The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.
It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.
We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)
OGH - You didn't really have to place the infograph on, just a printed few responses on here to a few graphs and data showing the 2010 Lib Dem to Labour switchers.
Is anyone else amazed by the cheek of Southampton FC?
The referee is accosted by Lallana because he wouldn't award Saints a penalty. He should have been sent off immediately and banned. Instead the ref tells him he's changed since he's played for England (i.e. he's become too gobby).
Southamptom refuse to accept it. How peculiar is that? By comparison, people believing what they want to believe is quite normal
Is anyone else amazed by the cheek of Southampton FC?
The referee is accosted by Lallana because he wouldn't award Saints a penalty. He should have been sent off immediately and banned. Instead the ref tells him he's changed since he's played for England (i.e. he's become too gobby).
Southamptom refuse to accept it. How peculiar is that? By comparison, people believing what they want to believe is quite normal
The fact that Lallana had been mouthing off to the ref for most of the game has been ignored. I am amazed he wasn't booked for dissent much earlier in the game.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
She supported reunification as the expression of the German people's democratic will. She was nervous about the implications for Europe given the huge weight that a prosperous Germany would have in the continent. She perhaps under-estimated the cost and pain and time to get there, but equally a lot of the challenges at the moment arise from Germany's preponderance (and the disquiet that breeds in Southern Europe)
I think we should all remember that during the period 1990 to 2002 or so, Germany was the sick man of Europe.The costs of reunification were high, and the country was hide-bound by a highly inflexible labour market. How could, people asked, Germany compete with the dynamic economies of Ireland, Spain and Italy?
Germany was able to compete, it turned out, by freeing up its labour market, while on the periphery, governments in boom-time Spain, Portugal and others implemented laws to help protect workers. German labour markets become more efficient, peripheral ones became less.
And, of course, the monetary policy of the ECB - which was designed to help Germany exit its late 1990s slump - threw fuel on the fires of speculative excess in Ireland, Portugal and Spain, creating crazy building booms that only collapsed following the GFC and the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis,
I'm totally lost by what question is being asked. Perhaps instead of the vast overuse of fancy graphics they could say exactly what they asked. The inference of the top-left box is that the cream works less well than not using the cream but I suspect this isn't what was asked.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Research in other areas re attitudes/beliefs etc shows pretty much the same. Not only political views.
OT Hail and thunderstorms here in Brighton. I'm pretty near/exposed to the coast so I'm hoping my roof's still on when I get back - if I get back - from a night out later. First time ever a thunderclap has rattled my windows.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
"The image depicts the education secretary alongside union colleagues from Aberdeen’s Press and Journal, distributed across the northern counties of Scotland. He went on a strike for as long as four months after his employers de-recognised the National Union of Journalists.
Indeed, Gove was described by his former shop steward as quite the firebrand:
“He was an active striker, willingly taking his turn on picket duty and going on a small delegation to Strasbourg to press the union’s case”
Not because he went on strike but it showed his hypocrisy up very well.
"The image depicts the education secretary alongside union colleagues from Aberdeen’s Press and Journal, distributed across the northern counties of Scotland. He went on a strike for as long as four months after his employers de-recognised the National Union of Journalists.
Indeed, Gove was described by his former shop steward as quite the firebrand:
“He was an active striker, willingly taking his turn on picket duty and going on a small delegation to Strasbourg to press the union’s case”
Not because he went on strike but it showed his hypocrisy up very well.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
The perfect reply from Farage. How many new voters for UKIP will that mean, when people who are threatened by floods, read and realise what that berk, Owen Paterson is actually saying?
Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.
I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
He would obviously have to resign from UKIP, join Labour and run for the leadership first.
There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.
I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
Probably busy in the gym working off the Xmas pudding; fingers crossed, Luciana negotiated a discount on the membership fee.
There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.
I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
SMukesh - I Haven't a clue where Milibad is, however, Patersons shadow has already questioned him a few weeks back:
"Responding to remarks by Owen Paterson that energy companies “let customers down” by not having enough staff on duty to cope with Christmas power cuts, Maria Eagle MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said:
"As the country faces more severe weather, households that went a week without power and suffered devastating flooding expect to see some action from Ministers at long last, not attempts to pass the buck.
