BoJo has said crime figures have reduced. True only if fraud is not included. Include that and they're on the up. Even with the number of people ashamed to report being caught by a scam, etc.
But there could be an explanation. Criminals find fraud easier than the effort of house breaking. And no dogs to worry about.
Work from home has been absolutely terrible for the house-breaking industry. :)
Ah - of course.
Yes, well also a lot of crime goes unreported as people know under some circumstances the likelihood of anyone being caught is small.
The problem has always been there, but with the new online landscape, its just moved into cyberspace, if you will. Brian
This was covered on todays 'more or less' program about statistics on radio 4 at 9AM (there is also an RSS podcast).
Excluding fraud, crime figures have dropped (or I think that was what they said) but there has been a big increase in cases of fraud.
The program also had something to say about the claim that more people are in employment than ever but this is stated to be because the new IR35 regulations have forced a lot of people out of 'self employment' (but working for one company) and back onto PAYE.
Andrew
Excluding fraud, crime figures have dropped (or I think that was what> they said) but there has been a big increase in cases of fraud.> > The program also had something to say about the claim that more people> are in employment than ever but this is stated to be because the new> IR35 regulations have forced a lot of people out of 'self employment'> (but working for one company) and back onto PAYE. Since the move out of employment into "dodgy" self-employment would have been cited as a fall in employment at the time, it seems reasonable enough to claim the credit when the numbers go the other way. ;-)
That didn't look too well laid-out, did it?
It's marginally better now.
Just why would anyone with half a grain of decency exclude certain crimes to give a 'positive' result? And quote the same fiddled figures so often too?
Is it not obvious that certain things are going to change due to Covid lockdowns - like say after pub brawls? When pubs are closed? More people saying at home meaning fewer burglaries? Fewer cases of drunk driving due to far less traffic - and so on?
But most fraud figures are not going to be changed much by a lockdown. Indeed, people at home may spend more time online, making the chances of a successful fraud that way more likely.
The only possible justification that I can see, and I am not a Bojo fan, is that some crimes are less traumatic than others. For example, if I am going to have £100 stolen, I'd far rather that was done remotely over the internet, than by somebody mugging me or breaking into my house.
However, claiming that is a result of a Tory law and order policy is ridiculous.
Not an attribution line which refers to me.
OR:
I did not write a single word of that quoted above, but you have attributed all of it to me.
You have snipped the one line that I did write (in answer to it).
Please take more care.
Something wrong with your first post (timed at 17.16 on my reader). That shows:
"Excluding fraud, crime figures have dropped (or I think that was what> they said) but there has been a big increase in cases of fraud.> > The program also had something to say about the claim that more people> are in employment than ever but this is stated to be because the new> IR35 regulations have forced a lot of people out of 'self employment'> (but working for one company) and back onto PAYE. Since the move out of employment into "dodgy" self-employment would have been cited as a fall in employment at the time, it seems reasonable enough to claim the credit when the numbers go the other way. "
Looks like something screwed up with the post. I won't attribute blame, but I don't think that you are in a position to do so. :)
I wrote ONLY this bit:
That has been excised in its entirety and the rest (which I did not write) attributed to me.
I accept that the individual.net line was mine and that I should have made that clearer, but it certainly did not belong to a single word of the quoted material.
All I'm saying is that something went wrong in the formatting of your post.
I knew that. I reformatted (manually) and posted it again.
The fact remains that the only line I wrote was deleted and the rest of the thread attributed to me.
People go through these posts in chronological order, so I doubt that Dave saw your amended post before he replied.
As you said, "Please take more care". ;)
Then I suggest you get the quoting in your posts fixed.
I'd suggest you learn how to do that and include the original(s) as quotes, then.
All I ever do is to try and reduce the amount of text on the page - leaving the bit I'm actually commenting on.
But then many have such short memories they just quote everything. Which, of course, no-one reads again.
I did.
This is the post I replied to - in its entirety.
****************************From: JNugent <jenn > >> Yes, well also a lot of crime goes unreported as people know >> under some circumstances the likelihood of anyone being caught >> is small. >> The problem has always been there, but with the new online landscape, >> its just moved into cyberspace, if you will.
Excluding fraud, crime figures have dropped (or I think that was what> they said) but there has been a big increase in cases of fraud.> > The program also had something to say about the claim that more people> are in employment than ever but this is stated to be because the new> IR35 regulations have forced a lot of people out of 'self employment'> (but working for one company) and back onto PAYE. Since the move out of employment into "dodgy" self-employment would have been cited as a fall in employment at the time, it seems reasonable enough to claim the credit when the numbers go the other way. ;-)
*****************Your 'reformatting' has left quotation marks scattered all over the place. Making them meaningless.
That is NOT the reformatted version.
Try again?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.