Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Please do not dump pics here. Post deleted.

Capt'n Midnight

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I'm curious to know who registered the .co.uk domain name back in January
http://whois.domaintools.com/thebrexitparty.co.uk


Still, given Farage's connections, maybe he should reister the .ru version!

http://thebrexitparty.co.uk/ is still a blank site so cybersquatters?
Besides Farage wouldn't do anything as patriotic as register a co.uk look at https://marchtoleave.co.uk/


https://thebrexitparty.com/ is asking people to Register to vote by May 7 because it was nabbed by LedByDonkeys


So Nigel is down to using https://thebrexitparty.org/

ancapailldorcha

The "Meet our candidates" page is littered with typos:

She has spent years fighting for the rights of British fisherman by finally taking back controls of our waters.

Richard believes that huge opportunities will open up for the UK withe a proper clean Brexit.

I mean that's just sloppy given the domain fiasco. Then there's this:

Nigel is one of the UK’s most successful political leaders in modern British history.

A man who's never been elected to the House of Commons despite 7 attempts gets this? Hardly an auspicious start IMO.

Capt'n Midnight

Patser wrote: »

Looks like Farage lost out on Brexitparty.eu to Dolphin party too

http://thebrexitparty.eu/wordpress/

When you say dolphin party do you mean Flipper the Dolphin who beat him to second place in Buckingham in the 2010 GE ?

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/969112552205705217

DrumSteve

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The "Meet our candidates" page is littered with typos:





I mean that's just sloppy given the domain fiasco. Then there's this:



A man who's never been elected to the House of Commons despite 7 attempts gets this? Hardly an auspicious start IMO.

I presume successful in that he's taking responsibility for the largest mandate in a referendum in English political history?

Shelga

Does Nigel Farage actually believe his own bull****? I really can’t tell. What drives him? Why on earth has he spent decades of his life trying to destroy Britain?

The way he was speaking at that launch, about “putting the fear of god into MPs again” was just sickening. I’m sure Jo Cox felt plenty of fear as she was being stabbed to and shot to death by an evil man shouting “Britain first”.

How Nigel Farage actually looks at himself in the mirror is beyond me.

Patser

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

When you say dolphin party do you mean Flipper the Dolphin who beat him to second place in Buckingham in the 2010 GE ?

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/969112552205705217

Yep, that's the lad that has the .EU page. Also seems to do kids parties under the banner Brexit party.

First Up

I think some of the comments about Ireland being "the only English speaking country in the EU" are missing the point.

For US executives especially, the environment for their families is very important when considering an overseas move. While some may welcome the opportunity to expose their children to a new language, for many its a daunting prospect. Ireland has a very positive image in the US and cultural affinity is a big part of that - including language.

It won't overcome somewhere else's strong business advantages in choosing a location but if those factors are finely balanced, its a definite plus.

Laois_Man

Shelga wrote: »

Does Nigel Farage actually believe his own bull****? I really can’t tell. What drives him? Why on earth has he spent decades of his life trying to destroy Britain?

Have a look at Bloomberg's short documentary (12 minutes) on the Brexit financial killing. That might tell you....

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2019-03-15/how-hedge-funds-gamed-brexit-to-make-millions-video?fbclid=IwAR3EcMEG38rOz6nDGryfOEBXLXbg6c6qToEbpo81s8v7sQdsRNbvmvXd_Sc

otnomart

otnomart wrote: »

A 31 October exit is such a bad compromise,
It means no time for a second referendum and a repeat of what just happened since the WA was finalised last Dec.
A 12 months extension would have been so much better.

A bad compromise all driven by the Frenc Prez trying to salvage its party's performance at the European elections - by the way.

Like I feared: "Philip Hammond has played down the possibility that the UK could use the delay to Brexit to hold a second referendum and stressed that he still expects Britain to leave the European Union. Speaking in Washington, the chancellor said time would be too tight to hold a confirmatory vote before the new deadline of the end of October unless it was triggered over the coming weeks." (source: The Guardian)

Anteayer

CelticRambler wrote: »

I'm not saying that France is a better place to do business; I'm pointing out that pushing the line "Ireland is the only English-speaking country in the EU" is irrelevant these days (French children have been learning English in primary school for more than a decade now, and take a second foreign language when they enter secondary, which puts them well ahead of most Irish pupils).