"Of course the energy companies must explain why it took so long to get power restored, but Owen Paterson has a nerve pointing the finger at staff being on holiday when he himself has not been seen for days.
"The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
As a piece of presentation the material in the header is pants.
As a proposition it is self evident.
Someone mentioned a study on an earlier thread that took this one stage further. There was apparently a study which suggested that those that work in an industry tended to be poorer investors in it than those that were not because they over exaggerated the importance of their knowledge and analysed the data in ways that met their preconceptions.
That struck me as a more interesting study for this site. Does having a very detailed knowledge of politics actually help or hinder people on here with their betting?
One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)
Owen Patterson said "I had a meeting this morning with the chief executive of the Environment Agency. He has assured me he has every intention of protecting front-line services concerned with flooding. His intention is to protect front-line services as he makes his efficiencies."
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
They do.
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
I may have 1p to spend on feeding a house containing fifteen adults for a week and intend to feed them. Doesn't mean I will actually do it.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Nigel has weighed in:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
Atleast Nigel is keen to take on the government.Perhaps he should be LOTO instead of the totally docile Ed Miliband who never criticises the government for anything.
The perfect reply from Farage. How many new voters for UKIP will that mean, when people who are threatened by floods, read and realise what that berk, Owen Paterson is actually saying?
MikeK, I think you are inadvertently proving OGH's point...
As a piece of presentation the material in the header is pants.
As a proposition it is self evident.
Someone mentioned a study on an earlier thread that took this one stage further. There was apparently a study which suggested that those that work in an industry tended to be poorer investors in it than those that were not because they over exaggerated the importance of their knowledge and analysed the data in ways that met their preconceptions.
That struck me as a more interesting study for this site. Does having a very detailed knowledge of politics actually help or hinder people on here with their betting?
One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)
I like Give a lot and think most of his teaching reforms are long overdue. But he really should think before he opens his mouth about subjects he is not familiar with. His comments on WW1 and blaming entertainment like Blackadder or Oh What a lovely War for our perception of the conflict is just plain daft. To add that they are some sort of left wing propaganda is even more ludicrous given that their perception of WW1 was probably itself formed by the writings of those well known lefties Alan Clark and Winston Churchill.
One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)
Very true. Each member of the current government must have been proclaimed 'next one out' on several separate occasions by now. It's odd that people go in for all that - honing in on the shortening odds, posting them gleefully on PB.com etc. - when resignations over or sackings for incompetence are almost non-existent these days.
The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.
It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.
We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)
Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.
Agree with the other comments on both content (interesting) and graphicvs (yeuch). The Nate Silver book that I keep plugging reinforces the study with evidence that people with strong opinions predict LESS accurately when given more information (presumably because they use the information to embellish their certainties).
No poll expected till tomorrow evening, fellow-addicts.
Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
The study came out (or was at least publicised) a few months ago.
It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.
We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)
Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.
Agree with the other comments on both content (interesting) and graphicvs (yeuch). The Nate Silver book that I keep plugging reinforces the study with evidence that people with strong opinions predict LESS accurately when given more information (presumably because they use the information to embellish their certainties).
No poll expected till tomorrow evening, fellow-addicts.
Oh bummer! These polling crossover goalposts are killing my back.
"The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
Before the election I thought the Conservatives were in favour of returning responsibility for flood defences to local government.
SMukesh - I Haven't a clue where Milibad is, however, Patersons shadow has already questioned him a few weeks back:
"Responding to remarks by Owen Paterson that energy companies “let customers down” by not having enough staff on duty to cope with Christmas power cuts, Maria Eagle MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said:
"As the country faces more severe weather, households that went a week without power and suffered devastating flooding expect to see some action from Ministers at long last, not attempts to pass the buck.
"Of course the energy companies must explain why it took so long to get power restored, but Owen Paterson has a nerve pointing the finger at staff being on holiday when he himself has not been seen for days.
