Dead Men Walking

One of our esteemed dMw members posted this up on Facebook and I found it quite enlightening. Seems we're going to have to pay a huge additional EU tax that we knew nothing about, except actually we did :blink:

http://pme2013.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/eu-budget.html


Of course a grubby little rag like the Daily Mail/Express etc will simply make up whatever crap it's choosing to peddle at the moment. I've read the condemning stories in the papers and listened to our glorious leader Cameron decrying this dreadful EU tax that we are being forced to pay by the grey amorphous suits in Brussels, but it's always interesting to get a contrary view to challenge our preconceptions. I've no idea who the writer of the piece is so can't vouch for it's validity. However it's very telling that I'm happy to believe some random blogger over one of our biggest daily newspapers when it comes to honesty and reporting the facts. It also suggests that David Cameron is a complete hypocrite of the first order.

But maybe I'm just as naive and gullible for believe something I read on the Internet as the red top brigade are for believing something they read in a paper? I'll probably go back to not giving a monkeys either way and sticking exclusively to tech news :)

Quote from: smilodon;389852I'll probably go back to not giving a monkeys either way

You, me and nearly everyone else. The only common comment I hear when politics are mentioned is "I'm voting for UKIP next time"

That was either me or Dan :)

It was something I caught on twitter but like you I've no idea (or time) how to check sources. I'm happy to believe because it supports my current view of the media and politicians :)

Anyone know of a website that collates news stories of importance (subjective I know) and has some kind of peer review system. One can dream, or maybe we should just make one.

Most of the good news feeds I access are either professional subscription or pay-walled.   However the things that I noted and made me laugh when I read the stories in  professional papers were:

• Cameron did not say the 'UK would not pay', what he said he would challenge the basis of the figures and would therefore not be paying on 1st December (i.e. the UK will pay, but later than 1st December and only after a debate about the figures).   I readily admit the latter truth does not make quite such a hysterical anti-EU story and thus may have got lost in the rush for a good headline in such bastions of public truth as the Daily Mail.
• The increase in the calculated contribution results from a statistical accounting change in the way the UK calculates (i.e. guesses) the economic value of illegal trade and types of non-profit organisations.   The Office for National Statistics changed the way it calculated the guess, the guess resulted in a larger notional value for the UK economy and a guess was more good enough for a body that can't get its own accounts signed as 'true & fair' to then use to recalculate the required UK contribution.   Clearly the drug-dealers & pimps (along with churches and other NPOs) are doing better than we previously thought.  (does this mean I have to pay tax on my pimp earnings in addition to the local police hush money or do they offset?)
• The EU backdated the formula to take account of previous years of 'under-reporting of whore & crack houses (and churches again, or is that implicit)' which is why the UK's payment is so much bigger than anyone elses: it's 3.5 times that of the second biggest loser (Netherlands), 7 times that of third place Italy's and many multiples more than anyone else.
• If the ONS changes its basis again we might get a refund.   How accurately do you think other countries are with those guesses?   Not sure?   Don't worry, neither are the EU, but they'd like to charge you for it anyway.
• Alongside the UK and Dutch, other countries deemed by the EU to be financial power houses and whose economies must be surging forward with uncharacteristic bullishness are 'Greece' and 'Cyprus' (and the others noted below).  The EU said it, so it must be true.   I must be getting too old:
• Clearly it was a different Greece whose economy nearly went bankrupt recently?  
It was a different Cyprus that as part of an EU financial rescue package had to remove money from the people's savings accounts?

• Probably it wasn't Italy, but Italy's identical twin that added another 15% GDP to Italian national debt over the past four years because that's what the EU must define as a successful economy.
• It's blindingly obvious that Malta's membership of the G139 (as opposed to the G7) and it's 0.01% contribution to world GDP makes it a dead cert for being a key player in world finance, hence we want it to pay more.
• Bulgaria's trip into deflation this year must be acting contrary to normal economic theory and pushing their finances healthily into the black.
• I must have misheard about Ireland's financial crisis, never mind the fact that their recent acceptance of EU-held views on the 'double irish' tax treatment of non-domicile companies will probably lose them many millions in the future.
• Latvia's wealth is clear, their economy is growing at 3.8% - 5.0% per annum in each of the last four years, we'll just need to not remember that the growth is a recovery from 2009-10 when its economy crashed badly and shrank by 20%.

• It's more than a little disingenuous to suggest that the EU budget is really quite small when it runs to billions and they can't get their auditor to sign off their accounts as true and fair.   If the EU Commission were the board of a plc then they would have been struck off for financial incompetence, mismanagement, fraud and various other irregularities.
• The current funding formula was signed and agreed to by all countries, but unfortunately it relies on a sort of honour system.  Who do you trust?
• The bottom line: the squawking is more about the fact that the UK has only one month's notice of a pretty massive increase in EU membership costs.

Pick and choose, there's lots to laugh at in there for all sides.

Bring back the death penalty, even if you don't use it. Having it automatically disqualifies you from EU membership. Two birds, one stone....

Are you sure?  As far as I know, we still have hanging for persons who murder heads of state, from back when we were in GB.

Quote from: Jamoe;389860That was either me or Dan :)

It was your good self I believe. There's a healthy debate to be had about the pro's and cons of EU membership..... looks to Norway with envious eyes. What I'm 'loving' is the stupendous hypocrisy of our elected leaders and utterly dreadful reporting of our tabloid press. As usual we're left stumbling around in the dark searching for the truth. Still someone very clever once said "We get exactly the press we deserve." So we only have ourselves to blame.

A friend of mine who lives in Germany was amazed how little were told compared to basically any other European country, the people of the United Kingdom simply know nothing about what really happens in the EU with regards to our membership.

Quote from: Galatoni;389871the people of the United Kingdom simply know nothing about what really happens in the EU with regards to our membership.

Neither do the leaders of other countries as Eurostat give them about 4 weeks notice of their revised guess.

I thought the blog rather let itself down being too full of political rhetoric, although contained some new facts and the comment about xenophobia rang true. What terrifies me is that those in power end up pandering to the extreme views because the silent middle are seen as too apathetic...

The media in the UK seem to have slipped in recent years towards sensationalism over rational analysis.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2014/10/munchausen-by-proxy-and-the-media.html

Quote from: Jamoe;389860That was either me or Dan :)

It was something I caught on twitter but like you I've no idea (or time) how to check sources. I'm happy to believe because it supports my current view of the media and politicians :)

Anyone know of a website that collates news stories of importance (subjective I know) and has some kind of peer review system. One can dream, or maybe we should just make one.

No official ones that I'm aware of.

There are several newswire outlets which will harvest, collate and disseminate press stories. Reuters being a good example.
 There are also plenty of pan-European press cuttings' agencies which collect news stories but they tend to focus more on PR-led stories than general news stories and it's certainly not for peer review. They're also incredibly expensive.

The best way would be to find a dedicated forum of which I'm sure there's plenty.

Probably just go back and bury my head in the sand... trying to keep up with just tech news is hard enough.

I have read a lot of books related to Jack the Ripper. I stick to the reasoned and factually accurate accounts rather than the ridiculous "Solved -Jack the Ripper - uncovered -revealed" trash. Even back in the 1890's the tabloid press was all about sensational headlines, wild speculation and factual jiggery pokery, so sadly I don't think anything has really changed. We're happy to read stuff if it's entertaining and not too bothered about the facts.

In the age of technology we're as clueless as we've always been. There's an irony in there somewhere.