Furthermore, Macron is very aware of the points I've highlighted in red in Anteayer's post. His re-election prospects depend on getting France over those hurdles, and he does not need the distraction (at an international political level) of the Brexit dog-and-pony-show while he's trying to re-establish France's place in the world.

His comment about the necessity of Ireland paying a price for Brexit is not without merit, either. There have been plenty of contributors to this thread who have made exactly the same point. In any radical change of business model, there comes a time when you have to take a financial hit so as to profit from future opportunities. We've seen how Ireland's economy, so intimately bound up with England's for centuries, is being reorientated towards other places, and obviously "the longer the better" gives more time for that - but there's also a cost in constantly preparing for a future that isn't properly defined, and extension after extension after extension just makes that worse.

Ireland's 100% entitled to say that it's the only large English speaking country in Europe after Brexit because that is 100% true. It's part of marketing in much the same way as marketing anywhere else - you're going to put your best foot forward.

I've lived in France and I like many aspects of the place, but I don't think this is about a competition between Ireland and France. The two countries have common ground on many issues and are different on others.

Ireland's also of course intimately connected ot the UK's economy, because of proximity, history, language, common cultural norms in terms of kinds of products and services we use and so on and we've done a huge amount to diversify away from that to the point that UK exports are less than 10% of our total.

It's absolutely not, in anyway, unreasonable for Ireland to have a large and deep connection with its next-door neighbour in terms of economy and trade. It's no less reasonable than the complex connections of supply chains between France and Belgium, or Belgium and the Netherlands, or any other neighbours in the EU.

Ireland had no expectation that the UK would do this and everything about Irish, British and EU policy through the last number of decades, certainly since the foundation of the single market has been about integration of markets and supply chains.

The UK has turned that upside down and inside out and it's grossly unfair to suggest that this is somehow Ireland fault or that Ireland should pay a price, as an EU member, for being next to a former member that seems to have politically turned on it and on the EU.

I don't in anyway believe that Macron thinks Ireland should be paying a price or that it's collateral damage, and I have no idea where this notion is coming from, as it was never stated in that way. In fact, the total opposite was suggested by Macron, who has offered serious levels of solidarity with the Irish situation and level of exposure to this mess.

There has, however, been much foaming at the mouth and excitement amongst certain Brexiteers at any suggestion (imagined or real) that Ireland would be thrown under a bus, or would somehow pay a price and so on. They also jump for joy and exaggerate any slight differences of opinion between EU members. For example, you'd BBC's correspondent going on about a 'tiff' between France and Germany that clearly did not exist. The two countries took different opinions and the end result was a compromise, arrived at within a few hours- which is how EU politics works.

At the Council meeting, Ireland, Denmark and a few others proposed and supported a compromise situation between the very long extensions being asked for by some countries and the very short one being proposed by France.

The assumption being made is that the UK's currently in political turmoil and that there may be a resolution in the next few months.

A very key and fundamental element of the foundations of the EU and its predecessor organisations is about building cooperation, peace and prosperity in Europe with members and non-members. It's a big, broad vision that thinks about the long game, not the short-term and nobody wants to be in a situation where the UK is, or feels that, it's been expelled.

If European solidarity on some of these key issues starts to become a bitter and transactional relationship between members where there's a price to be paid for every gesture of good will towards neighbours, it's the end of that grand vision and sense of European identity.

If the UK crashes out, it will have excluded itself. The EU has tried, and tried and tried to come up with a solution to this.

trellheim

BTW much like Ireland, Malta and Cyprus' second language is English

briany

Shelga wrote: »

Does Nigel Farage actually believe his own bull****? I really can’t tell. What drives him? Why on earth has he spent decades of his life trying to destroy Britain?

The way he was speaking at that launch, about “putting the fear of god into MPs again” was just sickening. I’m sure Jo Cox felt plenty of fear as she was being stabbed to and shot to death by an evil man shouting “Britain first”.

