|
Post by deadly on Sept 24, 2019 11:09:11 GMT
The TV licensing thing is really silly. I don't have a TV and never use live streaming. They write me more and more threatening letters the last one had a red envelope ! Scary apparently they are going to come round and get into my boat with a ram then imprison me in solitary on an island for 14 years !! I don't have a telly. Yes we have the same thing at the gliding club. Threatening letters telling us we “have a case opened against us” etc. This has been going on for years. I’m not the guy in charge of the clubhouse but if I were I might just write back telling them we don’t have a Tv so they stopped bothering us. But the clubhouse manager is from Glasgow and hence would be delighted if they came round, just so he could heedbut them! Unfortunately after 19 years, they still haven’t been round! You can write back all you want, they won't stop harassing you just because you write back, they want to come and visit. You can let them visit and they may choose to leave you alone for up to 2 years, they may carry on harassing as if the visit never happened (that's what happened when I let them in back in '98), or they may use the visit as their cue to manufacture false evidence against you (one guy they took a photo of his video monitor and edited a television picture onto it).
In my old house I managed to get them to stop by telling them they could come and visit any time but had to pay an entry fee, this means that any attempt to bamboozle their way past me on the doorstep would then be within what is described by S11 Fraud Act, an attempt to obtain services dishonestly, an offence for which both the doorstep goon and his boss could end up in court (company officers who are party to the commission of an offence by the company will be liable to be charged with the offence as well as the company). I've now moved, had my first doorstep visit off them, expecting the hate mail to start again any day soon.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Sept 24, 2019 11:23:14 GMT
Last time i lived in a house, i got them to stop sending threatening letters and cease harassing me. This was a lng time ago though so i cant remember if it was capita.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 11:46:06 GMT
Its quite funny with my residential mooring because the layout of the site is counter intuitive ie numbered backwards and the boat which appears to coincide with my address is not my boat and does have a TV aerial.
It would be a bit of a giggle if they did try to observe anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2019 6:48:16 GMT
Here’s another good example of BBC bias this morning on Brexit. No-deal Brexit would push UK debt to 50-year high, says think tank www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49961301What they don’t say is that our National Debt has been pretty much going up ever year since then anyway. To blame a No Deal Brexit is simply misleading. I suspect it will go down once we finally get back some control of our country again
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 10, 2019 6:29:34 GMT
Here’s another good example of BBC bias this morning on Brexit. No-deal Brexit would push UK debt to 50-year high, says think tank www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49961301What they don’t say is that our National Debt has been pretty much going up ever year since then anyway. To blame a No Deal Brexit is simply misleading. I suspect it will go down once we finally get back some control of our country again So the BBC reports what a think tank says and it is biased. That's just reporting. Have you tried to find a genuine report that says otherwise? Hello? Hello? Are you still around? Nope, gone.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Oct 10, 2019 7:42:51 GMT
Here’s another good example of BBC bias this morning on Brexit. No-deal Brexit would push UK debt to 50-year high, says think tank www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49961301What they don’t say is that our National Debt has been pretty much going up ever year since then anyway. To blame a No Deal Brexit is simply misleading. I suspect it will go down once we finally get back some control of our country again So the BBC reports what a think tank says and it is biased. That's just reporting. Have you tried to find a genuine report that says otherwise? Hello? Hello? Are you still around? Nope, gone. Have you considered the possibility that certain 'think tanks', despite having experts employed within their ranks, begin any study with a position of bias, and then, the BBC, sharing that same bias, gleefully publish the reports, making no efforts to obtain different views, which must surely exist, given that all these reports are only informed speculation? After all, before the referendum many 'respected think tanks' staffed by 'experts' made lots of predictions of what would happen following a 'leave' vote but few, if any of these things actually happened. You'd think that a truly impartial organisation would learn from this experience and treat such reports with suspicion or at least, seek a balance with opposing views.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 10, 2019 8:24:56 GMT
So the BBC reports what a think tank says and it is biased. That's just reporting. Have you tried to find a genuine report that says otherwise? Hello? Hello? Are you still around? Nope, gone. Have you considered the possibility that certain 'think tanks', despite having experts employed within their ranks, begin any study with a position of bias, and then, the BBC, sharing that same bias, gleefully publish the reports, making no efforts to obtain different views, which must surely exist, given that all these reports are only informed speculation? After all, before the referendum many 'respected think tanks' staffed by 'experts' made lots of predictions of what would happen following a 'leave' vote but few, if any of these things actually happened. You'd think that a truly impartial organisation would learn from this experience and treat such reports with suspicion or at least, seek a balance with opposing views. Consider the idea of a round world versus flat earthers. While, by some opinions, the flat earthers have a right to equal air time on the BBC, they don't get it because they are just wrong. The earth is round. Of course Donald will say the pics from the moon show the earth as a flat disc, that just shows that he is stupid. That aside, are there any think tanks that currently support the leave case, if you can find them I will read them. All I can find is platitudinous twaddle and beliefs purported to be facts.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 10, 2019 8:33:07 GMT
Have you considered the possibility that certain 'think tanks', despite having experts employed within their ranks, begin any study with a position of bias, and then, the BBC, sharing that same bias, gleefully publish the reports, making no efforts to obtain different views, which must surely exist, given that all these reports are only informed speculation? After all, before the referendum many 'respected think tanks' staffed by 'experts' made lots of predictions of what would happen following a 'leave' vote but few, if any of these things actually happened. You'd think that a truly impartial organisation would learn from this experience and treat such reports with suspicion or at least, seek a balance with opposing views. All I can find is platitudinous twaddle and beliefs purported to be facts. basically what you find in the remainers "spin" ...... I have only ever heard one considered, sensible argument to stay in the EU. That was by someone who points out the glaring faults of the EU bureaucracy but believes (in my view naively) that it can be changed from the inside democratically, even though he has shown by his arguments that it is a thoroughly undemocratic institution.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Oct 10, 2019 8:52:41 GMT
