The Commons Bar Mk XIII - MHoC Chat Thread

Announcements Posted on
TSR looking different to you this week? Find out why here. 02-12-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:


    omg that's 2 memes in two days, this one not in the least bit funny but some members of this House could well take note.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Oh, god, I'd forgotten that you understand masses about everything.

    Are you basically saying that over half the population are idiots?
    Didn't the Tories write a bill that would have made voting rights subject to exam performance?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)


    omg that's 2 memes in two days, this one not in the least bit funny but some members of this House could well take note.
    When people over use a word it loses its meaning, I saw someone yesterday claim it was racist to be against caster semenya competing against women.

    There are legitimate views being blocked because someone claims that the speaker is those things, surely if it is true you should be able to destroy the other persons argument without resorting to ad hominem attacks.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    When people over use a word it loses its meaning, I saw someone yesterday claim it was racist to be against caster semenya competing against women.

    There are legitimate views being blocked because someone claims that the speaker is those things, surely if it is true you should be able to destroy the other persons argument without resorting to ad hominem attacks.
    Obviously you can be racist in your motivation (something along the lines of 'omg they're all baboons that lot, shouldn't be allowed in races with humans'), but yeah, not racist per se. I think you probably overestimate the extent to which this happens though outside of a few vocal tumblristas.

    (also, what's the argument against Semenya? She conforms to rules stated clearly in advance)
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Obviously you can be racist in your motivation (something along the lines of 'omg they're all baboons that lot, shouldn't be allowed in races with humans', but yeah, not racist per se. I think you probably overestimate the extent to which this happens though outside of a few vocal tumblristas.

    (also, what's the argument against Semenya? She conforms to rules stated clearly in advance)
    I'm not judging one way or another but some people say that because of her condition (hyperandrogenism) that the fact it gives her a much higher testosterone levels of somewhere over 10 (it is unknown how far over) when 99% of women have a testosterone level below 3 and it is said to give them a advantage a significant advantage between 1 and 3% which could be around 3.6 seconds over 800 meters.

    The IAAF have tried to change the rules recently to the testosterone levels.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Didn't the Tories write a bill that would have made voting rights subject to exam performance?
    Thought that was UKIP?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)


    omg that's 2 memes in two days, this one not in the least bit funny but some members of this House could well take note.
    Wish I could rep you for this, that could have been said with a degree of accuracy by about 25% of the MHoC.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Thought that was UKIP?
    I'm sure it was you lot at the start of last term. I remember you guys writing a Suffrage Bill


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    I'm not judging one way or another but some people say that because of her condition (hyperandrogenism) that the fact it gives her a much higher testosterone levels of somewhere over 10 (it is unknown how far over) when 99% of women have a testosterone level below 3 and it is said to give them a advantage a significant advantage between 1 and 3% which could be around 3.6 seconds over 800 meters.

    The IAAF have tried to change the rules recently to the testosterone levels.
    But the Olympics and top-level sports is all about athletes who, due to their biology, have some advantage over most people. Sure, her testosterone levels are very unusual and make her better at the sport than most women - so what? Michael Phelps has had such tremendous success because his body his highly unusual. Someone with short or average length legs is unlikely to win an athletics event. The Olympics is not a celebration of average bodies, it's a celebration of extraordinary bodies accomplishing extraordinary feats. The argument that this particular natural advantage should result in disqualification seem utterly bizarre.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I really can't help thinking that if Andre Gray was an Imam rather than a Premier League footballers, he'd be facing prosecution rather than having an "apology" that was made only when he was forced to so widely accepted.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I'm sure it was you lot at the start of last term. I remember you guys writing a Suffrage Bill


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Will have to look
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm really unsure as to how people can support private ownership of our railways.
    The entire justification of privatization is that, unlike state ownership, that competition will bring the price down for the consumer and produce a better product. However we only have one railway line, there is no competition.

    When you go to the train station, you don't get a choice of which train to take to your destination. There aren't 4 or 5 different train companies offering services there. It's not like choosing a phone etc. So how can we justify the capitalization of our rail services when there is no competitive element, the very hallmark of theoretic capitalism?

