qman said:

"The CBO predicted 10 years ago that the US national debt in 2012 would be 7.4 percent of GDP...instead of publicly held debt as a share of GDP being a microscopic 7.4% this year, it was closer to 74%"

Just a little error in forecasting. 

---

So you believe that "anyone with any degree of commonsense" in 2002 would have predicted there was going to be an upcoming housing bubble in and a subsequent crash?  

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

qman said:

"The CBO predicted 10 years ago that the US national debt in 2012 would be 7.4 percent of GDP...instead of publicly held debt as a share of GDP being a microscopic 7.4% this year, it was closer to 74%"

Just a little error in forecasting. 

---

So you believe that "anyone with any degree of commonsense" in 2002 would have predicted there was going to be an upcoming housing bubble in and a subsequent crash?  

---

qman said:

What were the odds that everything was going to be perfect?

---

qman said:

That's not the way real life works, bad things can and do happen all the time.

---

qman said:

It's not a matter of predicting a specific event, the fact is there's always risks out there, a failure to acknowledge those risks is being intellectually dishonest.

---

Tipote said:

are you saying the law that protects refugees is the reason it's got into such a mess in calais? i'm not sure if im understanding this point youre making.

---

Bigbadwooof said:

Yes, religion is the greatest plague of humanity, and always has been.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

qman said:

What were the odds that everything was going to be perfect?

---

Given that we haven't had a collapse like that since 1948, the odds were actually good of it not happening.

qman said:

That's not the way real life works, bad things can and do happen all the time.

---

Of course bad things happen.  But not "all the time", and it's certainly not something "anyone with any degree of commonsense" had predicted in 2002. 

qman said:

It's not a matter of predicting a specific event, the fact is there's always risks out there, a failure to acknowledge those risks is being intellectually dishonest.

---

Every CBO report I've read includes economic assumptions.  Your story didn't link to the actual report, but I'll bet it also included assumptions.

---

Bubbles85 said:

Tipote said:

are you saying the law that protects refugees is the reason it's got into such a mess in calais? i'm not sure if im understanding this point youre making.

---

Not scrapping the Dublin protocol, does not some how mean that refugees are some how no longer protected. Of course they are.

It just means that they should claim asylum within the first country of safety, which is right and i fully support that process. Scrapping the current regulations will just make the situation faced by the EU even worse.
Camerons government has even stated that they will not be taking part in any planned revisions to the current regulations.

---

Tipote said:

Bubbles85 said:

Tipote said:

are you saying the law that protects refugees is the reason it's got into such a mess in calais? i'm not sure if im understanding this point youre making.

---

Not scrapping the Dublin protocol, does not some how mean that refugees are some how no longer protected. Of course they are.

It just means that they should claim asylum within the first country of safety, which is right and i fully support that process. Scrapping the current regulations will just make the situation faced by the EU even worse.
Camerons government has even stated that they will not be taking part in any planned revisions to the current regulations.

---

The point your missing is that the Dublin Protocol is a failure. Britain only doesnt want to change it because its relatively hard to get across the Channel.

As I've said in an earlier post. The reason these problems are building up is because of the lack of responsibility and due to a failure of the Dublin Protocol. 

Quote:

IMO the planned revisions are simply an attempt to force every member state to accept the relocation of millions of refugees.
If we dont have the resources available to take more people in, then we shouldn't be forced to. Its just common sense.

---

every member accept millions of refugees? You mean collectively right? not each.

The dublin protocols will force the least able countries to accept refugees, this is the point. Resettlement needs to be on more legitimate grounds.

If all countries refuse to take responsibility on top of this, it will only get worse. This is why we see the Calais Jungle grow so much.

---

Tipote said:

Nazis on the streets of england

I'm glad that they were vastly outnumbered by the antifascist groups who were chanting "refugees are welcome here"

also here is a video about the calais jungle from last week

---

Bubbles85 said:

It's not a failure.

---

Quote:

The inherent problems of the Dublin System

The European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights point out the inherent weaknesses of the Dublin System. By tying the responsibility of examining the refugee status to the initial entry, EU Boarder States – most prominent among them Greece, Italy and Bulgaria – are overburdened.[57] In 2010 alone, nearly 90% of illegal immigrants entered the EU via Greece.[58] This ipso facto leads to systemic deficiencies in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions.

We have to welcome these changes as they provide Asylum Seekers with more comprehensive protection. But the Dublin III Regulation does not address the core problem. It does not address the problem of jurisdiction and responsibility. Thus the overburdened boarder states will not be relived of their burden and the conditions within refugee camps and facilities will not improve. The introduced early warning system, that is supposed to recognize appearing systemic deficits, cannot – as a matter of fact – offer sufficient protection. The situation in Greece, Italy and other Member States is marked with human tragedies. These tragedies are symptoms of the systemic deficits the highest courts of the EU already addressed. These deficits are already impacting the CEAS. Thus it has to be questioned if the early warning mechanism can offer more then just lip service.
...
(Possible Solution: Right to Choose)
...

