Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Tax Research UK Blog is written by Richard Murphy unless otherwise stated and published by Tax Research LLP under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Design by Andy Moyle
A succinct appraisal.
If a picture paints a thousand words a photograph of a toilet would also serve 🙂
Too true Andy. And with the hapless population of the UK crammed into the bowl with Johnson (or any other of the Brexit cultists) sitting on it ****ing on us.
Thanks a lot Tory party.
Good but you left out a few circles…
– climate change
– ecological collapse
– peak everything
I’m not that clever…to draw them
“I’m not that clever…to draw them”
Oh! I think you just put the compass point in the middle of ‘Z’ and draw three big circles round the the whole Venn diagram.
Please yourself which grand circle is which. Just one which is labelled ‘Ecological collapse’ will probably do.
No, I use a machine to wrote these and it eventually gets very confused
It too rejects complexity
I think a crazy spiral spiral in black crayon pressing so hard it tears the page would capture the spirit of it 😉
November 9 2017 at 3:11 pm
“No, I use a machine to wrote these and it eventually gets very confused
It too rejects complexity”
Would that complexity were so easily dismissed 🙂
Suggest you start a competition to name the pair wise intersections and triples ( but you’d need a 3D model to do that properly). I’ll start: W intersects Y is “No Deal”
Nigel Goddard says:
November 9 2017 at 10:50 am
Suggest you start a competition to name the pair wise intersections and triples ( but you’d need a 3D model to do that properly). I’ll start: W intersects Y is “No Deal”
Surely No Deal is the intersection of WXY.?
Could be. Hard to tell.
Haven’t you said though that Z isn’t a problem and the government should issue more debt?
Maybe you can’t read these things
In fact, I’ll tell you you are not reading it correctly
Well which is it? Here you are saying there is a debt fuelled economic crisis and elsewhere you say we don’t have enough of it and the government can borrow more with impunity?
We have an insufficiency of government debt
We have a surplus of private debt
They have very, very different economic characteristics, as I keep explaining on this blog and elsewhere
Here you go Gary,
A bit of perspective for you:
http://neweconomics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Northern-Rock-1.png
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/business/2017/01/05/IIF-UK-debts_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.JPG?imwidth=480
All that you need to put that in context now is a bit of knowledge and a sense of proportion.
It looks as if you are saying that there are good things about Brexit. About time. We could never have the economic policies you advocate if we remained in the EU
I am saying no such thing
I am saying it is contributing to an unholy mess
And we could have what I want in the EU
We have entered an age of complexity and uncertainty. At such times people want simplicity and stability, which fit more neatly into a conservative agenda – however ineffective that may be in resolving the issues at the core of increasing socio-economic problems. Which is why progressive political parties find it so frustrating and why they appeal more to younger voters, for whom stability is less important than opportunity.
Until Labour and the Democrats definitively reject neo-liberalism, offer a credible, planned vision for the future – and our versions of democracy are radically reformed – the conservative right will continue to get a disproportionate access to power both here and in the USA.
I have a lot of sympathy with that
Nice…
Feel somehow the media ought to have a circle in there also…
Ian Hopper
I think the media is a three ring circus way out on its own somewhere playing with itself.
Richard, this is not a Venn diagram, rather it is an Euler diagram. A Venn diagram shows *all* possible logical relationships between sets. In this example there is no discrete space for XW or VY etc.
A four-set Venn diagram is actually pretty complicated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venn_diagram#/media/File:Venn%27s_four_ellipse_construction.svg
An Euler diagram has no such restriction, and just groups the relationships between specific sets.
I fear I’ve missed the point, but pedantry is often a virtue in accounting 🙂
None of my Venn diagrams are really anything of the sort
They are cartoons
If you had followed the series (there have been many) I think that’s obvious
Apologies if it was not
Well I’m certainly looking forward to your Euler diagram cartoon, Richard.
Do you know any good algebraic jokes?
A billionaire from Down Under
Filed his tax return all asunder
His attempts at avoidance
Were as crude as a war dance
So he died in the jail and no wonder.
I really liked this! I found Venn diagrams were the best way to work out the truth/falsity of Aristotelian syllogisms. I love the ellipse as a solution to a four-set Venn. I would never have thought of that. I wonder if that is the only geometric form of a four-set Venn; i.e., is it a necessary solution? Second, what geometry would be required for a five-set Venn? And so on. When would three dimensions be required? Presumably this would require a polyhedron; wow!
Damn you, Mr Warren 🙂
Now I’m going to have find out what ‘Aristotelian syllogisms’ are and whether there are any I should have solved that are holding me back in life.
I agree the four set Venn is neat and I’m damn sure I would never have thought of it. I did once solve a Sunday Times Brain Teaser logic problem graphically by stapling together the known ‘facts’ so that the unknowns would then only fit in right places. I was quite pleased with myself at the time, but have never been able to apply the principle to any thing useful.
Here you are …
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore Socrates is mortal.
So you think we are in a mess but you don’t know why?
I’d have thought the evidence is I do know why
I say so
While we play with the crayon a child dies hungry.