Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

David P wrote

Neuroscientists now claim that the human
brain is not fully developed until age 25-30.

And its obvious that that never happens with some.

We should therefore raise the voting age to that level.

Nope.

Military service is different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.

That isnt the reason that the military has always used young kids.

They really do believe that nothing can kill them.

With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather
than obedience, should yield better outcomes.

That would only be true if there is much to
think about and the facts to do that about.

No real evidence of that with politics,
particularly with complex issues like
brexit or socialism or the welfare state.

Politics has always been much more
about gut feelings and charisma etc.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 19:15:02 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the auto-contradicting trolling senile asshole's latest troll****
unread

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

I personally feel if anything the voting age should be 15 for Girls and 18
or higher for boys. It has been my experience that girls are far more
sensible at a young age. OK some do attempt the ladette life style but a lot
of that is an act to be able to be including in social events etc.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
David P wrote
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not fully developed
until age 25-30.

And its obvious that that never happens with some.
We should therefore raise the voting age to that level.

Nope.
Military service is different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.

That isnt the reason that the military has always used young kids.
They really do believe that nothing can kill them.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than obedience, should
yield better outcomes.

That would only be true if there is much to
think about and the facts to do that about.
No real evidence of that with politics, particularly with complex issues
like brexit or socialism or the welfare state.
Politics has always been much more about gut feelings and charisma etc.

Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

I personally feel if anything the voting age should be 15 for Girls and 18
or higher for boys.

That’s mad, most of them have remarkably silly ideas.

It has been my experience that girls are far more sensible at a young
age. OK some do attempt the ladette life style but a lot of that is an act
to be able to be including in social events etc.

And plenty of them are stupid druggys and sluts.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
David P wrote
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not fully developed
until age 25-30.

And its obvious that that never happens with some.
We should therefore raise the voting age to that level.

Nope.
Military service is different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.

That isnt the reason that the military has always used young kids.
They really do believe that nothing can kill them.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than obedience,
should yield better outcomes.

That would only be true if there is much to
think about and the facts to do that about.
No real evidence of that with politics, particularly with complex issues
like brexit or socialism or the welfare state.
Politics has always been much more about gut feelings and charisma etc.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 20:39:57 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the quarrelling senile pest's latest troll**** unread

--
Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

--
Colin Bignell

In message , nightjar
writes
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

My wife, a committed leaver, comes from Southwold which has links to
inshore fishing but hardly relevant on a national scale. She had links
to the travel industry through her mother (BEA) and godfather
(Thompsons) and spends far more time abroad now than I do.
So why attempt to pull up the drawbridge?


--
Tim Lamb

"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
writes
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

My wife, a committed leaver, comes from Southwold which has links to
inshore fishing but hardly relevant on a national scale. She had links to
the travel industry through her mother (BEA) and godfather (Thompsons) and
spends far more time abroad now than I do.
So why attempt to pull up the drawbridge?

No drawbridge is being pulled up, international
travel will continue to be just as easy as it ever was.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
writes
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

My wife, a committed leaver, comes from Southwold which has links to
inshore fishing but hardly relevant on a national scale. She had links
to the travel industry through her mother (BEA) and godfather
(Thompsons) and spends far more time abroad now than I do. So why
attempt to pull up the drawbridge?

No drawbridge is being pulled up, international
travel will continue to be just as easy as it ever was.

well, it doesn't seem to be that way on the Dover Calais route

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
writes
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

My wife, a committed leaver, comes from Southwold which has links to
inshore fishing but hardly relevant on a national scale. She had links
to the travel industry through her mother (BEA) and godfather
(Thompsons) and spends far more time abroad now than I do. So why
attempt to pull up the drawbridge?

No drawbridge is being pulled up, international
travel will continue to be just as easy as it ever was.

well, it doesn't seem to be that way on the Dover Calais route

Then you need new seems machinery, BAD.

On 17/01/2021 18:59, charles wrote:
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:


"Tim Lamb" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
writes
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

My wife, a committed leaver, comes from Southwold which has links to
inshore fishing but hardly relevant on a national scale. She had links
to the travel industry through her mother (BEA) and godfather
(Thompsons) and spends far more time abroad now than I do. So why
attempt to pull up the drawbridge?