---

Quote:

Europes complete lack of ability to be able to control it's external boarders is the failure and scarpping the current regulations, will just leave every member state wide open to mass influxes of migrants, which they will have to accept.

The crisis in Calais has not gotten to the point it has today, because of the Dublin regulations. It is because countries like Greece and Italy for example, have completely failed to protect Europe's external boarders.

---

Bubbles85 said:

Those antifasict groups are no better than the far protesters, that they protest against.
There all as bad as each other, causing nothing but trouble on the streets, every time they congregate together to get there points across.

---

Youre honestly saying that the people standing up to the thugs doing nazi salutes are as bad as them?

It was right to stand up to them to challenge that hate. Counter demonstrations are reasonable, especially on controversial issues where there is a polarisation of opinion.

If you saw in my previous post, they told dianne abbott MP to go back to her country, they said that the antifascists werent english, they had knives etc and attacked the antifascists buses graffiting swastikas on the bus.

They also were with flags like this..



which praise the 3rd SS Panzer Division Totenkopf and the Combat 18

so what have you got on the antifascists?

qman said:

So the CBO makes assumptions that are usually very wrong and those poor forecasts are always too optimistic about the outcome.

---

Again, you STILL haven't shown CBO forecasts are worst than "anyone with any degree of commonsense".  If you can show there are consistently better sources out there, then I'll agree with you.  If you can't, then the CBO is the best we have. 

If you make a claim, burden of proof is on you to support it.

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

qman said:

So the CBO makes assumptions that are usually very wrong and those poor forecasts are always too optimistic about the outcome.

---

Again, you STILL haven't shown CBO forecasts are worst than "anyone with any degree of commonsense".  If you can show there are consistently better sources out there, then I'll agree with you.  If you can't, then the CBO is the best we have. 

If you make a claim, burden of proof is on you to support it.

---

"then the CBO is the best we have" 

So regardless of how horrible the CBO forecasts have been in the past, it wins by default? 

I hate to burst your bubble, but no one respects the CBO and it's long term forecasts. 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/five_things_to_know_about_cbo_projections_and_estimates.html

"The bottom line is the CBO works with- but does NOT verify the accuracy of- the numbers given to them by Congress"

I don't think anyone could get a worse bunch of political driven numbers than from Congress.

Tipote said:

Did you not read the links about who these people are?

Do you not understand why people cover their faces in this day and age during demonstrations?

are you saying that people shouldnt demonstrate because it affects the peace and trade?

No, i never assumed that just being on the antifascist side makes you better than the other side, not being a nazi makes you better than the other side.

There are of course bad people among the antifascists too, such is the nature of humans. some groups like black block just smash stuff, that doesnt help.

I also did not say anything along the lines that if you dont support the antifascists then you are a fascist. You putting a whole bunch of words in my mouth.

I showed you the kind of people the antifascists were demonstrating against and asked you what have you got on the antifascists?

---

I don't need to read the links. The behaviour that has been captured on video, speaks louder than any words written in some shitty link ever could.

They hide there faces to clearly hide there identity's.

Only people who have in tensions of criminal behaviour, would feel the need to do this. They clearly fear reprisal's or prosecution.
Clearly half of them are more than guilty of committing an affray. Not to mention the amount of criminal damage and assaults that were taking place.

Do you not remember the nationwide England riots in 2011? How many of the people involved in that, roamed around with there identity's on show? Non and i know quite a few people who decided to get involved.

I can guarantee you, that they are all little pussy holes with out there "crews". So they hide there faces as to not get caught out, with out any back up at a later date.

People can demonstrate and have a right to peaceful protest, but clearly this was not peaceful. Plenty of laws were being broken on both sides.

What i have against them, is there complete and utter disrespect for the law and the innocent people that they affect, with out any remorse. They destroy British towns in protest of people who don't even fucking live here.
Like i said, both groups are exactly the same in terms of there behaviour. This sort of stuff is common place, at every single demonstration that takes places between these two groups.

qman said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Again, you STILL haven't shown CBO forecasts are worst than "anyone with any degree of commonsense".  If you can show there are consistently better sources out there, then I'll agree with you.  If you can't, then the CBO is the best we have. 

If you make a claim, burden of proof is on you to support it.

---

So regardless of how horrible the CBO forecasts have been in the past, it wins by default?

---

Of course the CBO forecasts win if there's nothing better.  Although burden of proof is on you to prove CBO is worst than other forecasts, as you claim, the evidence shows you're wrong:



The above chart compares CBO forecasts, with those of the President's Administration and the Blue Chip consensus (an average of about 50 private-sector forecasts).

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

qman said:

So the CBO makes assumptions that are usually very wrong and those poor forecasts are always too optimistic about the outcome.

---

Again, you STILL haven't shown CBO forecasts are worst than "anyone with any degree of commonsense".  If you can show there are consistently better sources out there, then I'll agree with you.  If you can't, then the CBO is the best we have. 

If you make a claim, burden of proof is on you to support it.

---