The guy who killed Jo Cox had a history of mental illness. I would certainly put his murderous tendencies more down to that than his Brexit beliefs, in the same way I would say Mark Chapman's decision to kill John Lennon was driven much more by his mental illness than reading Catcher in the Rye. It's important to delineate fringe groups and individuals from the mainstream because it's usually taken as an insult and furthers division. If somebody goes out and kills Jacob Rees Mogg, shouting "The future is Europe", we'd all be quick to dismiss the guy as a fringe lunatic.

If you try to pin Farage down on his 'fear of god' rhetoric, he's just going to say that he meant giving politicians a lashing at the ballot box, i.e. doing all one can to show displeasure in a non-violent democratic way. I doubt he would want to be presiding over death and destruction being what he is - a city trader who is annoyed that certain EU laws prevent him and his mates from making a few extra quid on top of their current personal fortunes. That'd be way too hot for him.

Anteayer

trellheim wrote: »

BTW much like Ireland, Malta and Cyprus' second language is English

Ireland - 99%+
Malta - 88%
Cyprus - 76% - 80%

The claim that Irish is our first language is aspirational stuff expressed through legislation rather than remotely realistic.

I can't really comment on Cyprus and Malta beyond the statistics above which reference 1st and 2nd language speaker numbers combined.
Of the population born in Ireland, there are no monolingual Irish speakers.

Seán Ó hEinirí from Co. Mayo is claimed to be the last monolingual Irish speaker and he passed away in 1998.

So, basically you're looking at a population of people who are either first language English speakers who learn Irish as a second language at school, or who are natively bilingual and speak both.

Anteayer

@CelticRambler:

I would also add that I think the outcome of Brexit for the City of London is likely that it will be replaced (for European business anyway) by a network of European financial centres, not just a single city. Technology has moved away from the need for everyone to be located in a single physical financial district, and there's a lot to be said in favour of an EU financial cluster rather than a single focal point. You'll also see a lot of logistics and manufacturing and so on being spread far more widely.

There's plenty of room in that for quite a large number of member states to benefit from the "brexedous" of formerly UK-based companies.

Sam Russell

Anteayer wrote: »

@CelticRambler:

I would also add that I think the outcome of Brexit for the City of London is likely that it will be replaced (for European business anyway) by a network of European financial centres, not just a single city. Technology has moved away from the need for everyone to be located in a single physical financial district, and there's a lot to be said in favour of an EU financial cluster rather than a single focal point. You'll also see a lot of logistics and manufacturing and so on being spread far more widely.

There's plenty of room in that for quite a large number of member states to benefit from the "brexedous" of formerly UK-based companies.

Is that not a good example of what the single market is/was all about.

Why should all manufacturing be based in Birmingham as it was 150 years ago? The very idea that manufacturing should be constrained by geography woud be considered nonsense in todays global market. Products move from one side of the world to the other if it saves a few shilings.

Why should finance be located by gegraphy when the internet brings a level playing field to much of the world? What should be asked is - why did it take Brexit to dispurse the finacial market out of London?

Enzokk

briany wrote: »

The guy who killed Jo Cox had a history of mental illness. I would certainly put his murderous tendencies more down to that than his Brexit beliefs, in the same way I would say Mark Chapman's decision to kill John Lennon was driven much more by his mental illness than reading Catcher in the Rye. It's important to delineate fringe groups and individuals from the mainstream because it's usually taken as an insult and furthers division. If somebody goes out and kills Jacob Rees Mogg, shouting "The future is Europe", we'd all be quick to dismiss the guy as a fringe lunatic.

I see this narrative on twitter recently, just as an aside, why do you think he has a history of mental illness? It was never brought up in his trial and his GP didn't mention any of this to investigators either.

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116306334960574464

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116306740033748992

What I have seen is that this is in response to Peter Hitchens claiming that he had a mental illness because of interviews with those close to him.

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116597766166179841

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116598150179901443

So no evidence of mental illness and no prescriptions from his GP either that may have influenced him. This blog is also a comment on his assertion that Mair should not be considered a terrorist. He points out that being irrational does not mean you have a mental illness.

