For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
That's the point. The Government is tired and ready for the chop, but will Labour tackle poor public sector productivity? Record levels of taxation? Boats? Northern Ireland? Reduce energy costs? I cannot see any big question we face to which Labour is the answer.
I thought the SNP were in power in Scotland?
Four out of those five are reserved issues, and public sector productivity is probably something the UK Government would take the lead on too.
Well it makes no sense to me, then, to grizzle about Labour when the Tories control the key levers and the rest are SNP.
I reserve 99.99% of my grizzling for the current bunch of chumps; on occasion I merely observe the distinct lack of solutions to the current issues emerging from the opposition.
Oh ok, well I’m fine with that ratio.
I’m not massively impressed with Labour of course, although I think under the hood there is more going on than they are usually given credit for.
At heart, both major parties (and the SNP) seem trapped by really really outdated ideology. And I’m 44, hardly at the cutting bloody edge myself.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
British Airways has recorded a “progressive” new safety video for passengers featuring tennis ace Emma Raducanu, rapper Little Simz, designer Oswald Boateng and TV presenter Robert Peston.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
Mega rich fucks that dodge tax royally piss me off. Because I don’t. I minimise it legally - claim all my exes - but don’t go to any great lengths. No offshore bank accounts. I never even bothered with becoming a PLC when that would have helped
I live here. I pay my whack. Tho as the whack goes up I increasingly think hmmmmm
I have never sought to do anything to minimise my taxes, I pay shed loads of tax, and I don't mind doing it. It's the shoddiness of the public services I get in return that bothers me. Schools that can't afford to pay their staff. Infrastructure that is left half-built. Doctors I can't get an appointment for. I'd pay more to have public services that work. I get it why people want to pay less and get a minimalist state, although that's not my preference. Right now we seem stuck in the worst of all worlds - high taxes that still aren't high enough for anything to actually work.
Yup, if we had low taxes and half working stuff, I could kind of deal with that as they do in the US. We have high taxes and half working stuff which is just awful.
There's an internal research paper doing the rounds at the moment at work listing out reasons to not invest in the UK and it's very hard to disagree with it. Near the top of the list was 'unreformable public services that have a voracious appetite for taxpayer money'. Labour have got a real job on their hands to make the public sector work properly because the money is there.
One of the points I have made before is that many Tory voters are simply less reliant upon the state; they see taxes going up but are still forking out for private healthcare, private education, the benefits of others.
Any Tory govt should make both income tax deductible before the next election.
This is one of the problems with private schools - some of the people in the country most invested in having good quality schools voting to cut taxes rather than to fund schools properly. The broader point is that it is actually the rich who gain the most from having a functional state and society, as by definition they have most to lose if it breaks down. And so of course they should contribute most.
How justifiable is that teachers take 24% in employer pension contributions when the average person in the private sector gets 4%? Surely some of those vast sums that gold plate teachers early retirement/laziness fund could go into making schools a bit better?
The more capable modern IFVs are arguably of more use on the modern battlefield than MBTs - though neither is dispensable.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
No it isn't. The Western world is moving on from it. That's why the Western world is hemorrhaging money to Dubai, China, India etc.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
But who made up the story ? The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
But who made up the story ? The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
The BBC picked it up from the Sun. At the Sun, Cole doubtless got it from a 'source' who wanted to get the story out, presumably to sink the idea and get a recommitment to the project. Most likely, someone onside with the government who wanted to kill off the trouble that the clown and his pals have been trying to stir up?
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
No it isn't. The Western world is moving on from it. That's why the Western world is hemorrhaging money to Dubai, China, India etc.
You off to Bangalore are you then? Or Urumqi perhaps?
British Airways has recorded a “progressive” new safety video for passengers featuring tennis ace Emma Raducanu, rapper Little Simz, designer Oswald Boateng and TV presenter Robert Peston.
Prof Peston will now be claiming to be an expert on airline industry and aircraft engineering....only a matter of time before he arguing with a Boeing engineering on twitter about how new design changes are incorrect, because he is a keen amateur engineer.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
It’s been nearly seven years. No Brexit benefits have even been identified. And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
It’s been nearly seven years. No Brexit benefits have even been identified. And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
Given that some easily dismissed denials about HS2 being an EU project were the only arguments put forward against my 'rather silly list', I'll treat that with the same respect I have for all your thoughts on this issue.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
If you are an SNP supporter, and you support the principle of Scottish independence, then the argument that the SNP are trying their best, but Westminster makes it impossible, is a pretty easy sell.