"The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
Labour has to be careful with flood protection. They listened far too much to the RSPB lobby when it came to developing protection.
Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.
"The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
Before the election I thought the Conservatives were in favour of returning responsibility for flood defences to local government.
I think they have but then cut the money they gave to them. There is another band of heavy wind and rain arriving on Sunday apparently.
Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.
No idea but I would be much happier if he said we should stop building so many houses in areas which lack the resources - particularly water - to support them.
The actual answer is we can only cautiously reject the null hypothesis that there is no difference between use/non-use of the cream/gun-ban (p=4.7%)...
Milliband and Farage will just be able to wave their magic wands and stop the rain falling, the tides from rising and the winds blowing...all magic in their world..and the fools who believe them
Er no. If you read what he has actually said Farage has made clear the areas he disagrees with the Government and what should be done to try and reduce the impact of similar weather conditions in the future. All very good points, particularly with regard to building on flood plains. Nor is thus the first time he (and many others) have made similar points. Unfortunately the Government is simply not listening.
No doubt the next time we have a drought Farage will say we should have a national water pipeline network.
Not a bad idea! Actually part of UKIP long range plans.;)
Goodness me. A fine example of how a graphical representation can actually make something more difficult to understand. I read a paragraph about this study the other day and understood the point perfectly. But I couldn't make head or tail of this infographic.
Comments
And I hate it when I'm the last person to post on a particular thread.
It's certainly intriguing, and also probably all too real an effect. We all want our views reinforced to some extent, and are therefore liable to reject items that contradict our world view. It'd be interesting to know if this effect increases or decreases with intelligence.
We see this effect on PB every day, especially when Avery posts one of his yellow boxes ... ;-)
Oh, and the Infographic is pretty pants.
The referee is accosted by Lallana because he wouldn't award Saints a penalty. He should have been sent off immediately and banned. Instead the ref tells him he's changed since he's played for England (i.e. he's become too gobby).
Southamptom refuse to accept it. How peculiar is that? By comparison, people believing what they want to believe is quite normal
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Peacemakers-Months-That-Changed-World/dp/0719562376/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1388767895&sr=8-1&keywords=the+peacemakers+versailles
Don't worry. I posted twice after you.
Think of it as an act of charity ;-)
I'm sure everyone will be able to put a spin on it:
MoE, no change, Broken sleazy (Insert party here) on the slide...
Don't you just love PR disasters. Wonder who's bright idea it was to bury this today?
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/02/teachers-vote-labour-lead-41/
Paul Leinster the Environment Agency chief executive later said "Flood risk maintenance will be [further] impacted. All of our work on mapping and modelling and new developments in things like flood warning will also have to be resized. And we're looking at a proportionate reduction in the number of people in flood risk management."
One exactly doesn't back the other up does it.
She supported reunification as the expression of the German people's democratic will. She was nervous about the implications for Europe given the huge weight that a prosperous Germany would have in the continent. She perhaps under-estimated the cost and pain and time to get there, but equally a lot of the challenges at the moment arise from Germany's preponderance (and the disquiet that breeds in Southern Europe)
I think we should all remember that during the period 1990 to 2002 or so, Germany was the sick man of Europe.The costs of reunification were high, and the country was hide-bound by a highly inflexible labour market. How could, people asked, Germany compete with the dynamic economies of Ireland, Spain and Italy?
Germany was able to compete, it turned out, by freeing up its labour market, while on the periphery, governments in boom-time Spain, Portugal and others implemented laws to help protect workers. German labour markets become more efficient, peripheral ones became less.
And, of course, the monetary policy of the ECB - which was designed to help Germany exit its late 1990s slump - threw fuel on the fires of speculative excess in Ireland, Portugal and Spain, creating crazy building booms that only collapsed following the GFC and the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis,
Read the ministers words carefully: Note the word INTENTION (Of Leinster)
Moyes may well have the INTENTION to win the prem, but my bet on that is up shit creek with no paddle atm.
One fed the headline "Flood defences "will be protected".
