Comments on: “Dr” John Reid

By: Bondwoman

Bondwoman — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:56:19 +0000

I forgot, I shouldn’t do irony on blogs…

By: Wolfie

Wolfie — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:04:10 +0000

“Come on, now, doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t anyone want to discuss the content?”

What content?

By: Summary justice in Walford « Not Saussure

Summary justice in Walford « Not Saussure — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 18:55:40 +0000

[…] As critics have pointed out, nobody at the Home Office has thought through what will happen if these people canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t or wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t pay. Expecting John Reid, the Tories or the right-wing press to consider the humanitarian implications of making already poor people poorer is, needless to say, a bridge too far. […]

By: Chicken Yoghurt » On the spot’s hot

Chicken Yoghurt » On the spot’s hot — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:48:31 +0000

[…] As critics have pointed out, nobody at the Home Office has thought through what will happen if these people can’t or won’t pay. Expecting John Reid, the Tories or the right-wing press to consider the humanitarian implications of making already poor people poorer is, needless to say, a bridge too far. […]

By: Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Brevity

Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Brevity — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 14:03:20 +0000

[…] Meanwhile, over at The Sharpener, Bondwoman has posted her take on John Reid’s immigration policies in equation form. […]

By: Ryan

Ryan — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:14:52 +0000

An equivalence in mathematics usually means an equivalence relation, which is a rule R satisfying, for all x, y and z varying over, well, whatever you want it to:

xRx
if xRy then yRx
if xRy and yRz then xRz

So logical equivalence (“if and only if” essentially) is an equivalence, as is equality (“=” in the usual sense).

I think the thing in the prose is supposed to be an equation, but really given the context equivalence will do, as equality is a metaphor for what the guy is saying.

By: Bondwoman

Bondwoman — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:31:26 +0000

I should have added, to be strictly correct, “at least short term” right of entry and residence. Perhaps it would be better as a vicious circle rather than equation or an identity or an equivalence or whatever. Sadly, am not sure the virtuous circle would operate in the opposite direction with access to the labour market but minus the welfare state safety net. Incidentally, no one ever mentions is but I am 99% sure that the UK`s transitional arrangements in relation to access to welfare benefits is almost certainly contrary to EU law. To my knowledge no one has challenged it yet, but it would be interesting to see if they did. Now that really would get a certain constituency foaming at the mouth.

By: jailhouselawyer

jailhouselawyer — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:43:09 +0000

I am almost totally innumerate so the maths of it is beyond me. Still, the logic of it is non existent. A Latvian friend tells me that she slept rough for a time, and that 18 Latvians shared a house. She did work for awhile, but was unable to remain employed for 12 months, therefore does not satisfy the habitual residence test and right to reside test. No jobseekers allowance, no housing or council tax benefit. Debts, debts and more debts. She finds work on the black market…

By: Bondwoman

Bondwoman — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:39:47 +0000

“IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m disappointed that I havenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t seen a single news piece quoting some Poles who are worried about Romanians coming over here and stealing their jobs.” I saw a funny little snippet in a cartoon to that effect after Ratzinger became pope. There was a strapline that read “Deutscher nimmt Polenjob”. The biter bit.

By: Jonn

Jonn — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:17:05 +0000

I’m disappointed that I haven’t seen a single news piece quoting some Poles who are worried about Romanians coming over here and stealing their jobs.

Not that I think it’s a valid argument, you understand. I just think it’d be funny.