Turn on thread page Beta

EMA (Education Maintenance Allowance)- The poll. watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beekeeper_)
    £10,000 is an awfully large figure, i expect to spend just over £8,000, and thats only because i have gone for the more pricey accomodation.

    If your friend is "poor", she should opt for cheaper accomodation! You can get accomodation in London for about £70p/w. Thats only £2,800 for the 40 weeks! Would she really need to plunge herself into a £5,000 shotfall? Are you sure she will need to spend an extra £2,200 a year on varius other things?
    If you have no fees to pay, and a huge student loan of £5k, you can easily finance university in London.
    I was just giving an example,besides it's FINDING such accomodation which is the difficult part.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    70 quid a week? Where in london have you stayed for that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    I repeat certain things in order to respond to people who bring up the same objections as they have not read past posts.



    You’re a hypocrite of the highest order. For example your post below had 26 spelling and/or grammatical errors. Furthermore why are you so obsessed with diverting the issue? With attacking me? Every time you do it tells me how weak your case is that you feel you must divert. After all you refused to counter the argument in the 'is taxation theft' thread. To be honest I’m not here to throw insults, rater to debate issues. It’s not my fault you can't understand them







    Well after that nonsensical rant I have one question; who has the family brain cell today because it's certainly not you.





    You sure are mature with comments like that :rolleyes: How old are you, 12 or 13?





    Thanks for stating the obvious






    I accept it practically i.e. it occurs, I reject it morally. Why can't you see this? It’s very simple after all.






    Than what’s the point of making that comment? Everyone knows we pay tax, that’s why I call it theft after all. In order for something to be stolen something must exist i.e. tax.




    No, no, no you know NOTHING about Objectivism. Your using it in the wrong context due to your ignorance of basic philosophy.
    oh i do love the way you take my comments out of context so that they sound worse when their not with what ive written.and no, my "errors" are lazy typing. i dont really look at the screen much when i type, and i shorten words (this is called ellipsis), sometimes not bothering to put apostraphes and so on.that is completely different to what you do.you actually just spell words incorrectly. i wont read the crappy tax thread, because whether tax is morally right is down to opinion.i believe it is, so why do i need to hear your view on why it is morally wrong? it would be a waste of my time.why would i bother to look at your philosophical arguments?i dont do the subject, i have no interest in it at all, so how i am supposed to have any idea about it?do you know very much about astrophysics?if i was 13, i would probably take great offence at what you are implying about my family, but hey?how funny that you call me a child and then make personal comments about my family.its like the whole, "yeh and your mum" thing that chavs do.well done for putting yourself into the category for hypocrisy "of the highest order".nice to see a lot of your mistakes have gone; you do listen then i see.bet you typed veeeery slowly, well done.my case isn't weak; it's simple.tax is not wrong.tax helps everyone so to me it is morally right.i dont need a philosopher to tell me what i feel about things.i dont need to resort to useless analogies.and its quite funny; you dont seem to try and re-explain them anymore.tell me about the slave one again?how exactly is tax similar to slavery?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    oh i do love the way you take my comments out of context so that they sound worse when their not with what ive written.and no, my "errors" are lazy typing. i dont really look at the screen much when i type, and i shorten words (this is called ellipsis), sometimes not bothering to put apostraphes and so on.that is completely different to what you do.you actually just spell words incorrectly. i wont read the crappy tax thread, because whether tax is morally right is down to opinion.i believe it is, so why do i need to hear your view on why it is morally wrong? it would be a waste of my time.why would i bother to look at your philosophical arguments?i dont do the subject, i have no interest in it at all, so how i am supposed to have any idea about it?do you know very much about astrophysics?if i was 13, i would probably take great offence at what you are implying about my family, but hey?how funny that you call me a child and then make personal comments about my family.its like the whole, "yeh and your mum" thing that chavs do.well done for putting yourself into the category for hypocrisy "of the highest order".nice to see a lot of your mistakes have gone; you do listen then i see.bet you typed veeeery slowly, well done.my case isn't weak; it's simple.tax is not wrong.tax helps everyone so to me it is morally right.i dont need a philosopher to tell me what i feel about things.i dont need to resort to useless analogies.and its quite funny; you dont seem to try and re-explain them anymore.tell me about the slave one again?how exactly is tax similar to slavery?
    Guh, your inability to structure a paragraph is almost as annoying as that Vienna tactic objectivism uses...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beekeeper_)
    Guh, your inability to structure a paragraph is almost as annoying as that Vienna tactic objectivism uses...
    the important word being "almost" there.the reason i started picking apart his spelling was because he was being so pedantic all the way through; i know it lowers the tone of a debate, but i couldnt resist.if this was an english exam, i assure you i would use paragraphs.see, im wuite capable when it comes to english, a*s at gcse, as at a level, predicted an a.that tells me tha i am good at it, but perhaps cannot be bothered to stick to every rule when typing stuff onto a little student forum.this thread was originally about an interesting issue, and look what has happened to it.glad u fel the need to stick up for your cyber friend though, it's sweet, and im sure he'll appreciate it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i wont read the crappy tax thread, because whether tax is morally right is down to opinion.
    Yes, like everything else. Thanks for stating the obvious.