This is particularly so at this time when the SNP have positioned themselves on the ideological left and can point to a Tory government in London.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
It’s been nearly seven years. No Brexit benefits have even been identified. And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
Given that some easily dismissed denials about HS2 being an EU project were the only arguments put forward against my 'rather silly list', I'll treat that with the same respect I have for all your thoughts on this issue.
It really is was tinfoil time, that list. They were only “easily dismissed” if you are dialling in from the Twilight Zone.
I’ll give you droit de suite, although fears that it would lead to wholesale departure of the art market to New York seem unfounded. I think the UK committed to maintaining it in the TCA.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
It’s been nearly seven years. No Brexit benefits have even been identified. And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
The GW counting system might have to be questioned here! Does it go one, two, seven?
(There will be Brexit benefits and many of them, but currently it's not been beneficial. The Johnson government, whilst good at getting the actuality over the line failed to see that the main theme was seizing the opportunity. Of course they were party derailed by covid, but nonetheless they fell very far short)
If you are an SNP supporter, and you support the principle of Scottish independence, then the argument that the SNP are trying their best, but Westminster makes it impossible, is a pretty easy sell.
It's total bollocks, but if "you are already an SNP supporter" then yes, they are buying it
We are not at war with Europe anymore now we have brexited. All those newspapers and MPs waving fists at Europe constantly, we are better off without.
And where being in EU was blamed for every single thing wrong with UK, our decline in the world, our struggling public services and housing problems, etc etc everything, at least now we can find out and sort out what was really the problem all along.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
The problem with talking about "Brexit opportunities" is that it is an excuse not to face up to the unavoidable challenges that Brexit presents. As discussed on here yesterday, the UK may lose a mass market car industry in part because of Brexit. Focusing on protecting manufacture of high end performance vehicles which are less affected by Brexit, isn't a "Brexit opportunity", but it is a perfectly sensible defensive play. But we are not doing this kind of playing to our remaining, if diminished, strengths because we are not realistic about the situation we are now in post-Brexit. Even if you support Brexit for reasons that make sense to you, you should want to minimise the many costs.
We are not at war with Europe anymore now we have brexited. All those newspapers and MPs waving fists at Europe constantly, we are better off without.
And where being in EU was blamed for every single thing wrong with UK, our decline in the world, our struggling public services and housing problems, etc etc everything, at least now we can find out and sort out what was really the problem all along.
There’s two.
The first one is crap. Brexit increased hostilities between the UK and European neighbours.
The second is the real and only Brexit benefit, and i won’t dismiss it. But again, after seven years, its hardly delivering is it?
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
But who made up the story ? The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
The Sun made the story up, in the same way as they have made up thousands of stories over the years. What staggered me was how it was lapped up on here. There is so much work going on around Euston there was no way that the story was true. Gullible in the extreme!!
Scotland’s first minister starting to sound like she’s regurgitating Twitter discourse. This is frankly beneath a senior politician who has failed to engage with the massive substantive issues with her self-ID reforms.…
Also, saying opponents of this bill are using their opposition to the bill as a cover for racism without specifying who you mean? Give me a break. This is playground politics.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
We are not at war with Europe anymore now we have brexited. All those newspapers and MPs waving fists at Europe constantly, we are better off without.
And where being in EU was blamed for every single thing wrong with UK, our decline in the world, our struggling public services and housing problems, etc etc everything, at least now we can find out and sort out what was really the problem all along.
There’s two.
The first one is crap. Brexit increased hostilities between the UK and European neighbours.
The second is the real and only Brexit benefit, and i won’t dismiss it. But again, after seven years, its hardly delivering is it?
Besides, all we've really done is move from blaming Brussels to blaming Brussels's Fifth Columnists.
Who, on current polling, are getting on for a majority of the electorate.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits. But there must be some where it wouldn't. I'm just saying we could do them if we wanted to but I don't hear anybody proposing anything like that.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
The only policy I can think of that got this big a raspberry from the public was the poll tax.
And maybe it is a good thing, badly done. But the paradox there is that the politicians who could be trusted to deliver Brexit on an emotional level were mostly ones with a track record of failing to deliver anything.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
The question is too hypothetical. It's not on the table. We are not going to rejoin any time soon. However if the question ever does come back, previous terms will be irrelevant. We will rejoin because we think we need to and because the EU and members want it too - the same as last time in the 1970's. We will agree to essentially everything asked of us, but the EU in that case has no interest in creating unnecessary hurdles to us joining.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
The question is too hypothetical. It's not on the table. We are not going to rejoin any time soon. However if the question ever does come back, previous terms will be irrelevant. We will rejoin because we think we need to and because the EU and members want it too - the same as last time in the 1970's. We will agree to essentially everything asked of us, but the EU in that case has no interest in creating unnecessary hurdles to us joining.