No drawbridge is being pulled up, international
travel will continue to be just as easy as it ever was.

well, it doesn't seem to be that way on the Dover Calais route

Nor any other route, but that has nothing to do with Brexit

The trouble with you remainers is you never travelled internationally
before.


--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers think?

On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any facts.

--
Colin Bignell

"nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?

I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

Then you need a new hearing aid, bad.

The most obvious argument is that with the
UK out of the EU the voters will be free to pull
the plug on the govt at the ballot box if it does
something they dont agree with policy wise.
And they did that with Blair and Brown.

Thats not possible with the EU.

The other obvious point is that EU policy is
decided by an unelected bureaucracy and
even the EU parliament cant initiate policy.

There is no equivalent of a private members bill.

FLUSH troll****

On 17/01/2021 17:56, Rod Speed wrote:


"nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?

I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

Then you need a new hearing aid, bad.

The most obvious argument is that with the
UK out of the EU the voters will be free to pull
the plug on the govt at the ballot box if it does
something they dont agree with policy wise.
And they did that with Blair and Brown.

Thats not possible with the EU.

I never saw the differences in the political systems as anything more
than a side issue. Neither system is without its faults and both have
advantages. Choosing one over the other is an emotional choice.

This article sets out the factual arguments for and against the two
systems and reaches its own decision:

https://somethingnew.org.uk/news/201...emocratic.html

The other obvious point is that EU policy is
decided by an unelected bureaucracy and
even the EU parliament cant initiate policy.

There is no equivalent of a private members bill.

Obviously, you are not familiar with the provisions of the Lisbon
Treaty. That created the Citizens' Initiative, which states that any
proposal that gets at least one million votes from the citizens of a
majority of EU states has to be considered by the EU Commission.



--
Colin Bignell

On 17/01/2021 17:05, nightjar wrote:
I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

How about the EU is strangled by bureaucracy. The most recent example
being the COVID jab.

Andy

In article ,
Vir Campestris wrote:
On 17/01/2021 17:05, nightjar wrote:
I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

How about the EU is strangled by bureaucracy. The most recent example
being the COVID jab.

Any country in the EU can make its own choice about what drugs to approve
in an emergency like this.

But don't let that stop you trying to convince yourself it is only down to
the EU.

--
*They call it PMS because Mad Cow Disease was already taken.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 17/01/2021 17:05, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

It depends on what you call emotion. Would that include increased demand
on housing? Suppression of wages, especially for the poorly paid.

My take is this: 40% would always support the EU, 40% would always
support standalone UK. In both case there would be sheer stubbornness on
the same basis some will always vote Tory and others vote Labour. You
could call those "emotionals", where any reason will reinforce their
belief however fallacious.

The 40% floating voters would have had their own reasons, in my case the
experience of zero pay increases for 15 years; where I see school
teacher, on the whole remainers, whinge about their pay increases. I'm
not alone in recognising that an influx of 3m from Eastern Block
countries has had a profound effect on the labour market. Too much
change too quickly. The blame rests solely on John Major and Tony Blair
on their quest to enlarge the EU and their various Accession Treaties.

From your reply you appear oblivious to the numerous reasons why the
"floating" voter would vote for Brexit. I therefore presume you are
either retired, or work, or have worked in a sector protected from
immigration, such as teachers, legal or any job where near perfect
spoken English is required. Are there any East European MPs for instance?


Just my tuppennys' worth. I fully accept YMMV

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

It depends on what you call emotion. Would that include increased demand
on housing? Suppression of wages, especially for the poorly paid.

And sweatshop UK is going to improve wages?

--
*If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 17/01/2021 17:05, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

That doesn't mean that such a vote was bad per se.

All socialist votes, after all, are cast emotionally (often out of an
emotional distaste for the fact that others seem to be doing better) and
certainly in the face of all known facts as to which sorts of society
produce the highest living standards.

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2021 17:05, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

That doesn't mean that such a vote was bad per se.

