Lazy Sunday reading for JoyLouise
AFAIK Bloomberg are not known as a bunch of misogynst lefties living off secret funds from Brussels or Trump Inc. or even the NKVD.
You know that I voted the same way that you did Rollo but the thing I could not understand about this piece is why he did not have a proof-reader - or a good proof-reader?
I hate to see something in an article that detracts from the seriousness that article is trying to promote. It is rather a shame if someone is writing an article for public consumption and, for me, these schoolboy errors undermine a valid point of view.
Thank goodness we are all different or it would be a dull world.
Half the country is functionally illiterate while 90% is innumerate. Minor errors in popular journalism matter little. Widespread failures in understanding do.
And isn't it a shame, Rollo?
I'm one of those who does not care what kind of language is spoken or written by those who do not depend on writing for a living because it is easy to interpret the meaning behind statements and sentences.
However, for those whose craft is the written word, apart from an odd slip or a necessity to get through to people the meaning behind the words, I think the least they can do is get it right - or employ a proof-reader. (Editor?)
After all, you would take your car back to a garage whose engineer has done a botch-up job on it. You expect an engineer to get it right.
At the risk of incurring your wrath, see some of the Daily Mail's writers, two are very good indeed no matter what they write about.
I am off out now (can I really be off?) to do gran duties. <3 :-D
I really do not think that it is a matter of any great importance if a piece of journalism or much else of a temporary nature come to that contains errors of grammar or spelling so long as the meaning is clear. In this day and age speed of production and accuracy of content counts far more. That especially applies in commerce. One of the most tedious elements of improving gophers still in love with their first class degree is that they have a day or two to wheel out a piece of work not six weeks. I am for sure not going to fork out for proof readers!!!
As to the Daily Mail it is hardly known for the accuracy of its reporting! My late mother used to read it as she liked some of the contents while being completely at odds with its politics. I still have a pile of old numbers as it made a very good base for the litter of our cat. Now he is gone too I have no use for it at all.
It is disappointing to see the shift of the Daily Telegraph into fantasy land along with the usual Tory back benchers to whom the BBC gives far too much time and creedence. May is going to find paying too much attention to this crowd will be painful when she discovers the "Transition" she keeps wittering on about has zero chance of becoming reality. The very best she can hope for is a 20 month extension on the basis of the current setup inc the ECJ. Even that depends on playing nice eg over "The Bill".
Labour of course are in a similar mess to the Tories but as they are not in power it is easier to paper over the cracks. The big Corbyn fantasy has nothing to do with brexit anyway - he thinks they will return to being no.1 in Scotland.
If May had been a real politician and not just a chancer she could have used a GE to blow Corbyn out of the water summer 2018. instead she displayed the utter lack of experience in her team - something which has not been fixed. Harold McMillan for instance used to play the Labour Party in the same way as one would play a brown trout. SuperMac was a deft guy with a fly and an excellent fisher. The country could surely do with a SuperMac right now.
Taking all of the 650 members of the Commons there might be as many as 50 with the brains, contacts and capacity for hard work needed to run a country but I wouldn't bet on it. The ignorance of the press is near total just lke an eclipse of the sun. When reality appears again on the other side of brexit it will not be a pretty sight.
Anyway in a few weeks time we will be entertained by Phil Hammond demonstrating that the latest and greatest version of Excel has several idfferent ways of making 2+2 equal five thanks to the wonders of quantum politics such as the DUP.
Government policies (inc but not just brexit) are seriously eroding government revenue at exactly the time when political pressures make plucking more feathers from the goose impossible. Something will have to give. Looking at the last 60 years that something will be the £ sterling. Running a super deficit may fix things for a while but it will be at the price of an even weaker pound making life difficult both for shoppers and makers who rely on imported parts and raw materials.
This is of course the classic British problem and has been since 1919. It was the fundamental reason why Heath took the country into the EU and the main reason why Labour did not reverse it. Thanks to the many upsides of the EU UK failure to fix any of its serious structural problems has been hidden. Post brexit they will show up in stark relief and be as easy to fix as an Escher picture.
Of course the EU is undemocratic that is the whole point of it. As a collective largely run by experts it can bulldoze through policies for the greater good which would never pass with individual states.
There is already a rising sound of screaming as banks and businesses prepare to rush for the door. By midsummer it could be replaced by the deafening sound of doors slamming.
[ link may go down so whole piece given ]
Facts support MP's claim that better-educated voted remain – pollster
Former YouGov boss says data is on side of Barry Sheerman, who was accused of suggesting Brexit voters were ‘thick’
Matthew Weaver Grauniad Monday 30 October 2017 09.10 GMT
'One of Britain’s most respected pollsters has defended a Labour MP facing criticism for pointing out that better-educated people tended to vote to remain in the European Union during the referendum.
Barry Sheerman, a former chair of the education select committee, prompted gasps of disapproval from Tory MP Stuart Andrew during a TV discussion when he said most of the people who voted remain were better educated.
Appearing on BBC1’s Sunday Politics programme in the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire region, Sheerman denied accusations, later echoed by right wing commentators, that he was suggesting that those who voted to leave the EU were “thick”.
He said: “When you look at the people who voted remain, most of them were the better educated people in our country. Nearly all the university towns voted remain.”
Andrew accused Sheerman of snobbery. But Peter Kellner, the former president of the YouGov polling firm, said Sheerman was factually correct.
“I would not use Barry Sheerman’s choice of words but the facts are broadly on his side,” Kellner told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Monday.
“Overall, people who left school at 15 or 16 voted around two to one for Brexit. [For] people who got up to A-level or equivalent qualification [it was] 50:50. Graduates voted two to one to remain in the EU.
“So yes, there is quite a clear educational gradient in the way people voted in last year’s referendum.”
Kellner pointed out that a similar education divide was seen in June’s general election.
“People who were for Brexit tended to move to the Conservatives. People who were remain tended to move towards Labour. So because of this educational connection it means there was quite a big swing to Labour amongst graduates. And quite a big swing to the Conservatives among people who left school at 15 or 16,” he said.
“If you look at the handful of seats that Labour lost in the Midlands and north to the Conservatives, they tended to have fewer graduates. You look at the seats where Labour did particularly well, in London and the university towns, they tend to have more graduates … There is a shadow from the referendum which affects politics and parliament to this day.”
Preti Patel is MP for a mid Essex constituency. Born in London of east Asian parents she was educated at Keele and, yep, the University of Essex (Colchester). P.P. is a leading Brexiter and was once tipped as a future P.M. She believes that funding the Israeli Army is a good use of aid funds.