Agreed entirely with the first part.
In the second part, "everything asked of us" will be full membership of everything with no opt outs, because they won't risk us leaving a second time - this is the point that the Rejoiners don't seem to have understood yet.
The people like Scotty and GW who still haven't gotten over losing seven years ago, if they want to reverse that decision, need to realise that at some point the groundwork for accepting those terms will have to be laid - you can't fatten a pig on market day, and you can't get acceptance for the euro and Schengen during a referendum campaign. But until they realise that the groundwork has to be laid, they won't be able to do it, and will still be stuck in "this is terrible" mode. Which didn't win in 2016 and won't win next time either.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
I have always thought that PAYE is a con perpetrated on the population as a whole. If everyone had to write out a cheque or make an online payment for their tax out of their gross income they would probably get a bit more upset about how much they are taxed and what a very bad return they get on that money.
One of the few good things about the American tax system - almost everyone has to write a cheque every year to Uncle Sam. Yes, it’s mostly online these days, but the concept that the people should have a much better idea of how much the State confiscates, is a good one.
Most people in the US get tax refund as they PAYE element is outweighed by mortgage interest and local tax deductions.
This is utterly pathetic and contemptible stuff from the Republicans.
The Trump administration incurred a quarter of the entire debt in US history - including $1.8 trillion for an unfunded tax cut - and increased the debt ceiling several times to accommodate it. Now they want to fuck up the economy for no reason at all other than perceived political gain.
They make the Tories appear exemplars of moral principle.
We can use state aid to create new industries like renewables and become a world leader.
We can nationalise monopolies like the railways.
Not that the Tories will do it but Labour could. Labour could make a success out of Brexit
They might, but they’re not promising it either.
I don’t think I’ve seen a single coherent article who has made a case for economic success after Brexit in seven years.
Maybe, just maybe, it’s not possible to make one.
How are you keeping mate?
I’m still hanging in there.
2022 was better than 2021, which was better than 2020. It’s very sunny here. Im off to Philadelphia this afternoon with the family to see something new.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
But who made up the story ? The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
I wouldn't be surprised if the HS2 service did start initially at Old Oak Common. It is a fairly common approach to projects that are late and over budget. Get something working to buy time and generate at least some cash.
British Airways has recorded a “progressive” new safety video for passengers featuring tennis ace Emma Raducanu, rapper Little Simz, designer Oswald Boateng and TV presenter Robert Peston.
It would be reassuring to have Peston at the start of the video saying: "My sources tell me this plane is going to crash, so listen up"
Peston would be more likely to say: there's going to be a stampede to get off the plane, and unless you're there early, you're going to die a horrible death.
And when the stampede happened, he would pat himself on the back for his forecasting ability.
We can use state aid to create new industries like renewables and become a world leader.
We can nationalise monopolies like the railways.
Not that the Tories will do it but Labour could. Labour could make a success out of Brexit
They might, but they’re not promising it either.
I don’t think I’ve seen a single coherent article who has made a case for economic success after Brexit in seven years.
Maybe, just maybe, it’s not possible to make one.
If only we could see "Brexit done well" to judge. Or even "Brexit done ok".
But we'll see over time. The EU has had an extraordinarily tricky few years. They've just about scraped through. It's easy to dismiss the troubles as unimportant once they've been negotiated.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits. But there must be some where it wouldn't. I'm just saying we could do them if we wanted to but I don't hear anybody proposing anything like that.
One of several contradictions of Brexit is that it allows things that we don't want while preventing things we definitely do want.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
He didn't say it was - I don't think you lost patience and didn't read the following line "And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits", which means you must have disingenuously cut it out of your quoting.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
I'm curious if they deny it is as bad (obviously I've no idea if it is), or acknowledge it is but blame Westminster for that.
No idea, but the stats indicate that it is worse. Think of what happened this morning, a made up story about HS2 and Euston and people are outraged, "fucking useless tories" etc etc. They never seems to happen to the SNP. They have even got away with the prison rapist stuff.
But who made up the story ? The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
The Sun made the story up, in the same way as they have made up thousands of stories over the years. What staggered me was how it was lapped up on here. There is so much work going on around Euston there was no way that the story was true. Gullible in the extreme!!