We can deal with the first argument swiftly: irrationality and mental ill health are two discrete concepts. The former may be a symptom of a latter, but they are not necessarily linked. Most of the people who cross the threshold of the criminal courts are irrational. I’ve prosecuted more burglars than I can count who, despite their extensive experience, have still failed to process that climbing through a broken window is likely to result in your blood being left at the scene. The number of young men who, disqualified from driving and flagged down by the police, decide not to cut their losses and take their dues but instead to lead the police on a merry 90mph pursuit through residential areas and red lights before, inevitably, being caught, adding dangerous driving to the charge sheet – irrational? Tick. Incoherent? Tick. Achieving the exact opposite of what they supposedly intended? Tick. Colloquially they might be said to, in Hitchens’ words, be “roaming along the outer frontiers of sanity”, but mentally ill? That’s something different.

Anteayer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is that not a good example of what the single market is/was all about.

Why should all manufacturing be based in Birmingham as it was 150 years ago? The very idea that manufacturing should be constrained by geography woud be considered nonsense in todays global market. Products move from one side of the world to the other if it saves a few shilings.

Why should finance be located by gegraphy when the internet brings a level playing field to much of the world? What should be asked is - why did it take Brexit to dispurse the finacial market out of London?

Well, largely due to history and inertia. The City of London grew up originally as a transactional centre at the heart of an empire, with Sterling as a global transactional currency throughout the areas that it either 'owned' or influenced.

The rise of Wall Street and the USD as the de facto global exchange currency changed that enormously and the City of London found other niches, including as Europe's financial centre and became a modern global financial centre, more so since the 80s and 90s.

Brexit just breaks up the inertia and causes people to start rethinking all sorts of systems from financial hubs to supply chains.

I know quite a few companies who've been looking at alternative suppliers for all sorts of products in their supply chains over the last couple of years, and this is entirely driven by Brexit. They wouldn't have bothered otherwise.

In many cases, they've actually ended up finding better suppliers as they simply wouldn't have been motivated to shop around without having had reason to do so.

Sam Russell

Anteayer wrote: »

Well, largely due to history and inertia. The City of London grew up originally as a transactional centre at the heart of an empire, with Sterling as a global transactional currency throughout the areas that it either 'owned' or influenced.

The rise of Wall Street and the USD as the de facto global exchange currency changed that enormously and the City of London found other niches, including as Europe's financial centre and became a modern global financial centre, more so since the 80s and 90s.

Brexit just breaks up the inertia and causes people to start rethinking all sorts of systems from financial hubs to supply chains.

I know quite a few companies who've been looking at alternative suppliers for all sorts of products in their supply chains over the last couple of years, and this is entirely driven by Brexit. They wouldn't have bothered otherwise.

In many cases, they've actually ended up finding better suppliers as they simply wouldn't have been motivated to shop around without having had reason to do so.

Inertia has a lot to do with it.

The 'Big Bang' in 1986 deregulated the LSE ans allowed it to compete with the NYSE. It allowed it to gain momentum prior to the SM.

MrFresh

Boris Johnson found to have lied about poll data in a Telegraph article by IPSO. Interesting defence put forward by Telegraph.

The publication said that the article was clearly an opinion piece, and readers would understand that the statement was not invoking specific polling – no specific dates or polls were referenced. It said that the writer was entitled to make sweeping generalisations based on his opinions and that the complainant had misconstrued the purpose of the article; it was clearly comically polemical, and could not be reasonably read as a serious, empirical, in-depth analysis of hard factual matters.

briany

Enzokk wrote: »

I see this narrative on twitter recently, just as an aside, why do you think he has a history of mental illness? It was never brought up in his trial and his GP didn't mention any of this to investigators either.

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116306334960574464

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116306740033748992

What I have seen is that this is in response to Peter Hitchens claiming that he had a mental illness because of interviews with those close to him.

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116597766166179841

https://twitter.com/DdesimoneDaniel/status/1116598150179901443

So no evidence of mental illness and no prescriptions from his GP either that may have influenced him. This blog is also a comment on his assertion that Mair should not be considered a terrorist. He points out that being irrational does not mean you have a mental illness.

I would argue that Mair's actions point to a fairly dark psyche because, in the case of the speeder, irrationality can be brought about by a sudden and frightening scenario that you're not psychologically prepared to deal with. In the case of burglars, their irrationality can be brought about by poor upbringing and drug abuse which clouds their judgement.