All socialist votes, after all, are cast emotionally

Mindlessly silly. Attlee wasnt a socialist that way.

(often out of an emotional distaste for the fact that others seem to be
doing better)

But plenty arent.

and certainly in the face of all known facts as to which sorts of society
produce the highest living standards.

Pity about Norway.

In article ,
nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any facts.

From the very start I asked for concrete advantages of leaving that would
help me in some way. Or indeed others less fortunate.

All I ever heard was airy fairy 'bring back control' and 'sovereignty'
etc. And of course saving on the EU membership fees.

And I don't control this country. Or have sovereignty. If those we elected
always made the right decisions and the EU bad ones, that might wash. But
this simply isn't the case.

I then looked at the public face of the Leave campaign. Led by self
serving charlatans like Farage and BoJo. And at the right wing parts of
the meja which supported Leave. And it was obvious it was going to be a
disaster for the majority in this country.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 18/01/2021 11:12, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any facts.

From the very start I asked for concrete advantages of leaving that would
help me in some way. Or indeed others less fortunate.

All I ever heard was airy fairy 'bring back control' and 'sovereignty'
etc. And of course saving on the EU membership fees.

And I don't control this country. Or have sovereignty. If those we elected
always made the right decisions and the EU bad ones, that might wash. But
this simply isn't the case.

I then looked at the public face of the Leave campaign. Led by self
serving charlatans like Farage and BoJo. And at the right wing parts of
the meja which supported Leave. And it was obvious it was going to be a
disaster for the majority in this country.

You seem in utter denial that there might be more reasons to their
decision. I was what you might call a floating vote and yet you still
seem to misunderstand why floating voters might vote in the way they did.

I can add one further reason to the number I posted recently, simply
that remainers who still bleat on about losing are not a pleasant crowd.
Good example is various Lib Dems politician and councillor who used to
post her abusing those who didn't share their same policy. Your post
dismisses why the majority of 'floating' electorate voted for Brexit.

Regarding certainty, there is no certainty. No economist has reliably
predicted the economy. What many voters wanted was a change from the
relentless promises from politicians they will build more houses and the
likes of David Cameron promising immigration down to 30,000 per year.

Despite saying this I'm sure you will dismiss and forget these posts and
in a few months you will say, "All I ever heard was airy fairy 'bring
back control' and 'sovereignty' etc. And of course saving on the EU
membership fees", which will once again be a lie.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 13:02, Fredxx wrote:
On 17/01/2021 11:01, nightjar wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Are those the thoughts of a remainer? How do you know how all leavers
think?


I don't claim to. However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any
facts.

From the very start I asked for concrete advantages of leaving
that would help me in some way. Or indeed others less fortunate.

An important change like that isnt just about you
or those less fortunate.

All I ever heard was airy fairy 'bring back control' and 'sovereignty'
etc. And of course saving on the EU membership fees.

That's a lie. You were also told that the UK would
be free to import whatever it liked from the rest
of the world tariff free if it chose to do that and
that would certainly benefit those less fortunate
with cheaper food and grog and stuff like that.

And I don't control this country.

But those who bother to vote do control who does.

Or have sovereignty.

But the govt does now.

If those we elected always made the right
decisions and the EU bad ones, that might
wash. But this simply isn't the case.

It isnt about always.

I then looked at the public face of the
Leave campaign. Led by self serving
charlatans like Farage and BoJo.

Corse that was never true of remainers, eh ?

And at the right wing parts of the meja which
supported Leave. And it was obvious it was going
to be a disaster for the majority in this country.

But it turns out that it isnt a disaster.

And regardless, the majority who bothered to vote
voted to leave and you get to like that or lump it.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 17:05:58 +0000, nightjar
wrote:

snip

However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any facts.

I really do think most you decided to vote leave did so within seconds
of being given the option, not because of the facts but because they
didn't like what they had ('all these foreigners taking our jobs and
houses') but without any real clue / understanding of the bigger
picture, what it might *actually* cost all off us, in all sorts of
ways by leaving.

Therefore, noting that came up after the opportunity to jump to a
decision affected their thoughts, they just wanted to leave *because*
and (as we have said all along), didn't really feel they needed to
explain why ... 'that's democracy' etc.

