Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continuing this as original got too big. "So how come I have GCSEs A levels and a Degree but fall into a category described as below educational standard?" The YouGov analysis doesn't say anything about "below educational standard" nor does it say anything about EVERY leave voter being uneducated. It says: "The most dramatic split is along the lines of education. 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split, 50% to 50%." This means 32% of those with a degree voted Leave or didn't vote. However, what it does say is that the less educated were GENERALLY more likely to vote Leave. As were the old. At the end of the day you're arguing with maths." No I think the poster you quoted was arguing against polling, which let's face it has been proven wrong on many occasions over the last few years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continuing this as original got too big. "So how come I have GCSEs A levels and a Degree but fall into a category described as below educational standard?" The YouGov analysis doesn't say anything about "below educational standard" nor does it say anything about EVERY leave voter being uneducated. It says: "The most dramatic split is along the lines of education. 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split, 50% to 50%." This means 32% of those with a degree voted Leave or didn't vote. However, what it does say is that the less educated were GENERALLY more likely to vote Leave. As were the old. At the end of the day you're arguing with maths. No I think the poster you quoted was arguing against polling, which let's face it has been proven wrong on many occasions over the last few years. " If I leave you long enough you'll contradict yourself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continuing this as original got too big. "So how come I have GCSEs A levels and a Degree but fall into a category described as below educational standard?" The YouGov analysis doesn't say anything about "below educational standard" nor does it say anything about EVERY leave voter being uneducated. It says: "The most dramatic split is along the lines of education. 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split, 50% to 50%." This means 32% of those with a degree voted Leave or didn't vote. However, what it does say is that the less educated were GENERALLY more likely to vote Leave. As were the old. At the end of the day you're arguing with maths. No I think the poster you quoted was arguing against polling, which let's face it has been proven wrong on many occasions over the last few years. " The statistical analysis is absolutely clear: the likelihood is that if you are older and/or have fewer qualifications you are more likely to have voted leave. That's not polling per se | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continuing this as original got too big. "So how come I have GCSEs A levels and a Degree but fall into a category described as below educational standard?" The YouGov analysis doesn't say anything about "below educational standard" nor does it say anything about EVERY leave voter being uneducated. It says: "The most dramatic split is along the lines of education. 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split, 50% to 50%." This means 32% of those with a degree voted Leave or didn't vote. However, what it does say is that the less educated were GENERALLY more likely to vote Leave. As were the old. At the end of the day you're arguing with maths. No I think the poster you quoted was arguing against polling, which let's face it has been proven wrong on many occasions over the last few years. If I leave you long enough you'll contradict yourself." and we know what he calls people who contradict themselves  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continuing this as original got too big. "So how come I have GCSEs A levels and a Degree but fall into a category described as below educational standard?" The YouGov analysis doesn't say anything about "below educational standard" nor does it say anything about EVERY leave voter being uneducated. It says: "The most dramatic split is along the lines of education. 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower voted to Leave, while 68% of voters with a university degree voted to Remain in the EU. Those with A levels and no degree were evenly split, 50% to 50%." This means 32% of those with a degree voted Leave or didn't vote. However, what it does say is that the less educated were GENERALLY more likely to vote Leave. As were the old. At the end of the day you're arguing with maths. No I think the poster you quoted was arguing against polling, which let's face it has been proven wrong on many occasions over the last few years. If I leave you long enough you'll contradict yourself. and we know what he calls people who contradict themselves "yes i think the term used now is doing a bercow.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Ooops!
It's got March 29 written on it.
How much do you think it's worth now?
Tuppence ha'penny?
Piss-up . . . breweries . . . organise
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did anyone order a souvenir Brexit 50p piece?
Ooops!
It's got March 29 written on it.
How much do you think it's worth now?
Tuppence ha'penny?
