Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

hays you are wrong the e111 is for only minor and I do travel a lot and they will not except the card the doctor wants cash or your insurance .
Poland as no free health for any non polish to go to Germany want insurance docs
Portugal the same Italy want cash and docs .

65% want out that is what the pols say and getting higher ever day
I know no one who wants to stay in

I may well vote OUT, but that may not be the majority view. You don't want a vote, you want to leave.

Even UKIP could not take us out out of the EU. They would require a vote in the commons, which would not succeed unless there had been a referendum. In a referendum, they might well lose the argument. It was only a couple of weeks ago that the majority wanted to stay in. Currently the majority wants out, but that is temporary and due to the recent EU bill. The public are notoriously fickle. In a few weeks it will be wanting to stay in again.

I don't want to name drop for my Dad , but when he was based at Lark Hill, Army camp in 1939 , he use to see Lawrence of Arabia eating in the canteen there, when Lawrence re-enlisted . Said he was slim with fair hair.

The Guru writes!

E111 does not exist anymore. It is EHIC now and it is not just for minors. My whole family has a card.

that is exactly what i thought too MrT, which makes one wonder why the french allow the existence of sangatte, as many of these people got there via italy and the like

This is 6 days ago. As you can see the in/out vote is up and down and NOT your 65% for out.

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/10/30/voters-shift-sharply-against-eu-membership/

The remarkable thing about our EU referendum tracker is how much it moves. Within the last year we've had a ten-point lead for staying in, and a ten-point lead for leaving.

A week ago 41 per cent said they would vote to stay in, and 40 per cent said they would leave. Exclusively for Red Box, YouGov asked the question just four days later, and those numbers have moved to 35 per cent and 44 per cent, a 9 per cent lead for "out".

Johnny Foreigner doesn't play by the rules , we should know that by now. Even the German's don't follow the rules now [ rules that must be obeyed ]

Haystack,

The wording of that survey in your chart above is too ambiguous imo, as it doesn't explain what question will be asked of the electorate in a referendum.

There was an article in The Economist around the time of the Scottish referendum which explained how the wording of a question can affect the outcome. If the Scots had been asked 'Do you think Scotland should leave the UK' (which is what Salmond wanted), it would have resulted in a higher yes vote than the actual question of 'Should Scotland leave the UK' (which is what Cameron told them they had to have). As an example, if a surgeon tells his patients there's a 95% survival rate from an operation, more people will have the op than if the surgeon tells them there's a 5% mortality rate.

Conducting a poll to ask folks how they would vote, without telling them what the exact question is, will produce an inaccurate outcome.

€U in out question: YES or NO

Choose one option:


YES .. I would like to remain in the €U

NO ... I would like the Gov to make the decision for me

True. However, it is still clear that sentiment is changing all the time and the public might well vote to stay in.

TANKER Cyners, when I said we should give help to immigrants get a home I was meaning within the system I had drawn up earlier on.

So essential workers under my system would get help, not que jump.

Eg , that bloke on the news last week who was a fruit farmer, said without immigrants he
couldnt run his business. OK some of these fruit farmers 'put them up' themselves in lodgings but a lot dont.

Cant think that we'd have many essential workers anyway.

Wonder if the chuckle brothers will be out tonight to create a mass spat again. Hope not.

I for one will be watching the football.

Labour lead at 2

by YouGov in Politics and Voting intention
Wed November 5, 2014 6 a.m. GMT

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 4th November - Con 32%, Lab 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 15%

This is how the ‘annual tax statement’ SHOULD have appeared........5/11/2014

We all owe a debt of thanks to Richard Murphy, over at Tax Research UK. He has broken down the information in George Osborne’s misleading ‘annual tax statement’ into its component parts and then put a new version together, under categories that more accurately describe the spending concerned.

Then he turned the information into a handy pie chart – similar to Osborne’s but with one major change:

This version is accurate.



Let’s just compare it with Osborne’s…



Big difference!

The most interesting to Vox Political is the perception gap between Mr Murphy’s calculation of the total proportion of tax spent on unemployment benefits – 0.67 per cent – and Osborne’s ‘Welfare’ heading, which constitutes 24 per cent of spending.

Talk to most people about ‘Welfare’ and they’ll think you mean unemployment benefits – so the Osborne chart will make them think that government spending on the unemployed is no less than 16 times as much as is in fact the case.

When a government minister exaggerates the facts by that much, he might as well come out and admit that he’s lying to the people.

Mr Murphy wrote: “This is the statement George Osborne would not want you to see because it makes clear that subsidies, allowances and reliefs extend right across the UK economy. And they do not, by any means, appear to go to those who necessarily need them most. The view he has presented on this issue has been partial, to say the least, and frankly deeply misleading at best.”

He wrote: “Add together the cost of subsidies to banks, the subsidy to pensions and the subsidy to savings (call them together the subsidy to the City of London) and they cost £103.4bn a year – more than the cost of education in the UK.

“It’s also no wonder house prices are so distorted when the implicit tax subsidy for home ownership is £12.6 billion a year.”

He also pointed out that unemployment benefits cost only half the amount used to subsidise personal savings and investments.

For full details of Mr Murphy’s calculations, visit his article on the Tax Research UK site.

Mr Murphy tweeted yesterday: “Almost every commentator now agrees that Osborne is going to spend a fortune sending out tax statements that are wrong. Why not cancel now?”

He won’t unless he’s forced to; he has a political agenda to follow.

That is why Vox Political launched a petition to achieve just that.

If you haven’t already, please visit the petition on the Change.org website, sign it, and share it with your friends.

While you’re at it, feel free to share the infographic, created to support the petition:

Anyone received theres yet? I havent anyway Im not going to open it Ill put it in a post box and write return to lying sender on it.

MaxK - 05 Nov 2014 17:42 - 49379 of 49385

€U in out question: YES or NO

Choose one option:


YES .. I would like to remain in the €U

NO ... I would like the Gov to make the decision for me

=============

but there is a 3rd and very important option ......

REFERENDUM ....having heard the arguments for and against, do you think the voters should make the decision as to whether we stay in or get out?


I know i'ld vote for a referendum every time, as i can then listen and make up my own mind and not have politicians do it either way

And not swayed by media interpretation!

Another end of the world story/scare up in smoke....



Ebola in Africa: This is how much of the continent is really affected





Ignorance and confusion have surrounded the crisis in West Africa


Antonia Molloy Author Biography

Tuesday 04 November 2014


Ebola is an on-going health crisis – but in many instances fears have escalated out of context.

In response, British chemist Anthony England has created a map of Africa for the “geographically challenged”, which clearly highlights the three West African countries severely affected by Ebola.

Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia are coloured in red, green and blue, while the rest of the continent remains blank with the slogan “No Ebola” stamped across it.

The map also defines exactly what is meant by “No Ebola”. That is “no current confirmed patients” and “no current confirmed infectious outbreak”. So, for example, while Mali reported a case it is still not included in the graphic because the two-year-old victim tragically died from the disease.

In short, only “problem countries” are shown.






More: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/ebola-in-africa-this-is-how-much-of-the-continent-is-really-affected-9838206.html