I would imagine few people who voted to remain did so because they
were so *convinced* that leaving would be best for 'most people' [1],
so voted to remain as a counter vote to leaving. Many of the rest of
us wouldn't be dragged into the folly of making such an important
decision based on so few facts and so much personal prejudices / bias
/ bigotry.

So those fishermen that were protesting at Westminster were Scottish,
and so they were likely to be even less happy that they were dragged
out of the EU, putting their jobs and livelihoods in jeopardy for no
(as yet presented or accepted), 'good reason'.

Cheers, T i m

[1] Or more likely, themselves and their closed minded attitudes.

On 18/01/2021 13:23, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 17:05:58 +0000, nightjar
wrote:

snip

However, I have yet to hear one give an argument for
leaving that wasn't either based upon emotion or not backed up by any facts.

I really do think most you decided to vote leave did so within seconds
of being given the option

You really don't have a clue why the floating voter might have voted for
Brexit.

In article ,
T i m wrote:
So those fishermen that were protesting at Westminster were Scottish,
and so they were likely to be even less happy that they were dragged
out of the EU, putting their jobs and livelihoods in jeopardy for no
(as yet presented or accepted), 'good reason'.

There was a good reason. The vast majority of fishing communities voted
leave. On the basis they would get all 'their' fish back. But obviously
didn't think what they were going to do with it. Even those whose main
market was the EU. They believed the lies that selling to the EU would
continue as usual. Ie, have their cake and eat it.

It's easily explained. They'd been told by all how stupid foreigners are.
And believed it. The English the only clever people in the world. So we
could easily put one over on the EU and come out smiling. After all, we
won the war.

--
*IF A PARSLEY FARMER IS SUED, CAN THEY GARNISH HIS WAGES?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

It didn't with Brexit. Leaving seems to have been driven by emotion,
rather than thought.

Most politics is, you are usually a rightist or a leftist
by gut feeling that careful thoughtful analysis of the facts.

And there are few facts to do a thoughtful analysis
of too, most obviously with whether the economy
will be better or worse after brexit, particularly
when the detail of the trade agreement isnt known,

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 05:26:04 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.
--
Cheers,
Roger

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.

How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?

It isnt possible to do that. It isnt even possible to
decide what constitutes competence to vote either.

Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 07:56:59 +1100, Fred, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?

--
Chris Green
·

On 17/01/2021 20:49, Chris Green wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?


The test would need to determine whether the person had a basic
understanding of the issues on which political parties usually campaign.
It will obviously never happen, but would be good if it could be made to
work - along with needing a licence to procreate.
--
Cheers,
Roger

On 17/01/2021 23:16, Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 20:49, Chris Green wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30.Â* We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level.Â* Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather thanÂ* universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?


The test would need to determine whether the person had a basic
understanding of the issues on which political parties usually campaign.
It will obviously never happen, but would be good if it could be made to
work - along with needing a licence to procreate.

How sweet. Who would decide the testing system?
In your version of paradise, there can only be one party. I guess you're
hoping that party would support *your* perception of perfection.

So, it's back to the old reality of suck it up.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 23:16:38 +0000, Roger Mills
wrote:

On 17/01/2021 20:49, Chris Green wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?


The test would need to determine whether the person had a basic
understanding of the issues on which political parties usually campaign.

Quite. We are forcing 'foreigners' to understand (and live by?) 'our
way' via the Life in the UK' test to gain British Citizenship so why
not to be allowed to vote?

so why not
It will obviously never happen, but would be good if it could be made to
work -

You could do a pretty basic one at the polling station, multi
question, multiple choice, a randomly selected set (adaptive testing)
and if you pass you vote. Even if you learn all the answers to the
questions (like signs and stopping distances in the Highway Code) you
may well still be 'better informed' than before.

Feck, you have to take all sorts of tests to do all sorts of things
that are far less important than choosing the fact of the entire
population!

along with needing a licence to procreate.

;-)

So the EU vote test could start:

Q1. Do you know what might change and therefore impact you if we leave
the EU?

Q2. Do you believe all the things you have been told about the EU to
be fact?