Piss-up . . . breweries . . . organise
"The pm is playing a blinder she will ask the eu for an extention they will want to know what for, she will say to get the deal through,they will say no then we can leave on the 29th. The erg will be happy and she can say to the other tories its the eu,s fault they wont extend.Everyones happy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. " I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. " The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely." Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely." I would say that at all, I've met many people with degrees who are quite dogmatic in their approach to things. There are definitely many "uneducated" who are deeply critical of things, or there wouldn't be a Labour movement. All "intelligence" means, with respect to further/higher education is that those obtaining qualifications are more capable of using abstract concepts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. " Bit like the old bull and young bull looking down on a field of cows,the young bull says lets run down there and shag a cow the old bull replies lets walk and shag them all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. " You got us there. Your sayings and catchphrases trump facts and research once again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. You got us there. Your sayings and catchphrases trump facts and research once again. " They're not my sayings and catchphrases. They were around long before I was born. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. You got us there. Your sayings and catchphrases trump facts and research once again. They're not my sayings and catchphrases. They were around long before I was born. " Missing the point. At least you’re consistent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the point behind the "educational statistics", is that it's a thinly veiled dig at Brexiteers, which very much implies that they are stupid. It's the same, disingenuous argument from remaners: stupid, racist or both. Its both arrogant and tired as far as arguments go. Degree certificates don't necessarily indicate intelligence, nor does not having one mean you are less eligible to participate in democracy." It's legitimate comment. Saying that there is a statistical relationship between educational attainment and voting is hardly disingenuous, it's a fact | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yet more defensiveness from a snowflake who objects to voter analysis by social categorisation. I don't object to it, I'm just telling you why people feel the need to use it - They are making a point and I'm highlighting what that point is. I've both seen enough intelligence amongst those without degree certificates and also lack the arrogance to suppose that because I have more than one degree I'm somehow superior to those who don't. The point isn’t necessarily related to intelligence. It’s more to do with knowledge and worldliness. Qualifications don’t equal intelligence, but they do imply greater knowledge and a greater understanding of the wider implications and impacts of things going on around us. To pass a degree course you need a certain level of critical thinking, you need to question your sources, consider any bias and you need to gather information from a wide range of publications as possible. It doesn’t mean that people without degrees don’t have these skills, just that people with degrees are more likely to have them. The age thing highlights that the older generation didn’t feel like they had as much to lose where as younger people wanted to feel connected to Europe and wanted opportunities to travel, live and work there freely. Older people are generally more knowledgeable and more worldly. They have gained much more life experience than the younger generation and tend to make better decisions than the young. Hence the widely known terms such as 'older and wiser' and 'the inexperience of youth'. " What arrant nonsense. Age and wisdom arent connected in any way. Experience is not worldliness | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the point behind the "educational statistics", is that it's a thinly veiled dig at Brexiteers, which very much implies that they are stupid. It's the same, disingenuous argument from remaners: stupid, racist or both. Its both arrogant and tired as far as arguments go. Degree certificates don't necessarily indicate intelligence, nor does not having one mean you are less eligible to participate in democracy. It's legitimate comment. Saying that there is a statistical relationship between educational attainment and voting is hardly disingenuous, it's a fact" It's not the statistics themselves that are disingenuous (and I'm not sure how you managed to think that was what I meant), it's the using of them and then denying that there's a point to using them. Statistics are used to illustrate a point, either explicitly, or in this case implicitly. I'm merely pointing out the point that those particular statistics are being used to make in the context of this argument. The fact that the people using them are unwilling to say why is why is disingenuous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the point behind the "educational statistics", is that it's a thinly veiled dig at Brexiteers, which very much implies that they are stupid. It's the same, disingenuous argument from remaners: stupid, racist or both. Its both arrogant and tired as far as arguments go. Degree certificates don't necessarily indicate intelligence, nor does not having one mean you are less eligible to participate in democracy. It's legitimate comment. Saying that there is a statistical relationship between educational attainment and voting is hardly disingenuous, it's a fact It's not the statistics themselves that are disingenuous (and I'm not sure how you managed to think that was what I meant), it's the using of them and then denying that there's a point to using them. Statistics are used to illustrate a point, either explicitly, or in this case implicitly. I'm merely pointing out the point that those particular statistics are being used to make in the context of this argument. The fact that the people using them are unwilling to say why is why is disingenuous. " If people don't know how to either a) interpret statistics or b) use statistics it's not my problem. I have merely pointed out the strength of the correlations between age and educational attainment and voting patterns in the referendum. That in my book is entirely legitimate | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the point behind the "educational statistics", is that it's a thinly veiled dig at Brexiteers, which very much implies