- Popular Post
.jpg.ff3e4234cb78708eb2581c2fc1e46cd9.jpg)
7by7
-
Posts
24291 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by 7by7
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
14 minutes ago, nauseus said:I was highlighting the difference between the posted claim and the headline linked to it. Just the usual distortion but I never get used to it. Wish I could.
Had you said "Not what the headline in your link says" you'd have a valid point.
But you said
On 3/15/2021 at 8:11 AM, nauseus said:Not what your link says.
Headlines do not contain everything which is in the body of the article!
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
36 minutes ago, Sujo said:<snip> even farage said if it was close it would be unfinished business.
Only when he thought he'd lost!
On the morning of 24th June that 'unfinished business' suddenly became 'a magnificent victory!'
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, RayC said:<snip> It is undemocratic for the wishes of +/-2.5 million voters - rough, generous estimate of the likely number of SNP/ Scottish Green supporters - to be prioritized over those of the 47.6 million registered voters in the UK as a whole
Would you say the same if the people of Northern Ireland, where the electorate is approximately a third that of Scotland, voted to leave the UK and reunite with the Republic by a similar majority?
-
3
-
2 hours ago, RayC said:3 hours ago, 7by7 said:Expand
I would agree, but the 7 years is a minimum period, not maximum.
Brexit was, of course, a significant event and means the UK Scotland voted to remain a part of in 2014 no longer exists.
Had Scottish voters been told that would happen, I wonder if the result would have been the same.
Sorry. I don't understand the point which you are making?
When the last Scottish independence referendum was held in 2014 the UK Scotland voted to remain part of was a member of the EU.
In 2016 the UK voted narrowly to leave the EU. But Scotland voted by 62% to 38% to remain in the EU. The largest margin in any of the home nations.
We officially left the EU at midnight on 31/1/20.
So the UK which was an EU member, the UK Scotland voted to remain part of in 2014, ceased to exist at that time.
So I wonder what the result of the 2014 referendum would have been had Scottish voters known then what would happen just two years later.
Got it now?
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, vogie said:<snip> The 2014 Referendum was a Scottish only vote and when I say Scottish only I mean selected Scots, the Scots living other than Scotland never had a chance to decide on the future of Scotland
So how would you have determined who living outside of Scotland could and could not have voted?
2 hours ago, vogie said:<snip> however the SNP decided to also include 16 and 17 year olds for the first time, well 16 and 17 year olds might be good on playing Ghosts and Goblins but to decide the future of the country most people would say it was a big ask
Similar arguments have been presented every time the franchise has been extended, from the first Reform Act in 1832 onwards.
BTW, in the UK 16 and 17 year olds are legally able to marry and are old enough to fight and die for this country. But you consider them too immature to vote!
-
4
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
2 hours ago, RayC said:<snip> On the wider issue of how often a referendum should be held, you - and others - have continually stated that this is a matter solely for Scotland - presumably Holyrood? - to decide. Notwithstanding the fact that referendums are disruptive and affect the other party - reason in itself why Westminster must be actively involved in the process including the timing
You do realise that same argument applies to the UK's EU referendum in 2016.
But I don't recall the EU being involved at all; let alone we needing their permission!
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, RayC said:Thanks for the clarification. Imo seven years seems too short a period in the absence of any other significant event e.g. Brexit.
I would agree, but the 7 years is a minimum period, not maximum.
Brexit was, of course, a significant event and means the UK Scotland voted to remain a part of in 2014 no longer exists.
Had Scottish voters been told that would happen, I wonder if the result would have been the same.
-
3
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
6 hours ago, vogie said:We have to carry papers at all time here in Thailand, did you not know and are you drifting away from the topic again?
Even Thai citizens have to carry their ID card at all times in Thailand.
The provisions in this Bill will only apply to a minority, not everyone.
-
2
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
9 hours ago, JonnyF said:Your countrymen voted 55% Remain in 2014
Because of Brexit, the UK Scotland voted to remain a part of in 2014 no longer exists.
9 hours ago, JonnyF said:and currently don't want another referendum.
If that poll is an accurate expression of the opinion of the majority of Scotland's population, then you have nothing to fear from IndyRef 2.
So let's have it and get the issue done and dusted.
However, as I said to @vogie on Sunday: as I always say, the only poll which counts is the one at the ballot box.
If the parties supporting independence win a majority in the forthcoming election, will you finally agree that the Scottish people deserve another chance to decide whether or not to remain a part of the UK?
Vogie has so far declined to answer; will you do so?
-
3
-
22 hours ago, KhaoYai said:On 3/15/2021 at 10:35 AM, 7by7 said:
Then why are you still blaming the EU?
I think that's obvious.
Yes, it's very obvious.
23 hours ago, KhaoYai said:Official medical sources, notably the EMA say there is no reason to stop administration of the AZ vaccine
The EMA is an advisory organisation. As the UK proved when we approved the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine whist still subject to all EU rules and regulations, EU members do not have to follow it's advice.