The Murdoch press is usually the leak journal of choice for Sunak. It's where most of the anti-Boris leaks have been coming from.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits. But there must be some where it wouldn't. I'm just saying we could do them if we wanted to but I don't hear anybody proposing anything like that.
The problem is that the Brexiteers don't know what they what, or rather, they want different things. Take for example your first point: environmental legislation. One set of Brexiteers would indeed like much tighter environmental and food quality controls, but another set would prefer looser environmental and quality controls. So taking advantage of our new-found freedom isn't going to be easy - any divergence from the current standards will be wildly unpopular with a substantial number of the very people that voted for the freedom to diverge. In addition, any move in either direction from EU standards comes with its own cost in terms of trade, making divergence even more difficult.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
Oh I agree, I just thought of a few ideas off the top of my head. Maybe some tighter environmental controls could be sold if the cost wasn't too prohibitive, for a better quality of living? I'm surprised nobody is even advocating anything.
The “irony” is that our current PM is ideologically more austerian than Osborne, and certainly more Brexit than May.
I’ll grant he is not more Johnsonian than Johnson.
The world is moving on from neo-liberalism, though. Britain is now a country out of time. (And certainly nobody has been daft enough to try a kind of neo-liberal autarchism).
Britain isn't just out of time. Britain is out of money.
How do you improve public services and infrastructure, encourage business to invest to improve productivity, reduce public sector debt and win re-election?
One of the things that Cameron and Osborne did well in the run-up to 2010 was that they made the argument that the country was in a hole, and it was going to be a difficult job to put things right. That's how they managed to implement austerity and win re-election.
One of the problems with Starmer's current approach is that he prefers to give the impression that there's an easy answer to the situation that the government is willfully refusing to implement. This failure to prepare the ground is going to be problematic when Starmer is in Number 10 and has to start explaining that there are no easy answers or quick fixes.
If I understand correctly, Jeremy Hunt mentioned Brexit opportunities this morning.
Anyone who thinks there are Brexit opportunities, but refuses to name any, should be disqualified from public office. At this stage it’s a profound deceit to keep uttering such crap.
I agree on Starmer, although it’s hard to win on a negative ticket. Osborne had the sheer shock of the GFC.
Talking about Brexit benefits is just a signal that the pol in question is hoping to harvest the votes of idiots. Of course there are Labour pols doing this too, now, including Starmer. Idiots do vote so it makes sense. But at some point somebody will have to stop lying to the public.
You shouldn't believe your own publicity. There are clear and obvious Brexit benefits - as there would be to leaving any rules based organisation and no longer needing to follow the rules. Where the lying lies is in talking about Brexit benefits but having no plans to exploit them.
It’s been nearly seven years. No Brexit benefits have even been identified. And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
Given that some easily dismissed denials about HS2 being an EU project were the only arguments put forward against my 'rather silly list', I'll treat that with the same respect I have for all your thoughts on this issue.
It really is was tinfoil time, that list. They were only “easily dismissed” if you are dialling in from the Twilight Zone.
I’ll give you droit de suite, although fears that it would lead to wholesale departure of the art market to New York seem unfounded. I think the UK committed to maintaining it in the TCA.
I wish it were. If you knew the hoops that had to be jumped through just to get permission to refill the reservoirs when we had the recent rainy spell, you wouldn't be so dismissive. I appreciate your incredulity though, as it is utterly absurd that our shitty agencies are still cleaving to the letter of EU law six years after leaving.
A couple of weeks after her birthday iconic actress, Sylvia Syms, has passed on. I was WFH this week and while I was WFH I was watching her in an early Joan Hickson Miss Marple. Best known for downing a beer in the blistering heat. RIP
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
Oh I agree, I just thought of a few ideas off the top of my head. Maybe some tighter environmental controls could be sold if the cost wasn't too prohibitive, for a better quality of living? I'm surprised nobody is even advocating anything.
Perhaps though, the absence makes your point
The reason may that half the politicians and almost all the civil servants want to stay as close to the EU as possible, either because they're used to it and it means they don't have to do any hard thinking or because they think it will make winning a future Rejoin referendum easier. Or both.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
How would insisting that all Evs sold in the UK are fitted with UK-made batteries shift production of EVs away from the UK?
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
As for the future? I suspect that a lot of the views that most of us have are about emoition and identity rather than reasoned weighing up of pros and cons. 2016 was just the moment where the generation who have always been suspicious of Europe (see the age breakdown from 1975) were in the ascendancy. A bit like the way that 2024 looks like it won't be about the relative details of the manifestoes, more that people are fed up with this government and not afraid of the alternative.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits. But there must be some where it wouldn't. I'm just saying we could do them if we wanted to but I don't hear anybody proposing anything like that.
