The new EU policy

[L00b]

Some of it is and some is attributed to other things

So, no evidence then. Still less that any such is down to EU membership or immigration. Glad we cleared that up.

whatever has happened to the economy,

A bit too cryptic for me, sorry. Can I have the full question and context, please? Edited June 9, 2015 by L00b

[El Cid]

A bit too cryptic for me, sorry. Can I have the full question and context, please?

 

The happiness index brought in by David Cameron.

 

"The 'Life in the UK 2014' report shows that since 2010 the proportion satisfied with their health has fallen (from 68.3% in 2009/10 to 58.6% in 2011/12)"

 

Our economy may well be growing, but our health is getting worse.

[loraward]

So, no evidence then. Still less that any such is down to EU membership or immigration. Glad we cleared that up.

A bit too cryptic for me, sorry. Can I have the full question and context, please?

 

I see you are still unable to counter the claim with evidence.

 

---------- Post added 09-06-2015 at 19:01 ----------

 

The happiness index brought in by David Cameron.

 

"The 'Life in the UK 2014' report shows that since 2010 the proportion satisfied with their health has fallen (from 68.3% in 2009/10 to 58.6% in 2011/12)"

 

Our economy may well be growing, but our health is getting worse.

 

Thats because over consumption is bad for your health but good for GDP figures.

Edited June 9, 2015 by loraward

[I1L2T3]

Well,if there is an exit and unskilled labour still has to be imported,that is just shooting yourself in the foot...........amongst other things,it means extra administration to obtain work permits for foreigners.

 

And here we have it really. The practical reality is that we remain part of the single market and therefore signed up to free movement of people as a condition of that, with no more control than we have now over who comes in. We have to pay all the costs of membership without having any say at all.

[L00b]

I see you are still unable to counter the claim with evidence.

I see you still haven't understood how debating works: you countered my post with your unsupported claim first, without any evidence.

 

When I pulled you about it, typical one-liner dodge from you, no evidence.

 

When I pull you about it again, you now have the cheek to claim that I should counter your counterclaim with evidence?

 

So, start again, from post 24 if you please. Or jog on.

Edited June 9, 2015 by L00b

[loraward]

I see you still haven't understood how debating works: you countered my post with your counterclaim first, without any evidence.

 

When I pulled you about it, typical one-liner dodge from you, no evidence.

 

When I pull you about it again, you now have the cheek to claim that I should counter your counterclaim with evidence?

 

So, start again, from post 24 if you please. Or jog on.

 

It is you that clearly doesn't understand how debate works.

You expressed an unfounded opinion with no supporting evidence, I simply countered it with an opinion.

[L00b]

Nice misrepresentation there, loraward.

 

Here, I've correct your post for you:

It is you that clearly doesn't understand how debate works.

You expressed an unfounded opinion with no supporting evidence, I simply countered it with an unfounded opinion with no supporting evidence.

The rub is that you claimed that your opinion was more valid than mine, by invoking a 'flaw' in mine, without any supporting evidence. Which you consistently failed to supply when asked repeatedly.

 

I see from other threads that you don't have ant problem posting links that support your opinions, so I take it that there is no such evidence in the present case, as I have suspected since post #24.

[loraward]

Nice misrepresentation there, loraward.

 

Here, I've correct your post for you:

The rub is that you claimed that your opinion was more valid than mine, by invoking a 'flaw' in mine, without any supporting evidence. Which you consistently failed to supply when asked repeatedly.

 

I see from other threads that you don't have ant problem posting links that support your opinions, so I take it that there is no such evidence in the present case, as I have suspected since post #24.

 

Back to my original claim that your argument was flawed.

 

The flaw in that argument is that many of the people opposed to EU membership and immigration do understand macro and micro economics, do understand the benefits of immigration, but they also understand the negative consequences of EU membership and immigration, and are of the opinion that the negative out ways the posative.

 

How do you suggest I prove this point when its based on my experience and not on a a news story?

[L00b]

Back to my original claim that your argument was flawed.

Indeed. Your claim, so the onus of proof is on you. Not on me to disprove your claim. The burden only passes to me when you've done that.

 

That's how online debate works in here, the same as in any other real-life/virtual forum I've ever experienced.

 

You could have simply said that you disagreed with my post, rather than calling my argument 'flawed'...But that's not really your self-serving, misrepresenting style, is it?

 

/now bored with your false logic, and out of here.

[El Cid]

Any evidence that the current UK growth is attributable to these factors?

 

I'm all ears.

 

 

So why is this growth not resulting in a better health/lifestyle for most?

 

People are living longer, but warning of a nation of obese people seems to be falling on deaf ears, despite some claiming that they are all ears.

 

What proportion of this growth has gone to the already rich?? I fear our recent rise in living stands has all gone to the wealthy.

 

Why are we, as a country, not happier?