Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks Andy, the screenshot of the Luma Card from the internet bears the first 4 digits matching the account number they are using in this claim. There are other images with different numbers on them too...... 
    • A further valid point which you can add and adapt to my last post...then use that as your statement.   With regards to on line application in their statement I have posted the section above re " typing your surname and date " you give the necessary consent to be bound by the terms and conditions.Well you dont  ...you also have to tick the tick box which creates a digital signature...none of which is on the alleged application they disclose and rely on.
    • So lets look at your one link (I think) apart from some recent news reports from China   My statements are as defined by WHO, the CDC etc etc based on the experiences they had in managing and investigating prior similar outbreaks like MERS and SARS   ... gets my vote     Yours references appear based on a reputable source MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/   BUT - what actually is it?   I've scanned through two the two latest reports and it certainlt seems to be a mathematical modelling exercise (standard deviation etc) on the current outbreak based on the limited information currently available.   Absolutely a worthy and essential goal that undoubtedly will add to our knowledge of the progress of these sort of outbreaks It MIGHT even update the processes and procedures already in place some time in the future, or it might simply confirm them.     But is is accurate or anything other at present? From the LATEST updated report 3 - their own words quoted.   "For our baseline estimates, we assume that two key characteristics of 2019-nCoV are similar to those observed for SARS   that there is high  level of variability  in the number of new infections generated by each infectious individual    and that the  generation time (the  average time between generations of infection)  is  the same as was estimated for SARS (mean of  8.4  days  [3])"       "we also generate estimates assuming 1000 or 9700 cases by 18th January, the lower and upper bounds of the uncertainty range around our central estimate of 4000 cases by that date." (a 10 fold spread in the estimates)     How accurate have these guess-timations you quote here proven to be (in their own words)? " The  uncertainty range is 1,000-9,700, reflecting the many continuing unknowns involved in deriving these estimates. Our central estimate of 4,000 is more than double our past estimates, a result of the increase of the number of cases detected outside mainland China "     So yes I do understand them, and will stick with the CDC/WHO figures thank you         oh and of course a Russian spook selling a book - which I admit to NOT having read - I did say not Alex Jones
    • Not really a risk more of an oversight because throughout this claim you have stated you have never held a Cap One Credit Card.....now you find you did...but it helps prove thats theirs cant be valid because you would not have 2 credit agreements with Cap 1 unless one was for a Luma brand.   If your numbers in the screenshot are different to the ones they are quoting in this claim (they have given an account number ?) then yes it would be useful.   This is not about avoiding paying any debt its about proving to the court how DCAs are manufacturing documents to fit their claims.
    • If we can’t agree on the incubation period, what are you thoughts on “Ro” for 2019-CoV (or R0), which I’d prefer to write as R(subscript-0) if I was able....   a) what would you estimate it to be?   I’ve seen estimates of between 1.4-2.5 (the WHO report factoring in 4th generation cases, from Jan 23rd),   1.4-3.8 from other analyses from the same date, although Fisman from Toronto (who did much of the modelling around SARS) cites a paper noting “the volume of observed exported cases in countries outside China suggested a much larger underlying epidemic than had been reported at that time, and this epidemic may have begun a month prior to the recognition of the market-associated outbreak, consistent with the reported timing of viral emergence based on phylogenetic analyses” Fisman believes there is “a SARS-compatible generation time of 6-10 days” (so, again, not 14 days!), stating that he believes the transmission dynamics are similar to SARS :  “ It is the average R0 that determines whether, and how, the disease can be controlled.  By analogy with SARS and MERS, with which nCoV seems to share many characteristics, the spread of this virus should be controllable.”   Do you agree: a) “superspreaders may widen the Ro range seen” (there are suggestion one hospitalised case generated 14 secondary cases), and b) the outbreak can be controlled by measures to bring Ro (targeting both standard spreaders and accepting the challenge of “superspreaders”) down to below 1?   Happy to consider your expert epidemiological opinion based on current knowledge of the statistics currently available (& accepting that the information gets refined over time!)   Ohh, and that still isn’t an incubation period of 14 days, if the generation time is 10 days  (dependant on when / if infectivity occurs prior to symptoms, are you suggesting that that interval is 4+ days??)
  • Our picks

joeski

ahhhhh daily mail give it a rest *yawn* !!!

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2515 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

if the daily mail isn't banging on about non existent snow then it is slagging off benefit claimants, you can tell a newspaper is on its way out when it keeps repeating the same old rubbish!