The problem is that the Brexiteers don't know what they what, or rather, they want different things. Take for example your first point: environmental legislation. One set of Brexiteers would indeed like much tighter environmental and food quality controls, but another set would prefer looser environmental and quality controls. So taking advantage of our new-found freedom isn't going to be easy - any divergence from the current standards will be wildly unpopular with a substantial number of the very people that voted for the freedom to diverge. In addition, any move in either direction from EU standards comes with its own cost in terms of trade, making divergence even more difficult.
It’s the latter point which is key.
On its own, policy disagreement is normal and natural; that’s politics.
The problem is that the cost of divergence, 99 times out of 100, outweighs the supposed benefits.
The Brexit (economic) argument is basically that economic change is happening so quickly that we need the grab at the 1 out of 100 chance as and when it comes about, and that it will make up for everything else.
That sort of makes sense in theory, but in practice there’s very evidence for it. In the most cutting edge industries - AI, quantum computing, advanced manufacturing etc - I’m not seeing where the EU itself has actually retarded growth, and nor do I see the UK seizing supposed new opportunities.
Someone mentions nationalisation upthread.
We may indeed be damaging our economy so much that we have to - ironically - pivot to state protection of certain industries to push export performance by brute force.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
How would insisting that all Evs sold in the UK are fitted with UK-made batteries shift production of EVs away from the UK?
It wouldn't but it might make them bonkersly expensive - but I would hope our domestic market was large enough for it not be too much of an extra cost to the consumer. And if not that exactly, then for something surely?
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
How would insisting that all Evs sold in the UK are fitted with UK-made batteries shift production of EVs away from the UK?
It would result in the immediate suspension of all trade agreements between the UK and other countries as we would have rather breached the "no completely obvious non-tariff barriers" rule.
And therefore the only market for those EVs would be the UK.
Autarky has rarely been a successful economic strategy.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Also the idea that a narrowly won referendum —- which failed to carry in significant regions, nations, and demographics —- is the be all and end all of democracy - is at best very stupid. And at worst, to Godwinise, it is fascist.
For the first time in more than 30 years I got what is apparently called a wage slip today. A deeply depressing document. A small number at the top from which numerous deductions are made leaving an even smaller number at the bottom.
I am seriously perplexed we don’t have more revolutions in this country.
Worse still is realising how little we get for it. The UK is a classic example of the state doing too much and doing it badly, the last few years of big government conservatism should become a learning experience for all other countries to avoid going down the same path that Theresa May set us on.
And it’s getting worse. Yesterday my M-in-L had an online appointment for old age psychiatry. This is not a joke. She does not have internet or a computer so she had to be brought to our house to do the call.
After this travesty, which inevitably concluded that a face to face meeting was required, in 3 months time, my wife gets a form to complete confirming how wonderful this service was. Negative answers were not allowed. So, for example, you could record how many miles you had saved. A negative number, as in our case, was not permitted. Every question was slanted this way but no doubt this will be “evidence” in due course of how wonderful this is.
My MiL is suffering delusions which are scaring her to the point she doesn’t feel safe in her own home. A crap meeting like this, where she struggled to hear, and a 3 month wait. These are what these deductions from my pay slip are for?
You’ve continually voted for this, though. Austerity, then Brexit, then Johnson.
Edit: this sound like a personal attack, not especially. “You” is the general public.
You forget that I live in Scotland and live under the glory of the Scottish government which has never had a Tory element. The fact that it provides services which are at least as bad despite spending more per capita should really get a lot more thought by those deluding themselves that a Labour government is going to make it better.
The SNP must be the most effective political party ever, the situation with public servies in Scotland seems to be worse than in England, yet they, as the governing party, never get the blame for it. A remarkable feat.
Also remarkable that you think ‘public services in Scotland seems to be worse than in England’. Based on actual knowledge & experience, or what you read in the papers?
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
As for the future? I suspect that a lot of the views that most of us have are about emoition and identity rather than reasoned weighing up of pros and cons. 2016 was just the moment where the generation who have always been suspicious of Europe (see the age breakdown from 1975) were in the ascendancy. A bit like the way that 2024 looks like it won't be about the relative details of the manifestoes, more that people are fed up with this government and not afraid of the alternative.
