£11 for 15 minutes of Care..

[Anna B]

The conclusion of which was-

 

"Consequently, the Committee considers that there is reliable evidence that the threshold of grave or systematic violations of the rights of persons with disabilities has been met in the State party"

 

(State party referring to the UK govt), the report is downloadable from-

 

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/InquiryProcedure.aspx

 

It's a damning report, I believe the UK is the only country to have been investigated by the UN for human rights abuses against the disabled?

 

In this country, in 2018, many disabled people are living in absolute fear of what is being done to them.

 

Exactly.

[Robin-H]

[/b]

Exactly.

 

So why does evidence suddenly matter now?

[truman]

[/b]

Exactly.

 

 

We've been through this many many times... evidence /statistics can be found to support any position.

 

You said it yourself...

[Obelix]

[/b]

Exactly.

 

Exactly what? I seem to recall someone saying that any evidence can be made up so this is worthless right?

[onewheeldave]

 

We've been through this many many times... evidence /statistics can be found to support any position.

 

It's an understandable perspective- generally evidence/stats can be found to support any position- there's so many organisations with vested interests financing extremely ropey studies, hiring lobbyists etc.

 

But what counts, is the quality of the studies.

 

And, in this instance, Anna has put forward a high quality report backing up her claims- it's by the UN, it's up to date, and, very relevant.

[truman]

It's an understandable perspective- generally evidence/stats can be found to support any position- there's so many organisations with vested interests financing extremely ropey studies, hiring lobbyists etc.

 

But what counts, is the quality of the studies.

 

And, in this instance, Anna has put forward a high quality report backing up her claims- it's by the UN, it's up to date, and, very relevant.

 

The UN isn't whiter than white

 

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/united-nations-corruption-and-the-need-for-reform/

 

There'll be agendas involved there as well...

[Robin-H]

It's an understandable perspective- generally evidence/stats can be found to support any position- there's so many organisations with vested interests financing extremely ropey studies, hiring lobbyists etc.

 

But what counts, is the quality of the studies.

 

And, in this instance, Anna has put forward a high quality report backing up her claims- it's by the UN, it's up to date, and, very relevant.

 

Which is exactly the point that I made.

 

Unfortunately, Anna didn't seem interested in evidence until it suited her. It is impossible to have an adult debate with someone who conducts themselves like that.

 

Yes, the UN report raises some good points, and it would be a good place to start a discussion from. It is not possible to have such a discussion however when any evidence or counter view presented is just dismissed out of hand.

[Obelix]

It's an understandable perspective- generally evidence/stats can be found to support any position- there's so many organisations with vested interests financing extremely ropey studies, hiring lobbyists etc.

 

But what counts, is the quality of the studies.

 

And, in this instance, Anna has put forward a high quality report backing up her claims- it's by the UN, it's up to date, and, very relevant.

 

But Anna insists that evidence she doesnt "like" can be brushed aside with the trite claim that there are agendas and anything can be made up to suit.

 

So she really shouldn't be surprised people are taking her to task and ignoring this evidence

[Anna B]

But Anna insists that evidence she doesnt "like" can be brushed aside with the trite claim that there are agendas and anything can be made up to suit.

 

So she really shouldn't be surprised people are taking her to task and ignoring this evidence

 

People know what I think about statistics etc, but continue to use them (their priviledge) and criticise me for not using them. When I then use them back I am criticised for that too.

Anecdotal 'evidence' is also routinely rubbished, so I really can't win can I?

 

However that doesn't mean I'm not going to try, so get used to it.

[Robin-H]

People know what I think about statistics etc, but continue to use them (their priviledge) and criticise me for not using them. When I then use them back I am criticised for that too.

Anecdotal 'evidence' is also routinely rubbished, so I really can't win can I?

 

However that doesn't mean I'm not going to try, so get used to it.

 

You understand why that is surely?

 

Why would anybody want to engage in debate when you dismiss any statistics or evidence you don't like. It makes debate impossible, as you yourself have found out. People are doing exactly what you have been doing.

 

As for anecdotal evidence - it has its place depending on the matter at hand. It also has significant flaws, which have been routinely pointed out to you.