    Not to mention how our rail service is one of the most expensive anywhere in Europe.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I'm really unsure as to how people can support private ownership of our railways.
    The entire justification of privatization is that, unlike state ownership, that competition will bring the price down for the consumer and produce a better product. However we only have one railway line, there is no competition.

    When you go to the train station, you don't get a choice of which train to take to your destination. There aren't 4 or 5 different train companies offering services there. It's not like choosing a phone etc. So how can we justify the capitalization of our rail services when there is no competitive element, the very hallmark of theoretic capitalism?

    Not to mention how our rail service is one of the most expensive anywhere in Europe.
    On TSR we now have 2 providers per service as a point of note.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Thought that was UKIP?
    It was definitely the tories.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by United1892)
    It was definitely the tories.
    How've you been by the way? Good to see you popping in every now and then


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I'm really unsure as to how people can support private ownership of our railways.
    The entire justification of privatization is that, unlike state ownership, that competition will bring the price down for the consumer and produce a better product. However we only have one railway line, there is no competition.

    When you go to the train station, you don't get a choice of which train to take to your destination. There aren't 4 or 5 different train companies offering services there. It's not like choosing a phone etc. So how can we justify the capitalization of our rail services when there is no competitive element, the very hallmark of theoretic capitalism?

    Not to mention how our rail service is one of the most expensive anywhere in Europe.
    That's a fault of the model of privatisation (granting franchises - read state endorsed monopolies) rather than their being no capability to provide competition. I think that very few people really agree that the current system is close to their desired outcome. Ideally with looser property rights (where landowners could simply sell land to the train company) we'd see a return to the 1800's but in a more regulated form (so that we don't end up with 3 train stations in 1 town as we did back then) however for now the next best system is simply to encourage open access operators to run additional services and compete, also demand more from the franchise owners in terms of stock.

    With regards to price a study in 07 actually found that prices for off peak services were comparable, where UK prices rocket is at peak times where they are ~30% above those in western europe. The reason for this however is that most european nations fund their version of Network Rail through increased taxation, in the UK we fund it primarily through ticket sales. When the left say that nationalisation would lower prices for example, what they really mean is that they will tax the populous to lower prices (though i suspect many don't actually realise that operators have low margins and that the network as a whole is loss making).

    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    But the Olympics and top-level sports is all about athletes who, due to their biology, have some advantage over most people. Sure, her testosterone levels are very unusual and make her better at the sport than most women - so what? Michael Phelps has had such tremendous success because his body his highly unusual. Someone with short or average length legs is unlikely to win an athletics event. The Olympics is not a celebration of average bodies, it's a celebration of extraordinary bodies accomplishing extraordinary feats. The argument that this particular natural advantage should result in disqualification seem utterly bizarre.
    I actually agree here. Unless it can be proven that she is amplyfying the effect somehow then she should be allowed to compete. It would be like suggesting that Serena Willams should not compete as a woman simply because of her power advantage over most women.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Didn't the Tories write a bill that would have made voting rights subject to exam performance?
    We tried to restrict suffrage (not that it should have been a party bill, there was no consensus) however the exam bit sounds fishy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Ahh yes, B780! Minimum of 5 Cs at GCSE including Maths and English! Not last term, but term before! To be honest, quite fun looking back through Hansard at what kind of things were going on back then - seem to have forgotten a lot of it all!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    How've you been by the way? Good to see you popping in every now and then


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I've been good, apart from having to do A-levels. How about you?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Ahh yes, B780! Minimum of 5 Cs at GCSE including Maths and English! Not last term, but term before! To be honest, quite fun looking back through Hansard at what kind of things were going on back then - seem to have forgotten a lot of it all!
    Should need BBB or equivalent at A-level too (with an option to consider higher qualifications and a government sanctioned test to ensure competence with those who wish to vote but don't meet the requirements.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by United1892)
    I've been good, apart from having to do A-levels. How about you?
    Did you get into Leicester like you wanted
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 8, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
How are you feeling about doing A-levels?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.