Search results

Well thats appalling. We have laws about using mobile phones, but playing cricket at the wheel is just irresponsible.

You would though if the rules were simple and unambiguous. The problem is that the rules have got so ridiculously obscure and complicated they are impossible to manage now. Agreed - but all some of these corporations have done is establish their HQ's in countries in the EU with low tax...

My point though is that the laws have to be better. If a government establishes a law it needs to be defined in a clear and unambiguous way. At the moment they are drafted by imbeciles. You cant create a woolly piece of legislation and then expect people to interpret it in only the way you...

I do wonder how they account for these costs though. 2 Police officers time for 2 years leaves an awful lot of change from £12.6 million. Most of that amount will be the cost of bureaucracy - which would probably just been apportioned over other projects.

I dont get the 'foaming at the mouth' Daily Mail style anger about this. Countries make tax rules. Countries choose to join trade agreements with other countries. Companies operate in those marketplaces and pay tax according to the rules. They will minimise their tax within the rules. You...

Have I got Old new for you. Of all shows out there, there isn't one less suitable for repeating six months later than a comic take on the current weeks news events.

Only if they have a very poor grasp of geography.

One trap (or choice) that many people fall into is to constantly stretch themselves financially to get the biggest possible house, best car etc at the cost of having very little disposable income. An alternative may be to live cheaper than you could afford - minimise those outgoings. If you...

Cleverly avoids any sexism accusations.

Nice one. I really fancied United for this one. I put my in play bet on United in the 5th minute. 2 mins later it was all over :wrong: Still, I'm a whole £2 up on the > 0.5 goals prematch. Thanks for the heads up all.

I'm getting on this, this time. Are we completely convinced that +0.5 goals and draw in play doesn't fall foul of the small print? I like this one for its simplicity.

Didn't we end their unbeaten start to the season a few years ago? Another of those omens...

I think the unbeaten run is great, but it becomes a bit of an abatross. Definitely take the extra point.

but he didn't score "a" goal he scored several. You have just hoisted yourself by your own petard.

I'm not arguing that its true - I'm arguing that it has 2 interpretations. Lets soften the example a bit: "Bobby will get a goal this weekend" When he gets the hattrick most would argue that my prediction had been correct. However a pedant could argue that he didn't get "a" goal, he got...

No he did get one(fact). Then he got two more.

They moved on from that and redefined the question to remove the ambiguity.

It just isn't though, however much you bang your mallet. "One is a boy" is ambigious. It can mean "Only one" or "at least one". How about I say "You know what? I think Bobby will get one this weekend." Now suppose we win 3-0 with a BZ hatrick. Would you really claim I had been wrong? Fact...

Well thats what I was arguing earlier. But the statement "A man has two children. One of them is a boy" is ambigious, and your argument holds only if you take it to mean "only one". That's why i gave up on it.

Have you considered a job with the UN?