All I can find is platitudinous twaddle and beliefs purported to be facts. basically what you find in the remainers "spin" ...... I have only ever heard one considered, sensible argument to stay in the EU. That was by someone who points out the glaring faults of the EU bureaucracy but believes (in my view naively) that it can be changed from the inside democratically, even though he has shown by his arguments that it is a thoroughly undemocratic institution. So you can't find anything either! Facts and comments from those with expertise in finances, supporting brexit, seem to be thin on the ground.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 10, 2019 9:27:19 GMT
basically what you find in the remainers "spin" ...... I have only ever heard one considered, sensible argument to stay in the EU. That was by someone who points out the glaring faults of the EU bureaucracy but believes (in my view naively) that it can be changed from the inside democratically, even though he has shown by his arguments that it is a thoroughly undemocratic institution. So you can't find anything either! Facts and comments from those with expertise in finances, supporting brexit, seem to be thin on the ground. It is fairly obvious that you didn't listen to the talks about the operation of the EU that I posted. (From the only person I know of, who has the expertise and the first hand experience of dealing with the EU commission and is prepared to talk clearly and intelligently about it.) To be honest, I never expected you to listen to his talks, you have to have an open mind when it comes to searching out solid information about someone else's opinion His conclusion was that the EU is doomed if it fails to change. He believes the UK should remain to assist the process of changing and improving the EU. Considering the way that the EU commission treated the UK when we asked for changes to help make the EU less bureaucratic and a more dynamic trading area, I consider the likelihood of being able to change the EU democratically to be vanishingly small. So, if you accept the premise that the EU needs to change and become a democratic institution to survive, then the question becomes "Is it better to leave an institution that is heading down a road to catastrophe or is it better to stay in the tiny hope that you can prevent it" My view is that we should bail out. It will be a bumpy landing, especially short term (a sensible deal cannot be made when people have put limits on the bargaining position*) However in the long term it puts the UK in a much better position when everything hits the fan. * The actions of those who have forced the bargaining team not to allow the nuclear option (no deal) has guaranteed that no sensible deal will be made. It is only the UK leaving with no deal that would have shaken the tree enough for them to offer a sensible deal
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Oct 10, 2019 9:43:07 GMT
So you can't find anything either! Facts and comments from those with expertise in finances, supporting brexit, seem to be thin on the ground. It is fairly obvious that you didn't listen to the talks about the operation of the EU that I posted. (From the only person I know of, who has the expertise and the first hand experience of dealing with the EU commission and is prepared to talk clearly and intelligently about it.) To be honest, I never expected you to listen to his talks, you have to have an open mind when it comes to searching out solid information about someone else's opinion His conclusion was that the EU is doomed if it fails to change. He believes the UK should remain to assist the process of changing and improving the EU. Considering the way that the EU commission treated the UK when we asked for changes to help make the EU less bureaucratic and a more dynamic trading area, I consider the likelihood of being able to change the EU democratically to be vanishingly small. So, if you accept the premise that the EU needs to change and become a democratic institution to survive, then the question becomes "Is it better to leave an institution that is heading down a road to catastrophe or is it better to stay in the tiny hope that you can prevent it" My view is that we should bail out. It will be a bumpy landing, especially short term (a sensible deal cannot be made when people have put limits on the bargaining position*) However in the long term it puts the UK in a much better position when everything hits the fan. * The actions of those who have forced the bargaining team not to allow the nuclear option (no deal) has guaranteed that no sensible deal will be made. It is only the UK leaving with no deal that would have shaken the tree enough for them to offer a sensible dealWise words John, and the shit is getting ever closer for the EU!Tthey wont change because the people in charge make a great living doing pretty much whatever they feel like, its undemocratic because that suits the people in charge! If you were a bunch of dictators like the EU commission is would you want to change it? we both know that answer because we are on the same side, but remainers must have huge blinkers on because they cant see that the crumbling empire is getting very shaky! I hope we are well out of it when it goes because it will cause problems for all the countries closely involved
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Oct 10, 2019 11:00:18 GMT
So you can't find anything either! Facts and comments from those with expertise in finances, supporting brexit, seem to be thin on the ground. It is fairly obvious that you didn't listen to the talks about the operation of the EU that I posted. (From the only person I know of, who has the expertise and the first hand experience of dealing with the EU commission and is prepared to talk clearly and intelligently about it.) To be honest, I never expected you to listen to his talks, you have to have an open mind when it comes to searching out solid information about someone else's opinion His conclusion was that the EU is doomed if it fails to change. He believes the UK should remain to assist the process of changing and improving the EU. Considering the way that the EU commission treated the UK when we asked for changes to help make the EU less bureaucratic and a more dynamic trading area, I consider the likelihood of being able to change the EU democratically to be vanishingly small. So, if you accept the premise that the EU needs to change and become a democratic institution to survive, then the question becomes "Is it better to leave an institution that is heading down a road to catastrophe or is it better to stay in the tiny hope that you can prevent it" My view is that we should bail out. It will be a bumpy landing, especially short term (a sensible deal cannot be made when people have put limits on the bargaining position*) However in the long term it puts the UK in a much better position when everything hits the fan. * The actions of those who have forced the bargaining team not to allow the nuclear option (no deal) has guaranteed that no sensible deal will be made. It is only the UK leaving with no deal that would have shaken the tree enough for them to offer a sensible dealYour dead right, without that bargaining tool the eu know we have to get a deal, so their terms or we stay.
|
|