thesweetcheat wrote:
Does that invalidate the conclusions? Have you read the HE/EH principles I linked to?
Not necessarily, but trying to develop a value argument using an economics argument that was produced entirely without the the input of any economists may not be wise.
I'm familiar with most of the documents that have been cited so far, but if there's a specific thing that might be of benefit to the discussion, I'd be grateful for a link to it.
Reply | with quote | Posted by jonmor 22nd February 2017ce 08:09 |
Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (tjj, Jan 15, 2017, 00:18)- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (thesweetcheat, Jan 15, 2017, 09:43)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (tjj, Jan 16, 2017, 10:33)
- Salisbury bypass (thesweetcheat, Jan 18, 2017, 20:39)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (moss, Jan 24, 2017, 10:37)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (tjj, Feb 05, 2017, 10:59)
- Re: Another viewpoint from George Nash (tjj, Feb 08, 2017, 09:46)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (moss, Feb 09, 2017, 15:08)
- Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (tjj, Feb 18, 2017, 15:02)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (thesweetcheat, Feb 24, 2017, 18:40)
- Re: Friends of the Earth Petition (tjj, Feb 26, 2017, 08:59)
- Re: Dan Hicks - The Apollo Magazine (moss, Feb 27, 2017, 11:20)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (moss, Mar 01, 2017, 12:59)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (tjj, Mar 06, 2017, 08:49)
- Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge (thesweetcheat, Mar 16, 2017, 18:31)
- Re: Inside Out West (tjj, Mar 31, 2017, 20:12)
- Re: UNESCO say tunnel should be reconsidered (tjj, Jun 15, 2017, 22:29)
|
|