The short term effect of polling is that the Tories are chained to a corpse, and one that is beginning to get quite pungent. They won't be electable by a majority of voters until they accept Brexit was a mistake, and we need to reconcile with the EU.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
No, against the democracy deniers - the small minority (led by people such as Lord Adonis and Sir Keir) who fought tooth and nail from 2016 until 2019 to cancel the result of the referendum, thereby giving the many people who voted Remain but would have been quite happy to accept defeat and move on false hope of eventual victory and bias against ever accepting defeat.
There was a positive case for Remain. It was just drowned out by lies and immigration from Leave
What was it?
Rather tellingly, no answer was forthcoming. There might have been a positive case to be made - but if there was it wasn't made at the time by the Remain campaign or indeed by anyone at all since.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
I would be delighted if Brexit worked.
At the end of the day, it’s nice to have my prejudices confirmed, but I have property in the UK and built a life there. I’d much rather be wrong about Brexit than “right” and see the country poorer.
There was a positive case for Remain. It was just drowned out by lies and immigration from Leave
What was it?
Rather tellingly, no answer was forthcoming. There might have been a positive case to be made - but if there was it wasn't made at the time by the Remain campaign or indeed by anyone at all since.
We are wealthier and freer as part of a club of liberal democracies committed to building closer relations and a larger single market.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Also the idea that a narrowly won referendum —- which failed to carry in significant regions, nations, and demographics —- is the be all and end all of democracy - is at best very stupid. And at worst, to Godwinise, it is fascist.
Nobody said it was the be all and the end all - but it did have to be accepted. Losers' consent is essential in a democracy - we've seen the problems in the US in 2000, more significantly in 2016 and most significantly in 2020 when it was absent. The correct response by the Adonises of the world would have been "OK, we lost, we're leaving - let's make the most of it and try to learn the lessons of why we lost so we can win a Rejoin campaign in 10 or 20 years".
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
How would insisting that all Evs sold in the UK are fitted with UK-made batteries shift production of EVs away from the UK?
It would result in the immediate suspension of all trade agreements between the UK and other countries as we would have rather breached the "no completely obvious non-tariff barriers" rule.
And therefore the only market for those EVs would be the UK.
Autarky has rarely been a successful economic strategy.
I'm not sure if that's a more or less bonkers idea than Luckyguy1983's one-man campaign against electrical interconnectors.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Also the idea that a narrowly won referendum —- which failed to carry in significant regions, nations, and demographics —- is the be all and end all of democracy - is at best very stupid. And at worst, to Godwinise, it is fascist.
Nobody said it was the be all and the end all - but it did have to be accepted. Losers' consent is essential in a democracy - we've seen the problems in the US in 2000, more significantly in 2016 and most significantly in 2020 when it was absent. The correct response by the Adonises of the world would have been "OK, we lost, we're leaving - let's make the most of it and try to learn the lessons of why we lost so we can win a Rejoin campaign in 10 or 20 years".
Loser’s Consent relies on a widely accepted democratic procedure.
There was a positive case for Remain. It was just drowned out by lies and immigration from Leave
What was it?
Rather tellingly, no answer was forthcoming. There might have been a positive case to be made - but if there was it wasn't made at the time by the Remain campaign or indeed by anyone at all since.
We are wealthier and freer as part of a club of liberal democracies committed to building closer relations and a larger single market.
A case which was and is virtually never put in those terms. Mathematically "X is richer than Y" and "Y is poorer than X" are two sides of the same coin, but emotionally they aren't.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Also the idea that a narrowly won referendum —- which failed to carry in significant regions, nations, and demographics —- is the be all and end all of democracy - is at best very stupid. And at worst, to Godwinise, it is fascist.
Nobody said it was the be all and the end all - but it did have to be accepted. Losers' consent is essential in a democracy - we've seen the problems in the US in 2000, more significantly in 2016 and most significantly in 2020 when it was absent. The correct response by the Adonises of the world would have been "OK, we lost, we're leaving - let's make the most of it and try to learn the lessons of why we lost so we can win a Rejoin campaign in 10 or 20 years".
So in short all the problems of Brexit are because of the people who opposed it and have not been in government for years?
When will Brexiteers begin to accept some responsibility for what they have wrought? They won't get reelected until they show some contrition.
We are heading for 1/3 Brexit, 2/3 Brejoin, which is astonishing really.
"Rejoin", if not properly qualified in the question, will be inferred as "under the previous terms of membership" by the vast majority of people answering the question, who won't realise those terms are no longer available. So this polling, whilst not quite as bogus as treating a negative response to "in hindsight, should we have left" as equivalent to wanting to rejoin, is still sufficiently bogus to be not worth the paper it's written on. And it's on a screen not on paper.
