News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Clegg

Started by The Minsky Moment, April 20, 2010, 11:48:20 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Palisadoes

Quote from: Alatriste on April 27, 2010, 07:17:26 AMSix amnesties? Source, please.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/parties_and_issues/8629354.stm

Start from the "Will it work?" bit. The paragraph to the bottom left of the graph in that section.

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on April 28, 2010, 10:04:05 PMCouldn't Labour come in third with like 25%, but still end up with the most seats?

Yes, which is why we need electoral reform.

grumbler

Quote from: Palisadoes on April 29, 2010, 06:46:16 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on April 27, 2010, 07:17:26 AMSix amnesties? Source, please.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/parties_and_issues/8629354.stm

Start from the "Will it work?" bit. The paragraph to the bottom left of the graph in that section.
An interesting story (and Oxford study), given that so much in it appears to be wrong-headed or just plain wrong. 

For the US, for instance, it argues that "the large-scale amnesty implemented in 1986 has not reduced, and has in fact increased, undocumented migration to the US" when actual evidence for this assertion is completely missing.  The Oxford study it cites reaches no such conclusion.

Another example of the famous "BBC professionalism?"
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Palisadoes

The article references that by 2000 it had risen to such a level (which, as mentioned earlier in this thread, was due to the economy picking up in a large way). It does also give a graph indicating pre- and post- amnesty which shows it decreased. But yes, the written stuff regarding the US amnesty is crap.

Regarding the Spanish ones it is correct. Here are the actual numbers:

Year:        Number of immigrants:
1985/86 - 44,000
1991      - 135,000
1996      - 21,000
2000      - 127,000
2001      - 314,000
2005      - 700,000

Also, here are the Italian figures:

Year:        Number of immigrants:
1987/88 - 119,000
1990      - 235,000
1996      - 259,000
1998      - 308,000
2002      - 700,000

alfred russel

Quote from: Tyr on April 29, 2010, 06:20:25 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 27, 2010, 07:17:51 AM
Intrade odds on winning the election: Conservatives 82%, Labor 15%, Lib Dems 5%. (these are based on last traded amounts so they don't add to 100%)



This is who will win it if anyone wins it right?
As I'd have thought a hung parliament would be 70% or something.

I think that rules at intrade are that if it is a coalition government, it is the coalition party with the most seats, and if it is a minority government, it is the party forming the government.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

Savonarola

Quote from: Alatriste on April 27, 2010, 07:17:26 AM
Six amnesties? Source, please.

And, by the way, correlation doesn't prove causation... Many years ago one of my teachers showed us a very pretty graphic to make us understand this. Number of natives in Mexico, number of cows, and time from the Conquest 1521-1600.

Guess what? Apparently, cows eat natives.

They taste like corn.   :)
In Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace—and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock

Viking

#110


Going against convention David Cameron preferred to appeal to the almighty rather than try to wow the public with a riverdance style dance number like his opponents did
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Josquius

For anyone who doubts the awesome of Clegg:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZRIquiqAYw
██████
██████
██████

Brazen


Josquius

██████
██████
██████

Palisadoes

The Liberal Democrats need to hate some more.

Neil

Foxes?  The LibDems are animal rights scum?
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Ed Anger

What if I hate everybody but Jeremy Clarkson?
Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive

Ed Anger

Quote from: jamesww on May 02, 2010, 10:44:30 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 02, 2010, 10:41:42 AM
What if I hate everybody but Jeremy Clarkson?

Hello Jeremy.

I only like cars that cost over 100,000 pounds and am slightly mad.
Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive

Viking

Quote from: Ed Anger on May 02, 2010, 10:41:42 AM
What if I hate everybody but Jeremy Clarkson?

You can't follow a flowchart then can you.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

grumbler

Quote from: Ed Anger on May 02, 2010, 10:41:42 AM
What if I hate everybody but Jeremy Clarkson?
Then you hate the French, and so go to http://www.ukip.org/ (which you might like: it has the word "barking" right on the home page  :P).
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!