    i believe it is, so why do i need to hear your view on why it is morally wrong?
    If you can't counter than your beliefs are misplaced.


    it would be a waste of my time.why would i bother to look at your philosophical arguments?i dont do the subject,
    Neither do I. But i talk about such issues because I enjoy thinking.


    i have no interest in it at all,
    What are you doing here than? Just to throw personal insults i take it.


    so how i am supposed to have any idea about it?do you know very much about astrophysics?
    No, so i don't comment on it. You knowing nothing about philosophy yet you comment on it.


    my case isn't weak; it's simple.tax is not wrong.tax helps everyone so to me it is morally right.

    You have just said 'why would i bother to look at your philosophical arguments?i dont do the subject, i have no interest in it at all, so how i am supposed to have any idea about it?' and now you are offering a view on it!!! Talk about inconsistency.


    i dont need a philosopher to tell me what i feel about things.
    Your views seem to be based on your emotions. This is very irrational. But you would not know that because you don't know anything about rationalism.


    i dont need to resort to useless analogies.
    People use analogies when they have argument, you do not, thus is why you do not use them


    and its quite funny; you dont seem to try and re-explain them anymore.tell me about the slave one again?how exactly is tax similar to slavery

    I've explained one of them in my last post in the tax thread. Though of course you will reject it, not because it’s wrong, but because you can't admit being wrong. In the true essence of my philosophical views I will be selfish, what does it matter if you can't understand? It’s not my problem, after all its not like your a somebody.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Your views seem to be based on your emotions. This is very irrational.
    Wow yeah very
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    No, so i don't comment on it. You knowing nothing about philosophy yet you comment on it.
    Philosophy isn't about knowledge. It's about thinking. Although it may help that you know a bit about the philosophy of others, lack of knowledge by no means equates to not being able to think and come up with your own philosophy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HearTheThunder)
    Wow yeah very
    http://www.objectivistcenter.org/obj...istemology.asp

    Read and THINK
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    http://www.objectivistcenter.org/obj...istemology.asp

    Read and THINK
    Aha.. I shall be objective and decide through rational thinking that your objectivism in this situation is incorrectly applied. Thank You.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inequality)
    Philosophy isn't about knowledge. It's about thinking. Although it may help that you know a bit about the philosophy of others, lack of knowledge by no means equates to not being able to think and come up with your own philosophy.

    Our source for thinking is knowledge.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    hahaha

    (Original post by gossip_girl)
    im really annoyed that i cant fill it in untill my mum quits work, and im not even sure when that is! grrrrr
    was in the other thread about ema forms. just made me laugh cos all these ppl ahve been arguing they get ema but that doesnt mean their parentals don't slave away and here's an example of someone who's mum will not work thus allowing her child ot have ema
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HearTheThunder)
    Aha.. I shall be objective and decide through rational thinking that your objectivism in this situation is incorrectly applied. Thank You.

    In order to do that you must know what you are rejecting, given that you have not read it how can you judge?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by laura789)
    hahaha



    was in the other thread about ema forms. just made me laugh cos all these ppl ahve been arguing they get ema but that doesnt mean their parentals don't slave away and here's an example of someone who's mum will not work thus allowing her child ot have ema
    perhaps you should ask her for more details on what she means and stop generalising
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    oh but generalising is so much more fun :rolleyes:
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Our source for thinking is knowledge.
    So what knowledge do you have that makes you feel qualified enough to 'talk about philosophy', that HearTheThunder doesn't have?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    In order to do that you must know what you are rejecting, given that you have not read it how can you judge?
    I'm rejecting your particular application of your own objectivism (bit of a funny contradiction how objectivism can be subjective)... and considering I know what objectivism is I don't particularly need to read it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inequality)
    So what knowledge do you have that makes you feel qualified enough to 'talk about philosophy', that HearTheThunder doesn't have?
    My comments weren't even addressed to him, please keep up. Of course i like everyone has limited knowledge, i was merely rejecting the idea that philosophy does not require knowledge.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=HearTheThunder]I'm rejecting your particular application of your own objectivism (bit of a funny contradiction how objectivism can be subjective)... and considering I know what objectivism is I don't particularly need to read it


    Your errors are glaring. If you knew what objectivism was (Ayn Rand's philosophy) you'd know how it was not subjective. Your mixing up ideas due to a lack of learning. Perhaps you should go back to GCSE revision, its no doubt more on your level...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just because your parent earns, for example £35,000 a year doesnt mean to say you get that, or have alot of money coming in for your benefits. I reakon we should all get £30. not different ones.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,241

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

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

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