I don’t agree. It’s all about the trend. And the trend is BAAAAD for Brexit.
Brexit is a part of history, a given fact, an axiom. "The trend" is not some force of nature that will continue unabated - if Rejoin is to happen then at some point, its advocates have to win a referendum based on actual new terms of membership and not just by saying "leaving in 2016 was a mistake". Remain failed in 2016 solely because its advocates wouldn't - more likely couldn't - articulate a single actual positive reason to vote for continued membership. If the EU supporters don't learn that lesson, they won't win a Rejoin referendum, and no irrelevant perceived "trend" a few years in the past will help them.
Sure, for the time being, Brexit means Brexit. The interesting question is- what does this do to the British State of Mind. What will it be like to be in a country where there's something fundamental that a majority of voters don't like but don't think can be changed. A minority can be expected to get over it and make the best of it. But a majority? That's going to be odd and not in a good way.
If the majority doesn't get over it and want to make the best of it, that's another mark in the book against the democracy deniers of 2016-19.
So if the majority of the public doesn't get over it, that's a black mark against them?
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
Also the idea that a narrowly won referendum —- which failed to carry in significant regions, nations, and demographics —- is the be all and end all of democracy - is at best very stupid. And at worst, to Godwinise, it is fascist.
Nobody said it was the be all and the end all - but it did have to be accepted. Losers' consent is essential in a democracy - we've seen the problems in the US in 2000, more significantly in 2016 and most significantly in 2020 when it was absent. The correct response by the Adonises of the world would have been "OK, we lost, we're leaving - let's make the most of it and try to learn the lessons of why we lost so we can win a Rejoin campaign in 10 or 20 years".
Loser’s Consent relies on a widely accepted democratic procedure.
It was widely accepted right up until the moment the referendum result was declared that it would be decisive, both by the Prime Minister himself and by the Government in its information leaflet.
Even as a remainer, I see there are some potential benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
But that is not a list of unalloyed benefits.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
How would insisting that all Evs sold in the UK are fitted with UK-made batteries shift production of EVs away from the UK?
It would result in the immediate suspension of all trade agreements between the UK and other countries as we would have rather breached the "no completely obvious non-tariff barriers" rule.
And therefore the only market for those EVs would be the UK.
Autarky has rarely been a successful economic strategy.
I agree with you actually but as we won't be rejoining in my lifetime (almost certainly) I would at least like to hear some ideas from somewhere on how it could be made to work. It strikes me that casting yourself out of a large trading block for the sake of sovereignty implies a desire to do your own thing and to hell with the consequences. Where are the ideas?
Comments
I’m not massively impressed with Labour of course, although I think under the hood there is more going on than they are usually given credit for.
At heart, both major parties (and the SNP) seem trapped by really really outdated ideology. And I’m 44, hardly at the cutting bloody edge myself.
The suggestion is that it was a deliberate distraction exercise by government. Someone senior briefed it, since the BBC also took it seriously, first thing this morning.
https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1618979134692270081
The CEO of the Belgian defence company OIP argues that he isn't trying to rip off the Belgian government - instead summarising these costs for overhauling the Leopard 1A5BE.
Tracks: €120K
Engine revision: €185K
New shock absorbers: €36K
FCS: €500K
(He's trying to rip off the Belgian government)
Or Urumqi perhaps?
“Haemorrhaging money” is just tripe.
No Brexit benefits have even been identified.
And no, your rather silly list doesn’t count.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-64430454
This is particularly so at this time when the SNP have positioned themselves on the ideological left and can point to a Tory government in London.
They were only “easily dismissed” if you are dialling in from the Twilight Zone.
I’ll give you droit de suite, although fears that it would lead to wholesale departure of the art market to New York seem unfounded. I think the UK committed to maintaining it in the TCA.
(There will be Brexit benefits and many of them, but currently it's not been beneficial. The Johnson government, whilst good at getting the actuality over the line failed to see that the main theme was seizing the opportunity. Of course they were party derailed by covid, but nonetheless they fell very far short)
And where being in EU was blamed for every single thing wrong with UK, our decline in the world, our struggling public services and housing problems, etc etc everything, at least now we can find out and sort out what was really the problem all along.
There’s two.
This is on my phone: https://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/5464048785
The second is the real and only Brexit benefit, and i won’t dismiss it. But again, after seven years, its hardly delivering is it?
Also, saying opponents of this bill are using their opposition to the bill as a cover for racism without specifying who you mean? Give me a break. This is playground politics.
https://twitter.com/soniasodha/status/1618976056886833159
Who, on current polling, are getting on for a majority of the electorate.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls, for example. Or better employment rights than before. Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK.