Both the EMA and the WHO are still recommending the use of the AstraZeneca vaccine. However, in light of the report from Norway's Medicines Agency I linked to previously and subsequent ones from elsewhere, both organisations are investigating these reports. EMA, WHO investigate reported clots with AstraZeneca vaccine
23 hours ago, KhaoYai said:politicians from EU countries, EU politicians, whatever semantics you wish to use,
Semantics have nothing to do with it. If a country, e.g. Norway and Iceland, are not members of the EU then their politicians are not EU politicians!
23 hours ago, KhaoYai said:are the ones taking the decisions to halt the AZ vaccine. If that's not politicians going against medical advice, I'll eat my hat.
As previously shown, but yet again ignored by you, politicians from various countries, some EU members, others not, are acting on the medical advice of their own health or other appropriate departments; such as Norway's Medicines Agency.
Nothing in the rest of your post changes any of that!
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
21 hours ago, nauseus said:I could read the headline for free which reads UK exports to EU slump as Brexit hits trade, not UK international trade is dropping off a cliff!
So you commented on the article's contents even though you hadn't read it!
International means between different nations. Even before Brexit our trade with the EU was international trade!
As the FT headline says, our exports to the EU, which in 2019 accounted for 43% of all our exports (Source; HoC library), has slumped.
"Exports of goods, excluding non-monetary gold and other precious metals, fell by £5.3 billion (19.3%) in January 2021, because of a £5.6 billion (40.7%) fall in exports to the EU." (Source; ONS)
Maybe our international trade is not dropping off a cliff; but it's certainly teetering on the edge!
-
2
-
1
-
15 hours ago, bangon04 said:
let the EU ban the AZ - more doses to speed up the UK vaccination programme... in return the UK can let them keep their PB vaccine in their -70 degree freezers.
The EU have not said that the AstraZeneca vaccine is unsafe; nor have they given any indication of banning it.
Though both the EMA and WHO are investigating the blood clot claims; which as responsible organisations they should. AstraZeneca vaccine: Safety experts to review jab
What individual nations, EU members or not, decide is, of course, entirely up to them.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, polpott said:
At no time did I mention the EU. As you say, not every country in Europe is in the EU, the UK is a prime example.
Fair enough.
I was confused by you saying
On 3/15/2021 at 12:08 AM, polpott said:Europe is peed with AZ due to them not being promoted to the front of the queue, and started unwarranted claims about the vaccine. What did AZ do? Put Europe to the back of the queue again. Som nam na.
So, if not the EU, which countries were you referring to?
If you meant the country where these claims began, Norway, why not say Norway?
-
18 hours ago, kingdong said:
<snip> however did see the excesses of trade unionism despite copping out of it,however since thatcher smashed the the unions the working mans rights have been destroyed
Thatcher's emasculating of the unions had nothing to do with the EU nor our membership of it!
If anything, EU membership has improved workers rights through such measures as the Health and safety at Work directives, the Working Time Directive and the Agency Workers’ Directive. Like all EU members, the UK was able to improve upon these directives in our own legislation, and in some areas did. Although the EU regulation passed in April 2019 banning, amongst other aspects of the gig economy, zero hours contracts* wont become part of UK law.
In December the UK government did promise to introduce some measure of protection for gig economy workers, though it didn't go as far as the EU's. What has happened to that promise since Boris took over, I don't know.
How many other worker's rights derived from EU directives will this government remove, I wonder.
*Addendum.
Not that they were widely used within the EU anyway.
Zero hours contracts: is the UK "the odd one out"? 26 JULY 2016
"Not all have an explicit ban, but it’s correct that most EU countries outlaw these contracts, heavily restrict them, or don’t see them widely used. The UK is one of around half a dozen European countries where zero hours contracts are both legal and fairly common."
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, kingdong said:
Considering the damage done to the uk due to its membership to the eu the benefits will not occur overnight,he who laughs last laughs longest.
Here are 98 Reasons To Stay In The EU: Benefits Of Membership For The UK.
Can you counter that with a list of the damage you claim was done to the UK while we were a member?
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Loiner said:
I could also tell you to go look yourself, but you wouldn’t. I know what’s there and I’m happy with it. Why should I look for something to keep you happy?
You are the one who is constantly saying that there are tangible benefits to Brexit; yet you are always incapable of naming just one!
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Loiner said:
I’ve got all I need - the Brexit I voted for.
So you voted for a Brexit which puts fishermen, and women, on the dole, which increases the costs of small companies who export to the EU, which has seen jobs flow out of the UK and into the EU etc.; a Brexit of which you cannot find a single thing to say is a positive benefit?
Do you really hate the UK that much?
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, hotandsticky said:
Interesting to hear that there is evidential flexibility. I am not sure though if it is worth an appeal on those grounds. Presumably there are costs associated with an appeal. I guess it might be worth considering before expending another £1,500 on a resubmission.
I would certainly seek the advice of an OISC registered advisor before embarking down that road.
