Today's discussion about the news

Tbh it is not inconceivable with the demographics heading where they are heading, being able to look after both the aged and the poor is going to be too expensive without a considerable reduction in the quality of life for everyone.

Just heard a reform supporter on r5 talking about controlled immigration being a good thing. Chinese and Bangladeshi people are naturally good cooks, but don't necessarily want to work in the family restaurant any more, because they can sell mobile phones for more money.

This tour de force of casual racial stereotyping went totally unchallenged by the interviewer.

The graph seems to suggest that this particular couple can change earnings from €36k to €66k, but must pay *more* than €30k in extra tax.

At the very least that tweet deserves a good sniff test.

Sorry, what has the US got to do with it?

And to quibble, you didn't comment on an interesting take on the French situation, you reposted it without any cognitive engagement. And then, when someone suggests you might have stepped in some poo and trodden it around the forum, you start accusing people of being too stupid to have understood the general jist of the argument.

Actually, the statement appended to the data unrelated to France is about as complicated as the [ insert boomer moan here ] arguments we see all the time, it's just that the chart that purports to support the argument is bollocks.

It kind of suggests that, but not exactly. If there's reduced benefits and increased tax taken into account, then there could potentially be an example where the net in/out from the state as a whole has that effect. It feels kind of like extrapolating from the "marginal tax rate of a couple 3 kids and two people earning £45k each in the UK and both paying student loans" and making conclusions about the overall state of the British economy.

Exactly. To there's a similar cliff for child benefit here.

The list of caveats for that tweet would be longer than the garbled stuff at the end of a US TV advert for a diet drug, though.

Amusing take on Glasto and borders:

"Glastonbury has always been a haven for people who love to celebrate multiculturalism, diversity and open borders. And this year’s festival was no exception. The band Idles, for example, called Nigel Farage “a fascist”, and sang a song in praise of mass immigration (“My blood brother is an immigrant, a beautiful immigrant/ My blood brother’s Freddie Mercury/ A Nigerian mother of three”) while the crowd proudly held aloft a rubber dinghy filled with dummies dressed to look like Channel-crossing asylum seekers.

This display of compassion was of course deeply moving. Which is why I was surprised to read, on the final evening, that the festival had been “thrown into chaos” by people entering the site illegally, after buying fake wristbands or swarming over the security fence. Apparently, this caused fans to “panic” about the resultant “overcrowding”.

But hang on a minute. Surely those fans should have welcomed the new arrivals with open arms.

After all, anyone willing to risk their life climbing a 13ft fence in order to see Coldplay is clearly desperate. We should be showing these poor people compassion, rather than furiously calling for them to be arrested and sent back where they came from.

No doubt some regulars will say, “But these numbers are unsustainable. It’s making life a misery for people who are already here. Also, we know nothing about all these people who are flooding in illegally – they could be dangerous criminals.”

Quite plainly, though, anyone who spouts this hateful, far-Right rhetoric is a fascist. The only way to defeat the gangs selling fake wristbands is to provide a safe, legal route into the festival. And that means removing the fence, so anyone can walk straight in.

In fact, the people who have bought tickets should be made to pay out of their own pockets to feed and accommodate all the people who got in without tickets. It’s only fair."

😄

You mentioned France. The tweet mentioned France. The data mentioned Germany and didn't ever support the broad argument in relation to Germany. You and other then get defensive when the tweet is criticised and start accusing people of either not reading, not understanding, being picky etc. Then you post vast amounts of other unrelated data and invite people who don't necessarily disagree with the general premise to disprove it. All without acknowledging that the original tweet was misleading gibber.

Quite how I've ended up being right about that tweet while also disagreeing with myself is as mystifying.

So now you agree, but having vigorously participated in the discussion and defended the tweet, you are suggesting that people are banging on.

Stevo, this is from the Satire Supplement and you've fallen for it.

I didn't think it would be well received by middle class lefties 😉

I asked for comparative data from the same thread about the country he was posting about and had intimated would follow, not a copy of the internet. It is instructive that there wasn't any.

I would still be interested in a flavour of the twitteratis responses, on the offchance that someone else pointed out some flaws in the thesis. If it comes from twitter, people here might find it persuasive.

No need to pay for the Torygraph. Just disable Javascript on your browser and you're in for free.

And it was a funny article. Obviously tongue in cheek. Particularly the bit about taking the fences down to let everyone in via "safe, legal routes".

It was quite amusingly written but the actual message is still bollox.

That's overly po faced, you are right.