunk and a little over-confident of how your immaculate knowledge of this area somehow gives you the ability to judge the accuracy of figures which they don't. I don't care if you're the Director of the Fraud Squad; unless you actually know how that specific statistic was derived, how the data was collated and know about the reliability or the mistakes made in the weighting systems and the like then your ability to determine accuracy is a figment of your imagination.

And even then there's an argument about it.

And the "meet me irl m8" stuff was sad as fuck which you should hopefully be suitably embarrassed by

Not embarrassed at all. I very rarely embarrass. I was prepared to put my money where my mouth was; which you discernibly were not.

It is frankly quite comical for you to suggest that unless I am responsible for collating the data myself that I am not entitled to hold a view on the statistics or comment upon them, however well informed that view is. This is particularly surprising given the firm views you hold on a number of subjects without, presumably, you being in a similar position. Opinion polls leading up to the general election spring to mind.

Fuck me, what sort of country would we live in where people weren't entitled, based on their own experiences, to question government statistics, as I have? Not one you'd be comfortable living in, I'd hazard.

I question the figure, because based on my experience of human nature and my frequent encounters with the system it is a figure which I am simply struggling to accept, not least because all parties involved in its collation have a vested interest in it being as low, not least claimants.

I would suggest that to blindly accept such a figure, without question, as you seem to be doing, is more than a little naive and a greater source for embarrassment than any bet I may have laid.

You questioned my authority to speak on a subject by asking what personal knowledge I had, expecting, no doubt, for me to have none. I have reflected on my experience of this subject and I stand by what I said last night. The figure is wholly wrong.

Furthermore your suggestion that I am not entitled to hold a view and comment on these figures is just as wrong.

I hate it when mum and dad fight :-(

this.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not embarrassed at all. I very rarely embarrass. I was prepared to put my money where my mouth was; which you discernibly were not.

It is frankly quite comical for you to suggest that unless I am responsible for collating the data myself that I am not entitled to hold a view on the statistics or comment upon them, however well informed that view is. This is particularly surprising given the firm views you hold on a number of subjects without, presumably, you being in a similar position. Opinion polls leading up to the general election spring to mind.

Fuck me, what sort of country would we live in where people weren't entitled, based on their own experiences, to question government statistics, as I have? Not one you'd be comfortable living in, I'd hazard.

I question the figure, because based on my experience of human nature and my frequent encounters with the system it is a figure which I am simply struggling to accept, not least because all parties involved in its collation have a vested interest in it being as low, not least claimants.

I would suggest that to blindly accept such a figure, without question, as you seem to be doing, is more than a little naive and a greater source for embarrassment than any bet I may have laid.

You questioned my authority to speak on a subject by asking what personal knowledge I had, expecting, no doubt, for me to have none. I have reflected on my experience of this subject and I stand by what I said last night. The figure is wholly wrong.

Furthermore your suggestion that I am not entitled to hold a view and comment on these figures is just as wrong.

I hate it when mum and dad fight :-(

this.

Sorry kids, your dad is very sorry. I can't speak for your mother, though.

 

[Rascal]

I can't grasp the concept of the state paying you for having children, the more you have the more you get paid. Ludicrous

There really is no hope for you then.

Just stay stupified

 

[Bill]

I can't grasp the concept of the state paying you for having children, the more you have the more you get paid. Ludicrous

There really is no hope for you then.

Just stay stupified

he's right though. ok cadge for the first two kids but after that you get fuck all. watch the chavs stop making babies instantly.

 

[Rascal]

I can't grasp the concept of the state paying you for having children, the more you have the more you get paid. Ludicrous

There really is no hope for you then.

Just stay stupified

he's right though. ok cadge for the first two kids but after that you get fuck all. watch the chavs stop making babies instantly.

Stop posting, more graft. I need a holiday remember.

waster

 

[liamctid]

Guess we'll see the majority of you in here the next time we play Chelsea away:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.maggies-club.com/about-maggies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.maggies-club.com/about-maggies/</a>

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I hate it when mum and dad fight :-(

this.

Sorry kids, your dad is very sorry. I can't speak for your mother, though.

*Chortle*

 

[Rascal]

Guess we'll see the majority of you in here the next time we play Chelsea away:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.maggies-club.com/about-maggies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.maggies-club.com/about-maggies/</a>

No doubt all powerwanking themselves stupid.

How are you Liam, not seen you for a while?

 

[M18CTID]

You decided to escalate this debate by questioning the basis for me forming my views. Anyone who has properly arrived at a conclusion (as I have) which is then subject to any such challenge would respond in the way I have.

You asked a question; I responded to it robustly. Rather than being beneath me, it is very typical of me. I never pick a fight unless I'm sure I can win. Choose your battles.

I respect you declining my offer of a bet and I'll leave it there. Whenever we meet up I'll buy you a beer and explain why what you asked was so open to ridicule :-)

Let me say this as clearly as I can:

You have absolutely no ability to determine the accuracy of that figure.

Literally, unless you work for the ONS and are the one guy in charge of the statistical analysis that results in that figure who also has the ability to check data collection practices.

None. Not even a bit.

Your knowledge on this specific figure, unless you happen to be that one guy who I'm almost certain given your past posts that you're not, is imaginary and subjective.

You picked the wrong fight here, I can only imagine that you got a bit drunk and a little over-confident of how your immaculate knowledge of this area somehow gives you the ability to judge the accuracy of figures which they don't. I don't care if you're the Director of the Fraud Squad; unless you actually know how that specific statistic was derived, how the data was collated and know about the reliability or the mistakes made in the weighting systems and the like then your ability to determine accuracy is a figment of your imagination.

And even then there's an argument about it.

And the "meet me irl m8" stuff was sad as fuck which you should hopefully be suitably embarrassed by

Not embarrassed at all. I very rarely embarrass. I was prepared to put my money where my mouth was; which you discernibly were not.

It is frankly quite comical for you to suggest that unless I am responsible for collating the data myself that I am not entitled to hold a view on the statistics or comment upon them, however well informed that view is. This is particularly surprising given the firm views you hold on a number of subjects without, presumably, you being in a similar position. Opinion polls leading up to the general election spring to mind.

Fuck me, what sort of country would we live in where people weren't entitled, based on their own experiences, to question government statistics, as I have? Not one you'd be comfortable living in, I'd hazard.

I question the figure, because based on my experience of human nature and my frequent encounters with the system it is a figure which I am simply struggling to accept, not least because all parties involved in its collation have a vested interest in it being as low, not least claimants.

I would suggest that to blindly accept such a figure, without question, as you seem to be doing, is more than a little naive and a greater source for embarrassment than any bet I may have laid.

You questioned my authority to speak on a subject by asking what personal knowledge I had, expecting, no doubt, for me to have none. I have reflected on my experience of this subject and I stand by what I said last night. The figure is wholly wrong.

Furthermore your suggestion that I am not entitled to hold a view and comment on these figures is just as wrong.

1-0 to GDM ;)

 

[Rascal]

I question the figure, because based on my experience of human nature and my frequent encounters with the system it is a figure which I am simply struggling to accept, not least because all parties involved in its collation have a vested interest in it being as low, not least claimants.
.

Why would the DWP issue such a figure when it is plainly against the very vested interests of IDS and his desire to slash disability welfare.

You may struggle to accept it, but IDS accepted it and he is the boss of the whole shebang. Granted the man is a fucking imbecile but he still accepted it.

So whilst you may question the official figure, the Boss responsible for the figure and who collated the information blithly accepts it. But you know better??

Come on mate dont be so naive.