@alexcobham @Petercampbell1 But this is OT. You agree that £200m is not "missing"? Simple question.
-
-
Replying to @BenSaund
@BenCTA
@Petercampbell1 Simplistic question. It is missing wrt a pretty reasonable hypothesis which seems to have wide intl support.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @BenSaund
@BenCTA
@Petercampbell1 That's not terribly helpful - do you agree or not?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexcobham
@alexcobham@Petercampbell1 Depends on your answer to the simple question. You can give a complicated answer, if it helps... ;-)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BenSaund
@BenCTA
@Petercampbell1 Again, that doesn't seem on point. If you'd like to define 'missing' (especially if different), then q will be clear1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexcobham
@BenCTA
@Petercampbell1 I offered a definition so that question could be answered; calling that 'deflection' is not very helpful.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexcobham
@alexcobham@Petercampbell1 Article is about avoidance. What do you conclude "missing" is implying here?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BenSaund
@BenCTA
@alexcobham I don't understand why you're still having this discussion. Not missing in legal sense; moral one a matter of opinion2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @martinhearson
@martinhearson@alexcobham I like unambiguous statements in plain english for future reference.... ;-)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@BenCTA @martinhearson @alexcobham like most DM articles it seems designed to generate inchoate outrage -Its a cheap trick (cf: migration..)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.