Thomas Mair obviously planned his attack to some extent. It's not that he was just out on a routine walk with his knife and shotgun and had a moment of irrationality. I'm not saying he was insane - after all, plenty of serial killers are not found to be insane, but that doesn't mean they're well-adjusted either.

Imreoir2

lawred2 wrote: »

A great response but in all honesty I'd be surprised if the author was even vaguely aware that there were already 17 members/observers from the EU

Nah, if you read the article it's fairly obvious the author read the wikipedia page, they mentioned that Uruguay was also a member.

Imreoir2

Anteayer wrote: »

Ireland - 99%+
Malta - 88%
Cyprus - 76% - 80%

The claim that Irish is our first language is aspirational stuff expressed through legislation rather than remotely realistic.

I can't really comment on Cyprus and Malta beyond the statistics above which reference 1st and 2nd language speaker numbers combined.
Of the population born in Ireland, there are no monolingual Irish speakers.

Seán Ó hEinirí from Co. Mayo is claimed to be the last monolingual Irish speaker and he passed away in 1998.

So, basically you're looking at a population of people who are either first language English speakers who learn Irish as a second language at school, or who are natively bilingual and speak both.

I have to correct you there, there are monolingual Irish speakers, mostly younger kids. You will find that a number of families in the Gaeltacht and eleswhere choose to raise their kids through Irish and they only learn English when they go to school. Prior to this they are monolingual Irish speakers.

Anteayer

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I have to correct you there, there are monolingual Irish speakers, mostly younger kids. You will find that a number of families in the Gaeltacht and eleswhere choose to raise their kids through Irish and they only learn English when they go to school. Prior to this they are monolingual Irish speakers.

Well he's claimed to be anyway in the sense that even at that age he didn't have much English. I'd say it would be very, very hard to exist entirely monolingally in Irish in Ireland though without going to very considerable effort to remove English language media and contact.

The reality though is it's a very much primarily English speaking country with a minority language that carries legal 1st language status for symbic, cultural and nationalistic reasons.

From an international commercial point of view it's native English speaking.

Incidentally, I'm not intending to criticise the Irish language. It's important that it retains status as official language and gets promoted and supported. I'm just saying for practical reasons, it's not what the vast majority speak day to day as their primary means of communication.

From an EU perspective we should be declaring Ireland bilingual officially at EU level.

It would be quite entertaining if we could make Hiberno-English the official EU standard version though

BarryD2

CelticRambler wrote: »

Nope, because the only place they're getting heard and having a token influence is in Westminster - probably the only place in the world where that counts for nothing in respect of Brexit! Sinn Féin, meanwhile, are talking directly to Dublin, and talking directly to Barnier/Tusk/Juncker, and talking to movers and shakers in the US. Three years after the referendum, the DUP's electorate have achieved nothing as regards Brexit, but Sinn Féin's electorate have effectively achieved a United Ireland in all but name.

If you want your voice to be heard and your vote to count, make sure you're talking to the right people.

Another way of looking at this is that the DUP are voting on Brexit and Sinn Féin are lobbying on Brexit. At end of the day, who has the most power? Depends I guess on how the cookie crumbles but the DUP may well come into the reckoning again yet and swing it one way or another. And only they of the NI parties can / or are prepared to use their vote on Brexit.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure if the average NI middle class citizen of either hue that is employed in the public services overly cares as long as the funds keep flowing in from London to keep the show afloat. And the DUPers are fairly handy at getting the dosh up to now.

Imreoir2

Anteayer wrote: »

Well he's claimed to be anyway in the sense that even at that age he didn't have much English.

There are older people in the Gaeltacht who don't have great English today.

I am not disputing the wider point you were making, just pointing out that sweeping statements like "There are no monolingual Irish speakers" are usually wrong.

From an EU perspective we should be declaring Ireland bilingual officially at EU level.

This is unnecessary, the only way English stops being an official language of the EU is if all EU member states decide to remove official status from English. I don't see this happening any time soon, and if it were to happen then Ireland could veto it regardless of English being declared an official language of Ireland within the EU or not.

