[helene_t]

RMB1, on 2016-June-27, 09:43, said:

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let them understand the issues and decide policy.

Yes but that is not the way it works in the UK.

The two major parties each elect their candidate in each constituency. Then the people can make a choice between those two. Whoever gets more votes of the two is elected, even if the majority would prefer the other guy (since the second choice of those who voted for a 3rd party doesn't matter).

And then there's the house of lords ....

So the UK is probably the least democratic country in Europe. Given that, I think it would be best to have as much direct democracy as possible.

[Zelandakh]

helene_t, on 2016-June-27, 11:39, said:

Yes but that is not the way it works in the UK.

The two major parties each elect their candidate in each constituency. Then the people can make a choice between those two.

People living in Scotland will find the idea of having an apparent choice between Labour and Conservative rather strange. It has been some years since there was such a 2-way marginal there.

[shyams]

Zelandakh, on 2016-June-27, 12:03, said:

People living in Scotland will find the idea of having an apparent choice between Labour and Conservative rather strange. It has been some years since there was such a 2-way marginal there.

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.
That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

[shyams]

shyams, on 2016-June-26, 05:04, said:

Fingers crossed, today's coup in the Labour team will remove Jeremy Corbyn.

If he had openly said he believes in Brexit, I'd at least respect him for being honest. IMO, he instead resorted to underhand techniques to depress the share of Labour voters choosing "Remain". And for that one act alone, he deserves to be relegated to the footnotes of history.

Alan Johnson, a key Labour leader and the designated head of the Labour "Remain" campaign, has just gone on record saying team Jeremy Corbyn was "undermining Remain campaign and was sanguine re. Brexit".

Fire him! Now!!

[Zelandakh]

shyams, on 2016-June-27, 12:14, said:

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.
That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

As a long-time supporter of PR I did not feel the need to write about that part. Do you think I should have written an extra paragraph or two just for your benefit when it had nothing to do with the essence of my post?

[Vampyr]

shyams, on 2016-June-27, 12:14, said:

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.
That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

Wow, what a f cked-up way to defend someone!

[cherdano]

fromageGB, on 2016-June-27, 04:38, said:

I know nothing about this beyond the article I read, but I think calling someone who studies Shakespearean history a scientist may be stretching things too far. Obviously he was detained because he was here illegally, the notification presumably being ignored, or lost in the post.

This may be obvious to you, but it wasn't obvious to the Home Office.

Quote

(...) the Home Office finally issued a statement on the case on Wednesday afternoon, at about the same time he was released.

It said: “The Immigration Act 2014 clearly states that a person who does not have leave to remain in the UK is liable for removal. Enforcement action may be taken to remove these individuals.”

The Home Office also issued guidance that although a person must be notified of their liability to be removed from the UK, “this can be on the same date as an enforcement visit”.

http://www.independe...r-a6837986.html

Does that change your position in any way?

[fromageGB]

cherdano, on 2016-June-27, 17:09, said:

Does that change your position in any way?

Which one? I am happy to confirm that I believe the UK should grant temporary visas for study and other purposes, and I believe that on expiry of the visa or its renewals, the holder should leave the country, and - should he not do so voluntarily - be removed. The "decision to remove him was taken on 9 December last year", and I doubt that the home office failed to notify him of that fact. I also very much doubt that the "decision to remove" was not made after the expiry had failed to be followed up by voluntary relocation. I also very much doubt that a scholar who spends his life reading the writings of others failed to read the termination date on his visa.

So yes, I support his removal. And the home office processes.

[cherdano]

fromageGB, on 2016-June-28, 13:05, said:

Which one? I am happy to confirm that I believe the UK should grant temporary visas for study and other purposes, and I believe that on expiry of the visa or its renewals, the holder should leave the country, and - should he not do so voluntarily - be removed. The "decision to remove him was taken on 9 December last year", and I doubt that the home office failed to notify him of that fact. I also very much doubt that the "decision to remove" was not made after the expiry had failed to be followed up by voluntary relocation. I also very much doubt that a scholar who spends his life reading the writings of others failed to read the termination date on his visa.

So yes, I support his removal. And the home office processes.

This is just a great example of how biased you are - you aren't even able to get the fact straight.
The rules in this case say that the Scholar is allowed to stay in the country after his VISA is expired, as long as the decision on his request for leave to remain is pending.

- The scholar claims he was never notified that his request for leave was denied before he was arrested (and he has the right to stay in the UK as long as the decision on his request is pending).
- The Home Office specifically clarified that they think it is ok to detain someone ON THE SAME DAY when they learn they have to leave the country (which in this case means the day he learns that his request has been denied).
- Yet fromageGB assumes that the scholar has been informed of the denial of his request much earlier, and failed to follow his duty to leave the country. That would require the scholar to have lied. And fromageGB automatically assumes that the Home Office would never do what it said it could do.


Such a strong bias in understanding the FACTS of this case easiest to explain by a strong pre-existing bias against foreigners. That's usually called xenophobia.

