"Fact Check"

[WTFH]

I was asked where I got my figures from and I've explained.

And I admit that after reading the full article the figures are incorrect.

Are the figures incorrect because they have been worded incorrectly in one line of an article, or are they incorrect and have been repeated multiple times as fact in the hope that others believe it

[Zigenare]

Are the figures incorrect because they have been worded incorrectly in one line of an article, or are they incorrect and have been repeated multiple times as fact in the hope that others believe it

I can't speak for others. In my case it was the former.

[Whorty]

I was asked where I got my figures from and I've explained.

And I admit that after reading the full article the figures are incorrect.

Fair enough

[WTFH]

I can't speak for others. In my case it was the former.

And do you think that the other reference to the figure - that the Tories claim it is an increase of £1.2tn over the course of the parliament is a correct reference by the BBC to a repeated incorrect figure by the Tories?

[Zigenare]

And do you think that the other reference to the figure - that the Tories claim it is an increase of £1.2tn over the course of the parliament is a correct reference by the BBC to a repeated incorrect figure by the Tories?

I haven't given it much thought, why?

[WTFH]

I haven't given it much thought, why?

Just wondering if you were more triggered by the BBC making a mistake in one line of an article, that other articles on their site have correct, but unconcerned about Boris lying about numbers - his party makes up figures worse than Diane Abbott.

[Zigenare]

Just wondering if you were more triggered by the BBC making a mistake in one line of an article, that other articles on their site have correct, but unconcerned about Boris lying about numbers - his party makes up figures worse than Diane Abbott.

Maybe I'm not triggered at all. Had that possibility crossed your mind?

[Whorty]

I haven't given it much thought, why?

But you did. You gave it enough thought to ascertain that you was right, and we were wrong, so much so you was confident enough to ping out some insults.

You really need to learn to read and comprehend what is actually being said.

So if an increase of £240bn is equal to £1.2Tn then the starting figure is £960bn - the IFS says the increase will only be $180bn which leads to the target figure of £1.14Tn - what are you failing to understand?

Although, saying that, maybe looking at your workings above you didn't put that much thought into it

It would be useful for the country if those who are given the vote could actually try to have some independent thought rather than believing everything they see written down. Challenge your own preconceptions once in a while maybe?

[Zigenare]

But you did. You gave it enough thought to ascertain that you was right, and we were wrong, so much so you was confident enough to ping out some insults.



Although, saying that, maybe looking at your workings above you didn't put that much thought into it

It would be useful for the country if those who are given the vote could actually try to have some independent thought rather than believing everything they see written down. Challenge your own preconceptions once in a while maybe?

Quite a snowflake, aren't you?

[Whorty]

Quite a snowflake, aren't you?

Ha ha . I'm a snowflake for pointing out that you are wrong ha ha. You and your mate Minny crack me up