Q3. Do you believe all the promises that have been made re the
benefits of us leaving the EU to be fact?

Q4. Do you care about concepts (like Sovereignty) than facts (how
having Sovereignty may or may not make a positive difference to us)?

etc

Cheers, T i m

On 18/01/2021 13:43, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 23:16:38 +0000, Roger Mills
wrote:

On 17/01/2021 20:49, Chris Green wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?


The test would need to determine whether the person had a basic
understanding of the issues on which political parties usually campaign.

Quite. We are forcing 'foreigners' to understand (and live by?) 'our
way' via the Life in the UK' test to gain British Citizenship so why
not to be allowed to vote?

so why not
It will obviously never happen, but would be good if it could be made to
work -

You could do a pretty basic one at the polling station, multi
question, multiple choice, a randomly selected set (adaptive testing)
and if you pass you vote. Even if you learn all the answers to the
questions (like signs and stopping distances in the Highway Code) you
may well still be 'better informed' than before.

Feck, you have to take all sorts of tests to do all sorts of things
that are far less important than choosing the fact of the entire
population!

along with needing a licence to procreate.

;-)

So the EU vote test could start:

Q1. Do you know what might change and therefore impact you if we leave
the EU?

Q2. Do you believe all the things you have been told about the EU to
be fact?

Q3. Do you believe all the promises that have been made re the
benefits of us leaving the EU to be fact?

Q4. Do you care about concepts (like Sovereignty) than facts (how
having Sovereignty may or may not make a positive difference to us)?


Q5. Do you believe that the stock market will crash as soon as a
decision is made to leave?

Q6. Do you believe that a decision to leave will immediately result in
Armageddon and WW3?

etc.

But all the above is EU Referendum based. For covering all elections,
you'd need something far more general - based on a general understanding
of the differences between capitalism and socialism, the relationship
between government spending and taxation, etc.
--
Cheers,
Roger

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 23:16:38 +0000, Roger Mills
wrote:

On 17/01/2021 20:49, Chris Green wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:
On 17/01/2021 07:45, David P wrote:
Neuroscientists now claim that the human brain is not
fully developed until age 25-30. We should therefore
raise the voting age to that level. Military service is
different: obedience is valued over thoughtfulness.
With elections, the reverse, thoughtfulness rather than
obedience, should yield better outcomes.


How about a test of competence to vote rather than universal suffrage?
Some people may pass it at age 10 - others never.

How do you test?


The test would need to determine whether the person had a basic
understanding of the issues on which political parties usually campaign.

Quite. We are forcing 'foreigners' to understand (and live by?) 'our
way' via the Life in the UK' test to gain British Citizenship so why
not to be allowed to vote?

Because its not viable to stop those who always
vote for the same party and who never take any
interest in the news from voting.

so why not
It will obviously never happen, but would be good if it could be made to
work -

You could do a pretty basic one at the polling station,
multi question, multiple choice, a randomly selected
set (adaptive testing) and if you pass you vote.

See above.

Even if you learn all the answers to the questions
(like signs and stopping distances in the Highway Code)
you may well still be 'better informed' than before.

But being not so well informed isnt a viable way to
stop some from voting.

Feck, you have to take all sorts of tests to do all
sorts of things that are far less important than
choosing the fact of the entire population!

But its silly to say that those who arent well
informed shouldn't be allowed to vote.

along with needing a licence to procreate.

;-)

So the EU vote test could start:

Q1. Do you know what might change and
therefore impact you if we leave the EU?

No one does when we don't know the detail
of what trade deal will be agreed to.

Q2. Do you believe all the things you
have been told about the EU to be fact?

No one does.

Q3. Do you believe all the promises that have been
made re the benefits of us leaving the EU to be fact?

They can never be promises, at most predictions.

Q4. Do you care about concepts (like Sovereignty) than facts (how
having Sovereignty may or may not make a positive difference to us)?

Not viable to exclude voters on that basis. Plenty don't care
about sovereignty but do care about whether anyone in the
EU who decides that their prospects in the UK are better than
where they are coming from should be free to move to the UK.

etc