Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Polls
38 Answers
I think this might be one for Mikey. I have never taken much notice of polls because I cant understand how asking a few hundred people can reflect the views and voting intentions of the whole country but this latest one in the Sunday Times in beyond me.
Voting intention: Labour 36% Conservative 31%
Who would you trust most: Cameron 22%. Milliband 18%
Now neither leader is going to step down, or swop parties so what's going on?
Voting intention: Labour 36% Conservative 31%
Who would you trust most: Cameron 22%. Milliband 18%
Now neither leader is going to step down, or swop parties so what's going on?
Answers
I don't think any polls produced by the main polling organisation s ever cover just a few hundred people. A sample size of 1000 is usually considered good enough provided steps are taken to ensure it is representati ve, although sometimes a completely random sample can be used. Some use a sample of 2000 but the accuracy is only very slightly higher This site may...
14:53 Sun 28th Sep 2014
Of course I'll be an immigrant. But I will be a self funding one. You have to pay a shed load of money (thousands) up front if you are retired to cover medical treatment and that's how it should be. I don't want to become a burden on another country. My daughter is there also. I do voluntary work so I will put something back so to speak. Oz has a Liberal Government. That's Conservative as they only have two main parties, Labou and Liberal. When we were there last we took a keen interest in there politics and watched their equivalent of Question Time which is on a Thursday night and is called Q & A.
Linda,
You do know that Australia takes in more immigrants annually than the UK does? In a country with a third of the population of the UK, that is a hell of a lot of immigrants. Unemployment is higher in Australia than in the UK, so if you go there as an economic migrant and take a job, you are just behaving like the eastern Europeans who come to this country.
You do know that Australia takes in more immigrants annually than the UK does? In a country with a third of the population of the UK, that is a hell of a lot of immigrants. Unemployment is higher in Australia than in the UK, so if you go there as an economic migrant and take a job, you are just behaving like the eastern Europeans who come to this country.
Gromit, Australia is 27 times the size of the UK. They have a managed immigration policy where they take the skills they require. Their unemployment rate is currently 6.4' the same as the UK and I think ours is currently the lowest in Europe. We wouldn't be going to find a job anyway, having retired 14 years ago. How can we be classed as economic migrants when we a would be going with enough money to sustain ourselves and contribute to the society. Anyway it's only a dream at the moment. I have a 95 year old Mother living nearby. She was born in poverty and through sheer hardwork and savings is totally funding her own care with no help from the state. She had a visit from a occupational therapist the other day who suggested some equipment and would provide it free on the NHS. My Mother thanked her for her advise but said she preferred to purchase the equipment privately. This is the ethic of my family.
Linda...I am not sure how this simple debate has got so bogged down, and why a certain person is being so horrid to you !
If you are indeed off to Oz, I wish you luck. My Nephew now lives in Sydney and loves it, although he does say that the Oz wildlife isn't to be messed with, as it bites back ! He also says that there is great fusion cooking down under...he takes after his Uncle in appreciation of good food !
By the way, stay with us on AB wherever you are !
If you are indeed off to Oz, I wish you luck. My Nephew now lives in Sydney and loves it, although he does say that the Oz wildlife isn't to be messed with, as it bites back ! He also says that there is great fusion cooking down under...he takes after his Uncle in appreciation of good food !
By the way, stay with us on AB wherever you are !
The only understanding of polls I need is the fact that empirically it has been borne out that a large enough sample will reflect the opinions of the whole provided it is truly random and one understands limits of error that may occur. It's probable that it can be mathematically shown but that it works is sufficient for now.
As for the more favoured party having the least favoured leader of the two, I don't see an issue. One votes for one's local candidate. One might take into consideration the party they have joined, and that party's manifesto, and past record, if one wishes. But one doesn't vote for a leader; who can be swopped out at any time. It's the problem with not going for a democracy but electing a bunch of privileged elite to lord it over us for a while. They are more or less a law unto themselves, and if not they'll change the law so that they are.
As for the more favoured party having the least favoured leader of the two, I don't see an issue. One votes for one's local candidate. One might take into consideration the party they have joined, and that party's manifesto, and past record, if one wishes. But one doesn't vote for a leader; who can be swopped out at any time. It's the problem with not going for a democracy but electing a bunch of privileged elite to lord it over us for a while. They are more or less a law unto themselves, and if not they'll change the law so that they are.