that they are stupid. It's the same, disingenuous argument from remaners: stupid, racist or both. Its both arrogant and tired as far as arguments go. Degree certificates don't necessarily indicate intelligence, nor does not having one mean you are less eligible to participate in democracy. It's legitimate comment. Saying that there is a statistical relationship between educational attainment and voting is hardly disingenuous, it's a fact It's not the statistics themselves that are disingenuous (and I'm not sure how you managed to think that was what I meant), it's the using of them and then denying that there's a point to using them. Statistics are used to illustrate a point, either explicitly, or in this case implicitly. I'm merely pointing out the point that those particular statistics are being used to make in the context of this argument. The fact that the people using them are unwilling to say why is why is disingenuous. " Another way of looking at it is that those with fewer educational qualifications are more likely to get the shitty end of the economic stick and thus be in revolt against the prevailing economic wisdom. In that way those people voting for brexit may make perfect sense. Having said that, the implication that those voting for brexit tending to have fewer qualifications means that brexit voters tend to be thick is a good polemical point to put to brexiteers, given that most of them are right wing types, who in any other situation would dismiss structural reasons for people having few qualifications and would be entirely comfortable with the argument that if you have no qualifications you must be thick. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the point behind the "educational statistics", is that it's a thinly veiled dig at Brexiteers, which very much implies that they are stupid. It's the same, disingenuous argument from remaners: stupid, racist or both. Its both arrogant and tired as far as arguments go. Degree certificates don't necessarily indicate intelligence, nor does not having one mean you are less eligible to participate in democracy. It's legitimate comment. Saying that there is a statistical relationship between educational attainment and voting is hardly disingenuous, it's a fact It's not the statistics themselves that are disingenuous (and I'm not sure how you managed to think that was what I meant), it's the using of them and then denying that there's a point to using them. Statistics are used to illustrate a point, either explicitly, or in this case implicitly. I'm merely pointing out the point that those particular statistics are being used to make in the context of this argument. The fact that the people using them are unwilling to say why is why is disingenuous. If people don't know how to either a) interpret statistics or b) use statistics it's not my problem. I have merely pointed out the strength of the correlations between age and educational attainment and voting patterns in the referendum. That in my book is entirely legitimate" Its nothing to do with that, and everything to do with what assertions that you are making, using the statistics as your evidence. Remainers using these are very clearly trying use them to assert that people who voted for Brexit are stupid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I cannot believe how defensive people are getting about this. The polling simply provides demographic indicators. It does not tell you why. Two thoughts: The decade leading up to the referendum was the worst in living memory for income growth. On top of that, austerity disproportionately affected those on low incomes - the cohort more likely to contain people with fewer qualifications. The "feel good" factor was noticeably absent. Those with fewer qualifications may have been more receptive to messages about migration. They had less confidence in their ability to compete with imported unskilled labour, especially if they read that the entire population of Turkey was about to arrive in the UK. The picture was more mixed in the mid-range. Those with degrees had more confidence in their ability to compete in markets where skills are short. They may also have been exposed to a wider variety of cultures during their time at university and therefore felt less threatened. The leave campaign sought to appeal to emotion, whereas the Remain side lead with economic stats. Along comes Cameron and Osborne and tells people they'll be £3k a year worse off without the EU, so stick with us and we'll look after you. Well, people were already feeling worse off under their tenure, so they had no reason to feel confident about their messages. The ground was fertile for those arguing for change. It's anecdotal, yes, but for me the most memorable clip was a lady in the north-east interviewed by ITV on the day Cameron and Osborne gave their £3k warning. "£3000?" she exclaimed. "I don't know what that looks like. I have no money now. If I have no money then, how can I be any worse off?" In other words, things cannot get any worse for you, so what have you got to lose by voting for change? Nothing. One thing the Leave campaign did successfully, just as the Yes campaign did in Scotland in 2014, was to reach out to those who did not normally bother to vote and persuade them they had nothing to lose by voting for change. Align that to seductive messages about how much better your health care might be, too, and it was enough to tip the balance in favour of Leave. Viewed impartially, it was clever research and tailored messaging from the Leave side. We know now the data they built that around was obtained in dubious circumstances. That aside, it was shrewd and effective - and suggests some expensive help was brought in. " It is good to see a reasonable analysis here but you did not mention the age factor and age was a great influence on voting.Basically the young ruined generation are terrified of change.The old see things very differently also Osbourne was the biggest lier in the whole debate he was just making guesses nothing based on fact because there are still no facts about leaving | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Only just seen this thread, what. The statistics don't point out is only five percent of the population used to go to university, less people had qualifications, they did apprenticeships and got jobs lol now they get paper qualifications, people haven't got smarter, our brains haven't evolved and got big over the last twenty years, university became an industry, the younger generations just got more bits of paper saying how smart they are,it cost them! So the statistics are true but don't actually give a true picture "  100% true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
