When did I use the 350 figure? Now it is you who are lying.
-
Looking for a smarter way to manage your heating this winter? We’ve been testing the new Aqara Radiator Thermostat W600 to see how quiet, accurate and easy it is to use around the home. Click here read our review.
In or out
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2004
- Messages
- 1,330
- Reaction score
- 141
- Country
Done
Not a bad analogy except that the £6 returned from the EU has to be spent on hookers, it cannot be spent on anything else. In effect the EU is telling the UK how to spend some of its money and if the UK decide not to spend it the way the EU want it spent then the EU will not give it back to the UK.
Let's suppose Gerry joins the AA. The normal annual subscription is £100, but due to his disability he only pays £65.
Some of his money goes towards running the breakdown trucks, some goes towards putting up yellow signs for village shows and rock festivals, some goes towards helping villages where floods have damaged the roads. Occasionally his car breaks down, but he resents the fact that if a year goes by without his car breaking down, other people get the benefit of using the trucks he has helped pay for. He says that in his village, the roads are never damaged by floods.
Gerry has a sign-posting service, and puts up signs for his village fete and the leek show. For this he gets paid £25 a year. As a matter of policy, only paid-up members are offered these jobs. As a member, he also gets free or subsidised admission to the exhibitions of historic motor vehicles at 20 museums around the UK. The normal admission ticket is £2 and he visits about five a year.
Gerry says he wants to leave the AA. He says he wants to carry on visiting the museums every year. He says this will leave him £100 a year better off, which he intends to spend on cheap cider.
Is he right?
Some of his money goes towards running the breakdown trucks, some goes towards putting up yellow signs for village shows and rock festivals, some goes towards helping villages where floods have damaged the roads. Occasionally his car breaks down, but he resents the fact that if a year goes by without his car breaking down, other people get the benefit of using the trucks he has helped pay for. He says that in his village, the roads are never damaged by floods.
Gerry has a sign-posting service, and puts up signs for his village fete and the leek show. For this he gets paid £25 a year. As a matter of policy, only paid-up members are offered these jobs. As a member, he also gets free or subsidised admission to the exhibitions of historic motor vehicles at 20 museums around the UK. The normal admission ticket is £2 and he visits about five a year.
Gerry says he wants to leave the AA. He says he wants to carry on visiting the museums every year. He says this will leave him £100 a year better off, which he intends to spend on cheap cider.
Is he right?
But Jerry knows how to fix his own car so his subscription to the AA serves no function. But let's continue all the same:
As noble as those causes may be, it's still enforced charity.
OK now you've lost me. Your analogies are terrible.
And is told that if he does, the AA may choose to punish him and deliberately damage his vehicle. So he leaves on principle; him and his neighbour will fix the car from now on.
Last edited:
Lets make it easy for you.
Part 1:
No, he is talking rubbish because he doesn't pay £100 in the first place, so he cannot be £100 better off.
Part 1:
No, he is talking rubbish because he doesn't pay £100 in the first place, so he cannot be £100 better off.
OK OK, we get it already, the figure isn't £350M per week it's £248M per week. That doesn't suddenly make EU membership any more attractive.
Actually he may get a pay cut, but he won't lose all of it. Fortunately his neighbours also need signs putting up (but were previously unable to employ him, according to AA policy), which will easily make up for the loss.
Part 3.
He wants to carry on visiting the museums (getting access while not being a member).
He will in future not get free admission, he will have to pay £2 x 5 visits = £10 a year (like his friend from Norway has to pay for access).
Fair enough, so he has swapped his £65 a year mebership fee and £25 salary in exchange for a £10 a year fee, a £10 pay cut, plus a new £10 a year salary from his neighbours. Gerry is £55 better off. Be like Gerry.
So:
He can never be £100 better off by resigning, because he doesn't pay £100 in the first place
Additionally:
He will lose the £25 payment
He will have to pay £10 if he wants to continue visiting the museums. (His Norwegian friend visits more museums, and pays £50 a year).
In the event that the roads in his village are damaged by floods, he will not get any assistance from the AA Roads Disaster fund. When he car breaks down, he will not get recovery. A tow from the local garage costs about £120.
Yet he still keeps claiming that he will be £100 a year better off.
Is he
(1) A numbskull
(2) A liar?
He can never be £100 better off by resigning, because he doesn't pay £100 in the first place
Additionally:
He will lose the £25 payment
He will have to pay £10 if he wants to continue visiting the museums. (His Norwegian friend visits more museums, and pays £50 a year).
In the event that the roads in his village are damaged by floods, he will not get any assistance from the AA Roads Disaster fund. When he car breaks down, he will not get recovery. A tow from the local garage costs about £120.
Yet he still keeps claiming that he will be £100 a year better off.
Is he
(1) A numbskull
(2) A liar?
Both.
D
Doggit
Gentlemen, give it a rest. When you argue with morons, they will always drag you down to their level - and I'll let each of you decide which side you should be look at this from.
It doesn't bloody matter what the figures are, because both sides have handled themselves with dishonour, conducted themselves badly, and treated us all with contempt, and here we are arguing over petty little details, and you should all be ashamed of yourselves. Himmy and John want in, and aren't going to change their mind not matter what gets said, they only want to put the rest of us down, and prove how stupid we are, and by arguing with them, they end up proving they're right, and we're more than likely going to end up staying in, and they will crow their heads off, because that's the sort of people they've shown themselves to be.
Only time will tell which side was right, and as usual, it's the guys like us at the bottom of the pile that will have to suffer the inevitable problems that the idiots in charge have caused. We should be looking to change the system, not just arguing about little details.
It doesn't bloody matter what the figures are, because both sides have handled themselves with dishonour, conducted themselves badly, and treated us all with contempt, and here we are arguing over petty little details, and you should all be ashamed of yourselves. Himmy and John want in, and aren't going to change their mind not matter what gets said, they only want to put the rest of us down, and prove how stupid we are, and by arguing with them, they end up proving they're right, and we're more than likely going to end up staying in, and they will crow their heads off, because that's the sort of people they've shown themselves to be.
Only time will tell which side was right, and as usual, it's the guys like us at the bottom of the pile that will have to suffer the inevitable problems that the idiots in charge have caused. We should be looking to change the system, not just arguing about little details.
