MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Questions Of The Day (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 98, 99, 100 ... 299, 300, 301  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:

It's taken the world a thousand years to sort out how nation states get formed and how they get to interact one with another. This new experiment is going to take a lot longer than fifty years to sort out. Including whether it can be sorted out.


And having joined the experiment, it will take a lot longer than a few years to actually now get out, even if they now think it's not going to work.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

And having joined the experiment, it will take a lot longer than a few years to actually now get out, even if they now think it's not going to work.

This was the situation envisaged (pre-referendum) by the civil service, the very people responsible for the paperwork needed to join all those years ago. A decade or two, they said.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Yes, this is all true and why, if you want a quiet (and prosperous) life, it was correct to join and it was correct to stay. But, hey, we're Applied Epistemologists. We want more than that! Wasn't that why we all voted for Trump?
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

this Sensibles vs Crazies war.

A sensible solution would be to establish a cross-party committee. That shouldn't be contentious since cross-party groups have already worked together and this is but another area of 'national interest'.

It doesn't seem particularly sensible for one party to make national decisions, especially when that party is unlikely to stay in government very long.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Are you aged 8 – 18?
Do you sound Scottish?


If you can answer "yes" to both questions, the Scottish Government wants to hear from you.

The Scottish Government is appealing to children as young as eight to share their views on Brexit. Critics branded the Twitter plea for youngsters to “work with” the government on a Europe panel “creepy”. But the SNP administration defended the move as giving those who will be most affected by leaving the EU a “voice in the Brexit negotiations”.


Why on earth would you want to encourage Scottish children to speak?

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: “Brexit is the single biggest threat to our economy and future prosperity, and children and young people will be most affected in the coming years. “We are therefore supporting Children in Scotland to establish the children and young people’s panel on Europe and enable them to have a voice in the Brexit negotiations.”


It's clearly important that the Scottish Government listens to eight-year old children and what they think of Brexit.

You might wonder what happens if these eight-year-olds haven't seen any Brexit coverage on BBC Cbeebies (because there wasn't any), or they didn't pay any attention to their parents arguing about it. But don't worry, the Scottish Government has thought of that:

You don’t need to know much about Brexit to apply. We will share information with you to help you to take part.


Err, that's the Scottish Government's officially-approved and completely-impartial information on Brexit and its implications for Scottish children. What could possibly go wrong?

If you are not aged 8-18, and are still confused by Brexit, ask the children? To paraphrase the words of Harpo's brother Groucho:

Why an eight-year-old child could understand this Brexit White Paper. Run out and find me an eight-year-old child. I can't make head or tail out of it.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Do we have any AEL contributors interested in drugs and sex?

If so, perhaps they can explain this to me.


July 1st 2018: Jeremy Corbyn backs calls to decriminalise possession of cannabis. Jeremy Corbyn said he would like to see the possession of cannabis to be decriminalised as he backed calls for the drug to be used for medicinal purposes.

July 10th 2018: Corbyn backs Nordic Model to tackle sexual exploitation. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn declared his full support for Britain to look at changing our prostitution laws by criminalising the purchase of sex, also referred to as the ‘Nordic model’.


Why only legalise one and not both? Presumably both can be legalised, licensed, taxed as a source of revenue, etc?

It's confusing me. Not just because I've never been the recipient of drugs or sex offered for sale. Just for the sake of removing any possible ambiguity in that last sentence, I've never been the recipient of illegal drugs or sex offered for free either. And I've never had sex with a Nordic model either. Alright, it's a fair cop, I may have been the recipient of legal drugs and sex offered for free.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Legalising these things is now the orthodoxy. The AE position would therefore probably be to approve of them, possibly encourage them. The Scandi position is the clue. To criminalise men paying for sex would destroy prostitution, or as we might say, destroy women's freedom to exploit one of the few advantages they have over men. It is typical of the left to elevate a distaste into a principle.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
or as we might say, destroy women's freedom to exploit one of the few advantages they have over men..


I did wonder about the "exploitation" angle. Which is something else I've never quite understood either., as the two producers of porn films I've met were both female. They explained: males are so willing to part with cash, they are literally fucking stupid. So who is exploiting who?

I suppose I better explain this was at a Yoga/Personal Development centre. I wasn't auditioning for a role in one of their films.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I can't see through the haze either.

I do like the idea of a legal, regulated market for cannabis, which will cut crime and boost the treasury's coffers, giving more money to NHS.

Yeah Right.

I am also in favor of these pretty young women all giving up sex working and returning to their country of origin and becoming nurses, doctors and becoming part of a local movement to adopt democratic values.

Yeah Right.

Legalisation will mean two sectors. One legal. One not. The advantage of this is that Rich people won't get arrested because they can affod to pay more. Mysteriously, poorer people will end up in the illegal sector, but we will feel a lot better about enforcement.... as these poor folks had the chance to do it all legally, but chose not to do so.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I do like the idea of a legal, regulated market for cannabis, which will cut crime and boost the treasury's coffers, giving more money to NHS.

Oddly, cannabis is the most dangerous of the recreational drugs. Heavy prolonged use is a sure recipe for permanent brain damage and it is insidious, unlike hard drugs which at least tell you what you're in for. Legalisation will not only increase take-up but the more dangerous stuff -- skunk et al -- will presumably drive out the less dangerous on ordinary Gresham principles.

I am also in favor of these pretty young women all giving up sex working and returning to their country of origin and becoming nurses, doctors and becoming part of a local movement to adopt democratic values.

This is an insoluble problem. The rewards of prostitution are so great that there is an infinite supply of women who are prepared to undertake the appalling risks of getting from where they are to where we are in order to do it. We might rail against 'the traffickers in human misery' but since all parties are consenting adults there's nothing practical that can be done about it. It would be like trying to prevent Bulgarian philosophy professors from delivering my Ocado groceries.

Legalisation will mean two sectors. One legal. One not.

This is not usually the case since legal is so much more efficient, and therefore so much cheaper, than illegal. Admittedly there will always be a market for that which is considered too awful to be legal but that is generally a marginal matter for society as a whole.

The advantage of this is that Rich people won't get arrested because they can afford to pay more. Mysteriously, poorer people will end up in the illegal sector, but we will feel a lot better about enforcement.... as these poor folks had the chance to do it all legally, but chose not to do so.

You'll have to explain this.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Live Well for Longer (Channel 4) this week featured Modafinil. This is a 'smart drug' originally developed to treat narcolepsy and though technically illegal in this country is easily obtainable on the internet and without any serious official disapproval. The first part of the piece established that it was excellent and worked a treat, the second half was a mad scramble by the talking heads to explain why you shouldn't on any account use it. Including the immortal sentence, "Do we really want to live in a country where everyone is smart at the drop of a hat?'
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Wiley reckons the deal is done on Brexit. Chequers it is.
Send private message
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

and sex offered for free


Sex is never offered for free
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Surely it is a lot of the time because of mutual self gratification which I understand -- I'm no expert -- is often the basis of the operation.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Grant wrote:
Sex is never offered for free


Here I've been trying to give it away.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 98, 99, 100 ... 299, 300, 301  Next

Jump to:  
Page 99 of 301

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group