Enzokk

briany wrote: »

I would argue that Mair's actions point to a fairly dark psyche because, in the case of the speeder, irrationality can be brought about by a sudden and frightening scenario that you're not psychologically prepared to deal with. In the case of burglars, their irrationality can be brought about by poor upbringing and drug abuse which clouds their judgement.

Thomas Mair obviously planned his attack to some extent. It's not that he was just out on a routine walk with his knife and shotgun and had a moment of irrationality. I'm not saying he was insane - after all, plenty of serial killers are not found to be insane, but that doesn't mean they're well-adjusted either.

Sure, for me his actions also shout out that he was insane. But I am not qualified to make that assessment so my personal opinion is not worth much. The argument that I have seen recently is that he has a mental illness and the UK State has deliberately hid this from the jury during his trial. That is where I am commenting on it from, if it is just a coincidence that you are commenting on it at the same time then I hope you are not seeing it as me taking on your point of view.

Here is a link to his sentencing from the judge, where the Judge remarked that he researched all aspects of this crime. He researched the weapon he bought, he researched his victim and he planned an escape as well. I would say even if he has some mental illness, that amount of planning does not scream out someone that is not aware of what he is doing and aware of the impact.

Thomas Mair

Sentencing Remarks of Mr Justice Wilkie

jochenstacker

briany wrote: »

The guy who killed Jo Cox had a history of mental illness. I would certainly put his murderous tendencies more down to that than his Brexit beliefs, in the same way I would say Mark Chapman's decision to kill John Lennon was driven much more by his mental illness than reading Catcher in the Rye. It's important to delineate fringe groups and individuals from the mainstream because it's usually taken as an insult and furthers division. If somebody goes out and kills Jacob Rees Mogg, shouting "The future is Europe", we'd all be quick to dismiss the guy as a fringe lunatic.

"History of mental illness" always gets wheeled out when the assailant is native, white and Christian. Had he been a darker skinned Muslim, I'm sure people would have an entirely different viewpoint of his deed, "...all Muslims are... religion of peace... terrorists... they're all the same...".
Thomas Alexander Mair is the result of right wing rhetoric and propaganda and brainwashing by the English media, he may be nuts, but he's the ultimate result of a climate of fear and hate that has been stoked for decades.

Peregrinus

jochenstacker wrote: »

"History of mental illness" always gets wheeled out when the assailant is native, white and Christian. Had he been a darker skinned Muslim, I'm sure people would have an entirely different viewpoint of his deed, "...all Muslims are... religion of peace... terrorists... they're all the same...".
Thomas Alexander Mair is the result of right wing rhetoric and propaganda and brainwashing by the English media, he may be nuts, but he's the ultimate result of a climate of fear and hate that has been stoked for decades.

This.

There's no evidence at all that Mair's crime was the result of mental illness. It may or may not be true that Mair had a history of poor mental health, but poor mental health does not make you a murderer. Mair's crime was motivated by fear, hate, bigotry and fascism. None of these are mental illnesses.

McGiver

I've had a listen to Brexitcast for the first time and probably the last! I didn't know this podcast is actually Laura and Katya talking over each other. If I knew it I wouldn't listen to it. It's probably as accurate as their tweets.

I'm not sure if I'm the only one thinking this but they sound to me as a) slightly to moderately delusional, b) slightly arrogant/exceptionalist and c) mostly speculative. They don't seem to understand how the EU works despite actually spending time in Brussels, shocking journalism given they are BBC.

They described the last weeks summit result as a fudge which to me means they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the subject. European Council decides by unanimity and the only way to reach a conclusion in this system is to compromise. The word compromise has a generally a positive connotation, whilst the word fudge is pejorative. Do these English folk really think that a compromise equals a fudge? Is compromise considered something wrong in the English psyche and culture?

Furthermore, they basically suggested that the Germans and the French control the EU and the evidence of that is that Macron wanted a short extension and Merkel wanted a long one so they met in the middle. Just failed to notice that there were 25 other countries with range of opinions falling from harder than France up to the German position, so surprise surprise the compromise of 31 October is something everyone can generally accept. This is such a poor understanding of the situation and dynamics combined with basically making stuff up and perpetrating myths (all that for taxpayer's money).