And no, I'm not necessarily advocating any of those, as the costs might outweigh the benefits. But there must be some where it wouldn't. I'm just saying we could do them if we wanted to but I don't hear anybody proposing anything like that.
We can use state aid to create new industries like renewables and become a world leader.
We can nationalise monopolies like the railways.
Not that the Tories will do it but Labour could. Labour could make a success out of Brexit
I don’t think I’ve seen a single coherent article who has made a case for economic success after Brexit in seven years.
Maybe, just maybe, it’s not possible to make one.
poll tax.
And maybe it is a good thing, badly done. But the paradox there is that the politicians who could be trusted to deliver
Brexit on an emotional level were mostly ones with a track record of failing to deliver anything.
In the second part, "everything asked of us" will be full membership of everything with no opt outs, because they won't risk us leaving a second time - this is the point that the Rejoiners don't seem to have understood yet.
The people like Scotty and GW who still haven't gotten over losing seven years ago, if they want to reverse that decision, need to realise that at some point the groundwork for accepting those terms will have to be laid - you can't fatten a pig on market day, and you can't get acceptance for the euro and Schengen during a referendum campaign. But until they realise that the groundwork has to be laid, they won't be able to do it, and will still be stuck in "this is terrible" mode. Which didn't win in 2016 and won't win next time either.
Financial experts and political operatives experiencing debt ceiling déjà vu fear this time around, the ending could be catastrophic.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/26/obama-era-debt-ceiling-standoff-00079574
This is utterly pathetic and contemptible stuff from the Republicans.
The Trump administration incurred a quarter of the entire debt in US history - including $1.8 trillion for an unfunded tax cut - and increased the debt ceiling several times to accommodate it.
Now they want to fuck up the economy for no reason at all other than perceived political gain.
They make the Tories appear exemplars of moral principle.
2022 was better than 2021, which was better than 2020. It’s very sunny here. Im off to Philadelphia this afternoon with the family to see something new.
Hope you are well.
And when the stampede happened, he would pat himself on the back for his forecasting ability.
But we'll see over time. The EU has had an extraordinarily tricky few years. They've just about scraped through. It's easy to dismiss the troubles as unimportant once they've been negotiated.
We could have much tighter environmental and food quality controls. "We could make food much more expensive for UK consumers"
Or insist that all government contracts must only be let to UK-owned companies providing goods or services produced in the UK. "We could make everything much more expensive in the UK and raise taxes to pay for it"
Or that all electronic cars sold in the UK must be fitted with batteries made in the UK. "We can shift all production of electric cars overseas"
Perhaps though, the absence makes your point
https://news.sky.com/story/sylvia-syms-ice-cold-in-alex-star-dies-at-the-age-of-89-12796814
As for the future? I suspect that a lot of the views that most of us have are about emoition and identity rather than reasoned weighing up of pros and cons. 2016 was just the moment where the generation who have always been suspicious of Europe (see the age breakdown from 1975) were in the ascendancy. A bit like the way that 2024 looks like it won't be about the relative details of the manifestoes, more that people are fed up with this government and not afraid of the alternative.
On its own, policy disagreement is normal and natural; that’s politics.
The problem is that the cost of divergence, 99 times out of 100, outweighs the supposed benefits.
The Brexit (economic) argument is basically that economic change is happening so quickly that we need the grab at the 1 out of 100 chance as and when it comes about, and that it will make up for everything else.
That sort of makes sense in theory, but in practice there’s very evidence for it. In the most cutting edge industries - AI, quantum computing, advanced manufacturing etc - I’m not seeing where the EU itself has actually retarded growth, and nor do I see the UK seizing supposed new opportunities.
Someone mentions nationalisation upthread.
We may indeed be damaging our economy so much that we have to - ironically - pivot to state protection of certain industries to push export performance by brute force.
It's a while since I did GCSE German, but I'm pretty sure Brecht wrote something along those lines.
And therefore the only market for those EVs would be the UK.
Autarky has rarely been a successful economic strategy.
At the end of the day, it’s nice to have my prejudices confirmed, but I have property in the UK and built a life there. I’d much rather be wrong about Brexit than “right” and see the country poorer.
When will Brexiteers begin to accept some responsibility for what they have wrought? They won't get reelected until they show some contrition.
> possible, potential, theoretical, ideological
Whereas the demerits of Brexit appear to be
> actual, measurable, quantifiable, practical
Some crossover, but not much?