You have a right to your opinions. But you can't pretend that the policies you would like to see won't lead to human suffering.

[cloa513]

Trinidad, on 2016-June-27, 09:11, said:

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

Rik

The people with degrees get bribes (they call them grants and a chance with it highlypaid non-merit based jobs but we know what they really are) from the EU to say how wonder the EU is as it does its anti-democratic destructive policies. I read someone write that local laws override EU directives- if so every country would override EU directive (e.g. one simple law- all companies can ignore EU directives) and it would be meaningless- if you override EU directive then your country will fined and forced to repell such laws. Local laws are compelled to be inline with EU directives.

[fromageGB]

cherdano, on 2016-June-28, 16:33, said:

And fromageGB automatically assumes that the Home Office would never do what it said it could do.

This is wrong. I do assume, and indeed expect that, the home office detains people prior to repatriation if they suspect they are trying to avoid it.

[NickRW]

RMB1, on 2016-June-27, 09:43, said:

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let them understand the issues and decide policy.

Er. No. Certainly not to the extent that they start giving away the powers we elected them to wield to other bodies that we never agreed to and didn't elect.

[helene_t]

cloa513, on 2016-June-28, 19:52, said:

The people with degrees get bribes

QFT

[NickRW]

Trinidad, on 2016-June-27, 09:11, said:

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

Rik

The fact that the more educated a person is the more likely they are to have voted remain, does not prove or really even suggest that those who voted to leave were unable to understand matters.

Indeed such a view is arguably as badly prejudiced as, for example, the idiots who have recently been responsible for a rise in racial or ethnic prejudice. You're merely basing your prejudice on possession of a piece of paper instead of skin colour or accent of voice.

[Cyberyeti]

I hate the way the remain campaign characterise the Brexiteers as ill-educated racists. I don't know many people who voted out in person, but they would be characterised as well educated, politically aware and working in finance.

example: from one non-UK EU country, wife from another, masters in economics, worked in investment banking all over the world

Not revealing how I voted, but I thought it was a relatively close decision and made my mind up in the last couple of days.

I'd be interested in some of the other statistician forumites' take on the diagram of propensity to vote remain against education level, since the older you are, the less likely you are to have a degree, and the older you are the more likely you are to vote leave, isn't the pattern to be expected ?

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-June-29, 08:47, said:

I'd be interested in some of the other statistician forumites' take on the diagram of propensity to vote remain against education level, since the older you are, the less likely you are to have a degree, and the older you are the more likely you are to vote leave, isn't the pattern to be expected ?

Yes, when we have two correlated variables (in this case education and age) which both correlates with an outcome (in this case voting behaviour) it is generally not easy to say which of the two is causal. They might both be correlated with some unknown variable which is the one that really drives voting behaviour. And voting behavious isn't driven by a single factor, obviously.

Even if we are sure that level of education per se is correlated with voting behaviour, there are many interpretations possible. University life brings you into a particular culture, you get different interests.

[y66]

[1eyedjack]

Quite a few of the older folk who I understand (or so they tell me, if you can believe them) voted to leave, tell me that a significant factor in their decision was that for the last 40 years they have been smarting at the lies promulgated by Ted Heath in 1975 who, and I believe that this is a matter of historical record, was well aware at the time of plans for political union but who sold the referendum at that time to the public on the economic union (the "common market") while concealing and suppressing the political aspect.

[NickRW]

1eyedjack, on 2016-June-29, 09:46, said:

Quite a few of the older folk who I understand (or so they tell me, if you can believe them) voted to leave, tell me that a significant factor in their decision was that for the last 40 years they have been smarting at the lies promulgated by Ted Heath in 1975 who, and I believe that this is a matter of historical record, was well aware at the time of plans for political union but who sold the referendum at that time to the public on the economic union (the "common market") while concealing and suppressing the political aspect.

That was indeed the case. Indeed it is one of the reasons why I have been itching to correct that wrong my entire adult life.

[cherdano]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-June-29, 08:47, said:

I hate the way the remain campaign characterise the Brexiteers as ill-educated racists.

You are blaming the wrong side. I certainly have the impression that some of the Brexit voters were motivated by racism. But that has nothing to do with anything the Remain campaign said. It has to do with the fact that Nigel Farage was one of the most prominent campaigners for the Leave campaign; I haven't heard many complaints from his fellow Leave campaigners when his disgusting Breaking Point campaign poster came out, which obviously played to racist sentiments. It has to do with the fact that fromageGB uses blatantly racist language ("parasites") and makes other xenophobic posts here, yet noone among those here favouring Leave seem to care.

Look, I know that there are more than 17 millions who voted "Leave", and that their reasons are complicated. My first post on facebook on the topic on Friday was to complain about one-sentence-explanations for the Brexit vote. But if you want to complain about the impression that racism and xenophobia played a big role in the vote, then that complaint should be targeted to the right address.