On 3/13/2021 at 1:45 PM, Tony M said:The applicant does have a right of appeal, but that cannot, and will not, be successful, as the specified requirements of the immigration rules were not met.
After all, it was not just a few documents out of a sequence that were missing, but most of the required ones!
-
18 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:
Jeezzzz!!! That's exactly what I'm saying.
Then why are you still blaming the EU?
51 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:I don't agree and I stand by everything I've posted but won't be commenting further on the EU/Brexit issue
-
5 hours ago, hotandsticky said:
The mistake was in thinking that he had achieved that by submitting a P60 to April 2020, employers letter, 4 x weekly payslips and 2 months bank statements.
With respect, the mistake was in not reading the guidance properly! All the guidance leads applicants and sponsors to the financial requirement appendix which clearly lists the evidence required.
There is some room for evidential flexibility: see from page 13. I am not qualified to say whether he's covered by that, so he may want to seek professional advice from an OISC registered advisor.
-
10 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:
<snip> Isn't that exactly what I said?
No; you said
35 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:No, as I said early on. EU politicians are - against the advice of their own medical authorities.
OK, maybe by "EU politicians" you meant politicians in EU member states; but to say that they are acting against the advice of their own medical authorities is, as I have shown, incorrect.
13 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:<snip> You know very well that its not only Norway.
Where have I said that it is?
What I have said, and is true, is that those countries, EU members and non EU members, who have suspended use of the AstraZeneca vaccine are ignoring the EMA's, and the WHO's, advice and following Norway's lead.
Quote“The NIPH has put the AstraZeneca vaccine on hold in the coronavirus immunisation programme. Now it is the Norwegian Medicines Agency's role to follow up on these suspected side effects and take the necessary measures in this serious situation,” says Geir Bukholm, Director of the Division of Infection Control and Environmental Health at the NIPH.
You choose to not agree; but these are not opinions; they are all indisputable facts.
You are only offering your opinions; opinions with nothing to back them up. Therefore I see no point in engaging with you further on this matter.
-
2 hours ago, RichardColeman said:
Thank heavens we left the EU. hopefully the UK will be booming soon and leaving the EU and their fear of nothing in our dust
This issue has nothing to do with the EU!
See my post above.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
9 hours ago, polpott said:Europe is peed with AZ due to them not being promoted to the front of the queue, and started unwarranted claims about the vaccine.
Really?
In which case why did the EU's own EMA say ""There is currently no indication that vaccination has caused these conditions, which are not listed as side effects with this vaccine," the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said on Thursday.
"The vaccine's benefits continue to outweigh its risks and the vaccine can continue to be administered while investigation of cases of thromboembolic events is ongoing," it added."(Source)
Something said in the OP as well
12 hours ago, webfact said:European Medicines Agency has said there is no indication that the events were caused by the vaccination, a view that was echoed by the World Health Organisation on Friday.
Those countries who are EU members and have suspended the use of the AstraZeneca vaccine are acting independently of the EU and have based their decision on advice by the Norwegian Medicines Agency and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health; Norwegian Medicines Agency notified of blood clots and bleeding in younger people after vaccination with AstraZeneca vaccine.
Norway is not an EU member.
-
3
-
2 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:
No, as I said early on. EU politicians are - against the advice of their own medical authorities.
Wrong.
As the articles I have linked to show, the politicians in certain countries, some of whom are EU members, are ignoring the advice of the EMA: ""There is currently no indication that vaccination has caused these conditions, which are not listed as side effects with this vaccine," the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said on Thursday."
"The vaccine's benefits continue to outweigh its risks and the vaccine can continue to be administered while investigation of cases of thromboembolic events is ongoing," it added."(Source)
Instead they are acting on the advice of their own medical authorities! Advice based upon that of the Norwegian Medicines Agency.
A reminder that Norway is not an EU member.
More than 40% of Britons in poor health or struggling financially amid pandemic, says UK regulator
in World News
Posted
Through no fault of our own, both my wife and I lost our jobs in February 2020. It's a long story, but we needed to travel to Thailand for her twin sister's funeral and due to nearly all flights being cancelled could not return to the UK until the end of April.
Upon our return, we both searched for work and were willing to do anything; but the UK was in lockdown.
My wife applied for many jobs, both during the first lockdown and after; retail, care homes, cleaning etc.. But even in the rare instances when she got an interview, she was unsuccessful. Then she finally secured a temporary Christmas job with a large clothes retailer. Unfortunately this finished early when where we live was placed into tier 4! Since then she has applied for other jobs, but most have not even responded to her application, let alone give her an interview
I, too, have applied for many jobs in these areas, without even getting an interview. As soon as I have to disclose my age, 65, employer's computer vetting systems reject me before a human being even looks at my application; though they'll never admit this, of course. I did finally obtain a job at my local Covid test centre just before Christmas but in January, ironically, had to go sick because I tested positive for Covid and am still symptomatic!
Many people are in similar position to us; wanting to work but at the moment there are too many people chasing each job.
So please do not assume that many people cannot find work because they are being too choosey.