The other fed ""Environment Agency cuts"will hit" flood defences".
Which news source was it ?
Not Reuters I'm thinking...
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said much more needed to be done to prevent flooding and protect homeowners - and called the government "appallingly inept".
He said: "There are three million homes at risk of flooding in the UK and yet the government is cutting flood defences, allowing thousands of new homes to be built on flood plains, and sitting back and watching the EU block an insurance scheme designed to protect those most vulnerable from losing everything."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25594526
"The Environment Agency will protect front-line flood defence services despite confirming hundreds of job cuts, the environment secretary says."
Bias BBC !!!!!!
Appealing to teachers shouldn't be a priority.
Lol.
Research in other areas re attitudes/beliefs etc shows pretty much the same. Not only political views.
OT Hail and thunderstorms here in Brighton. I'm pretty near/exposed to the coast so I'm hoping my roof's still on when I get back - if I get back - from a night out later. First time ever a thunderclap has rattled my windows.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9ryU0KE7CIY/TggvkwPreuI/AAAAAAAAF88/fV2M95W0rfo/s400/Gove+on+Strike.JPG
"The image depicts the education secretary alongside union colleagues from Aberdeen’s Press and Journal, distributed across the northern counties of Scotland. He went on a strike for as long as four months after his employers de-recognised the National Union of Journalists.
Indeed, Gove was described by his former shop steward as quite the firebrand:
“He was an active striker, willingly taking his turn on picket duty and going on a small delegation to Strasbourg to press the union’s case”
Not because he went on strike but it showed his hypocrisy up very well.
They can indeed – and I’m obviously afflicted with it as I can’t make head nor tail of the diagram.!
t-witter.com/MartWes/status/419162240479424512/photo/1/large
2 or 4 ?
Not as close as this though
http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/285x214/224406_1.jpg
I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
There is clear discrepancy between what the Environment secretary and the CEO of Environment Agency are saying.And with massive problems expected,should it not the LOTO leading the debate against cuts to flood protection.
I haven`t seen Ed Miliband on TV for the last month.Is he abroad?
SMukesh - I Haven't a clue where Milibad is, however, Patersons shadow has already questioned him a few weeks back:
"Responding to remarks by Owen Paterson that energy companies “let customers down” by not having enough staff on duty to cope with Christmas power cuts, Maria Eagle MP, Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, said:
"As the country faces more severe weather, households that went a week without power and suffered devastating flooding expect to see some action from Ministers at long last, not attempts to pass the buck.
"Of course the energy companies must explain why it took so long to get power restored, but Owen Paterson has a nerve pointing the finger at staff being on holiday when he himself has not been seen for days.
"The Environment Secretary has his own questions to answer about his failure to prioritise flood defence investment and deliver the vital flood reinsurance scheme on time, leaving homes without affordable insurance until 2015 and, even then, excluding many properties at risk."
As a proposition it is self evident.
Someone mentioned a study on an earlier thread that took this one stage further. There was apparently a study which suggested that those that work in an industry tended to be poorer investors in it than those that were not because they over exaggerated the importance of their knowledge and analysed the data in ways that met their preconceptions.
That struck me as a more interesting study for this site. Does having a very detailed knowledge of politics actually help or hinder people on here with their betting?
One obvious point is the gross over reaction to every little bump in the road for any politician. Owen Paterson might be the latest example of this but it is an almost daily occurance. If people gambled on next cabinet minister out on this basis they seem likely to lose money. IMO those gambling on success for UKIP might well be guilty of the same fault (but then I would say that wouldn't I?)
(It is relevant to the piece actually)
No poll expected till tomorrow evening, fellow-addicts.
So who won?
And LOL wrt Hilary Benn and Stangate Farm.
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/01/stephen-edwards-the-achilles-heel-of-goves-education-revolution.html#idc-cover
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/component/zoo/item/call-for-evidence-ofsted
More to the point, you could debate if "risk modelling" is a frontline service.
Fundamentally, though, when did it become ok for a senior government employee to intervene in the realm of elected representatives?