placeholder

Still don't get it? It will not be deemed fictitious. It will be deemed unconfirmable. What's more, even if his personal experience could be confirmed, so what? You think one person's report, even if this person were completely unbiased (is there such a person?) would have any value as data? I have yet to see any studies with titles along the lines of "What Transam Saw Of The Poor Last Time He Was In Blighty"

Being invisible, nothing can't be seen.

Once again, you've got nothing.

Are anyone's personal reports in this forum verifiable? Do anyone's unverifiable reports in this forum have any evidentiary value?

Whatever the merits of your comment about Trump's appeal to the Russians, would you also say he was joking when he said he believed Putin even though American intelligence agencies said differently? And he held a private meeting with Putin with the only other person from his team being a translator? President Trump went to 'extraordinary lengths' to hide details of Putin meetings, report says President Donald Trump went to "extraordinary lengths" to keep details from his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin secret – even from officials within his own administration, The Washington Post reported this weekend, citing unnamed sources. After meeting with Putin at the 2017 Group of 20summit in Hamburg, Germany, Trump took his interpreter's notes and told him not to discuss the meeting with anyone, including other U.S. officials, the Post reported. The paper said Trump's handling of the Hamburg meeting was "part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries." https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/13/trump-putin-meetings-interpreter-notes/2565471002/

I certainly didn't call you a liar. But that you see it that way just reinforces the accuracy of my observation.

He took personally a general statement about the unverifiable nature of personal testimony and its evidentiary uselessness. When in fact, it applies to everyone in this forum.

Really? "Oh dear. Another poster questioning my honesty. Maybe you should start understanding stuff.

Because it's not the tanks that are fighting the Russians, it's the Ukrainians who are fighting the Russians. Tanks, like any weapon, are just tools. They enjoy no independent agency.

You think it's all about you, do you? Get over yourself. When it comes to issues involving millions of people, there's no way of verifying anyone's personal experience who posts here. We're all anonymous. If you want to tell us about your experiences, say, in tiling a bathroom, the do's and the do-not's, that's a different matter.

And don't you suggest that your personal reports are verifiable or have any evidentiary value.

As is noted in at least one of those article, the Nigerian President didn't say that the weapons were coming from Ukraine. He blamed it on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. And given the history of massive corruption in the Russian Army, I know which party is the more likely suspect. Especially given that the Wagner Group is active in Africa. And as for "Denis Pushilin, acting head of the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR)", do I really need to spell it out for why he's not a trustworthy source?

So the EU is all about feelings, is it? Nothing of any economic significance there?

How many times are you going to try and promote the assertion that the Mueller report was a complete vindication for the Trump campaign working with the Russians? A federal judge castigated Barr for making such assertions. There was plenty of evidence that Trump's campaign worked with the Russians. The Mueller report said there were 10 criminal charges that could be brought against Trump were he not the President.

If you call running away after being illegally assaulted resisting arrest, then you have a point.

Apparently, there is a need. Since you dismissed the information on the basis that it came via Wikipedia.

If it wasn't snobism, what prevented you from clicking on the link and seeing the source?

A lot more of them have died than have the rising generations. The votes was 52-48% https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rate-by-age-group-in-england-and-wales

Do you believe they're immortal?

Or maybe you could abandon your reflexive snobbism.

Well, how exactly does one prove a negative like that? I'm sure there must be some economic benefits to Brexit. At the moment, I can't come up with what they might be.

If you have a problem with the definition offered by Wikipedia, let me know what that is. If not, you've got nothing. Here's a link to the source of Wikipedia's definition. [1] Journal of Economic Integration 22(4), December 2007; 780-818 Trade Effects of the Euro: a Comparison of Estimators Richard Baldwin Graduate Institute of International Studies Daria Taglioni European Central Ban Looks quite respectable to me. But if you know something discreditable about the authors of the piece or the journal they published their work in, please share it with me.

Trying the exact same ploy again? Her judgements as an economist depend on her knowledge and mastery of economics. This thread is about the IMF forecast. Nothing to do with her bad decision not to appeal the judgement of an arbitration panel. offense. And whether or not she what she was convicted of could "carry criminal censure", in this case the course specified that it would not constitute a criminal record.

Here's a fact for you. And it's a powerful one. The 2 most important factors in determing what percentage of trade they do with each other is proximity and the size of a nation's economy. Economists call this relationship gravity. No amount of pie-in-the-sky trade deals with more distant nations will make up for the fact that it's now a lot harder for the UK to trade with its closest neighbors. The gravity model of international trade in international economics is a model that, in its traditional form, predicts bilateral trade flows based on the economic sizes and distance between two units. Research shows that there is "overwhelming evidence that trade tends to fall with distance.[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_model_of_trade

Actually, the demographics are such that the odds are very strong that the UK will be going back.