 

give it rest daily mail, your tiresome and boring now *yawn*

 

its funny how nothing is said in this article about MP's and bankers who are the real scroungers with their expenses, bonuses etc.

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2289593/More-20-everyones-income-tax-goes-straight-benefits-sparking-fresh-calls-cuts-welfare.html

Edited by joeski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over 1.5 million people take the Daily Mail every day.

 

Shocking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isnt is strange that they forgot to put the amount for pensions on

 

pensions are about twice the amount as benefits and might have changed the perspective


If you have found my post useful, please click on the star at the bottom of my post and add some reputation points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The daily heil has a graph showing the rise in the cost of living but they want to see a cut in benefits. Just goes to show you the kind of people they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any one notice advt. in daily mail mainly for disabled people i.e high chair -hearing aids- mobility scooter etc. and yet daily mail always against benefits

if we disabled people do not support daily mail advertiser then daily mail is doom

i do not buy any thing from daily mail advertiser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how much MPs expenses are in comparison to benefits...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was amusing that they call for welfare to be cut but at the same time help with rising living costs. That one lost me.

 

Also they (probably deliberatly) fail to mention JSA is only a tiny part of the welfare budget.

 

The question did the government tell them to print this story so joe bloggs is onside for next welfare announcement, or is the paper itself initiated this to try and push the government in that direction.

 

Also the quesiton as well, why does the paper feel it wrong for those able to help those not able, as that story pretty much says that statement.

 

Also how can income tax expenditure be fairly broke down?

 

Overall government spend is much higher as is other taxes such as VAT and corp tax plus overall spending is higher than all taxes. Do they just pick and choose what to put in the income tax income?

Edited by worried33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that those on benefits also pay tax is often missed ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that those on benefits also pay tax is often missed ...

 

Indeed. Some benefits are taxable too. I can't remember the figure off the top of my head; but I seem to remember that quite a few who claim HB are working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. Some benefits are taxable too. I can't remember the figure off the top of my head; but I seem to remember that quite a few who claim HB are working.

 

is there anything this useless goverment wouldn't tax?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is there anything this useless goverment wouldn't tax?!

 

The rich - if they thought they could get it passed.


We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~ Aesop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much does the conflicts in areas like Afghanistan and other places cost the British taxpayer every year? Not forgetting where there is no conflict but we have troops. How much are we giving away in grants or loans to various other countries every year. How much do we pay the EU each year? Lastly how much does it cost to fund the NI, Welsh and Scottish parliamenst every year? I would imagine that we could save billions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. Some benefits are taxable too. I can't remember the figure off the top of my head; but I seem to remember that quite a few who claim HB are working.

 

*raises hand*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. Some benefits are taxable too. I can't remember the figure off the top of my head; but I seem to remember that quite a few who claim HB are working.

 

HB is not a taxable benefit, but you are correct that many people who claim it are working. In fact, I believe that only around 12% of claimants are unemployed. The rest are pensioners, sick or disabled, or working on low wages. Most new claims are made by those who are employed.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

get what the daily mail is banging on about snow again today, acting like snow in winter is a massive deal *yawn* :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is where I live, joeski! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what seems to be missing in all this debate is everyone is starting to talk like the government quoting the welfare bill.

 

I am of the opinion that state benefits are an inherent right considering people have paid into it through national insurance contributions. The national health service is the same.

 

Welfare i would class as home help, meals on wheels, social services, housing benefit etc

 

To class the national expenditure of benefits, and label it as welfare is again disguising the real issue, and vastly distorting the real figures in which the welfare bill to the country is vastly superior to what the country spends on social security payments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Daily Wail (or Fail) as I like to call it thinks it is the mouthpiece of Middle England - well its idyllic Middle England died with the onset of the Second World War.

 

Also as I like to say, "There are lies, damn lies, statistics and Daily Mail statistics!"

 

They love including Council Tax benefit (which goes direct to the council in most cases) and Housing Benefit (which goes to the landlord) in their ludicrous claims that people on benefit have x amount to spend - try getting £142 a fortnight for 2 years and then come back and say I live a life of riley on it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is where I live, joeski! :D

 

well it isn't here :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is people buy it by the truckload. Don't you believe it,middle England is alive and well and blaming everything on immigration,benefits and the subversive elements. They pander to peoples fears and prejudices. I am sorry to say they do it extremely well.


Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neuro-Linguistic Programming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...