Starmer calls himself a Conservative - BJO please explain Starmer will mandate WFH if he gets in (I don’t mind, I get more sex out of that little wheeze) Dyson attacks Sunak’s focus on science Modi wants the British Crown Jewels back in India.
Couple of questions. Is South Africa arming Putin? And what’s the Australian PwC crisis - is the Labor government about to fall?
I WFH, and I don't get extra sex.
This is genuinely one thing where I hope SKS fans do explain.
She used to get up, breakfast, bring me a cuppa, shower, get dressed, make up, take a bus to the embankment, and suddenly she got the WFH habit, I wake up and she’s still in bed with me. 🤗
She calls the afternoon romps a necessary screen break.
I barely have time to have lunch.
I'm like a galley slave at my desk from 6am to 6pm!
You mean role playing with chains and whips?
Or maybe you havn’t got the hang of working from home malarkey. You are not supposed to do work, no one else is doing work at home, instead you’ve got to do… it a lot more, like everyone else is.
When you are on a Teams call you can only be seen from the waist up.
The anger amongst Remainers is likely to go through the roof as immigration rockets and not a peep from the right wing press who essentially drove the leave vote by their relentless anti EU nationals campaign .
Brexit couldn’t even deliver the apparent one thing many Leavers had wanted or were told they wanted as in lower net-migration!
Millions lost their freedom of movement rights , many dreams were shattered and for what .
Not a single Leave promise has been met.
Angry remainers. Are they like Anna Soubry?
You're completely right that Brexit has been a shitshow, but there wasn't ever a unified approach to what it should or could be. I voted to leave, but I'm damned sure very few people even considered the factors that made me do so.
As a remainer I don't think you have anybody to be angry at. The Brexit voters aren't a something. They've dispersed and gone their own separate ways.
My anger is aimed not at Leavers but those especially in the right wing press who waged a relentless campaign against EU nationals .
Ah you mean those that objected to the racist policy you advocate of preferring white christian immigration over brown people.....hands you your bnp application form
Free movement is a pillar of the single market. The aim is prosperity through economic integration, and economic integration isn't fully viable without free movement because we don't live in fucking feudal times any more. It's nothing at all to do with skin colour or religion, and if you're airbrushing the existence of non-white and non-Christian people out of European identity, then the racist is you.
Free movement is about fucking over the poor people on minimum wage for the benefit of business who like their infinite labour pool. But then you are a lefty so you like to keep people poor so you can pretend you are on their side
So, you've moved off the racial arguments and now it's I'm a "lefty", who wants to "fuck over poor people"?
I don't know what kind of acute episode you're having. Have you skipped your tablets?
He does the night shift on Radio Broadmoor.
Do fuck off the point was precisely accurate....farooq wants to skew immigration to white christians from the eu. If I said that you would be shouting racist from the rooftops....you like fom and agree with that so you have a go at me.
I am quite happy with immigration of people who benefit the country and are net contributors on the other hand and dont care if they are brown, yellow, white, black, green with yellow spots. I object however to immigration that keeps the poor on minimum wage while raising rents and puts ever more pressure on public services while not providing enough tax to make up for it.
That is not racist it is rational
You're talking about green people with yellow spots, you don't get to play the "rational" card sorry.
I'm sorry this hasn't worked out for you, but as explained, the idea of free movement isn't about racial or religious characteristics, and I would really like you to stop and think about what you're saying. Do you think everybody on here who is reading this and who is from this country or an EU country, do you think they are all white Christians? Because you're argument, apart from being wrong on its own merits, is erasing all those other people.
Again, it's wrong because free movement isn't predicated on anything other than membership of a single market. We have the same thing within countries too: I am free to move from Aberdeenshire to Cornwall if I choose. That isn't racist against someone from Mozambique who has to apply for permission to live in Truro. Your argument invites the conclusion that every country is racist for having internal free movement and restricted immigration. That's a silly conclusion and so you should wind your accusations in.
Only one person lost the argument. Have a nice night
Well, let me turn this around.
No part of the United States has - over the last 40 years - seen greater amounts of immigration (both from inside the US and from around the world) as the Bay Area.
Yet it is hard to rationally conclude that has driven down the price of software engineers. Indeed, the Bay Area is - without a doubt - the most expensive place to hire engineers in the world.
Now, it may be that there's a massively important difference between skilled and unskilled labour. But it certainly does not seem to be the automatic case that allowing people to migrate results in terrible pressure on wage rates.
That would be the bay area where they have a load of homeless people shitting in the street
Yes. That's the one.
I'm not sure the homeless heroin addicts are caused by software engineers, but I'll do some research if you like.
Starmer calls himself a Conservative - BJO please explain Starmer will mandate WFH if he gets in (I don’t mind, I get more sex out of that little wheeze) Dyson attacks Sunak’s focus on science Modi wants the British Crown Jewels back in India.
Couple of questions. Is South Africa arming Putin? And what’s the Australian PwC crisis - is the Labor government about to fall?
I WFH, and I don't get extra sex.
This is genuinely one thing where I hope SKS fans do explain.
Starmer calls himself a Conservative - BJO please explain Starmer will mandate WFH if he gets in (I don’t mind, I get more sex out of that little wheeze) Dyson attacks Sunak’s focus on science Modi wants the British Crown Jewels back in India.
Couple of questions. Is South Africa arming Putin? And what’s the Australian PwC crisis - is the Labor government about to fall?
I WFH, and I don't get extra sex.
This is genuinely one thing where I hope SKS fans do explain.
I think we will move closer to the Single Market over time but this will not involve full membership.
Just finished an international conference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsouJoc5-P8), where I was asked by three different EU nationals whether Britain would rejoin. I said I couldn't see it in the next 5 years, maybe the following Parliament, "but would you want us?" They all looked a bit taken back and said things like "Hmm, I see what you mean" and "Only if you were keen, not just to create trouble again".
Hence the fact that, even if popular support can be found to reopen the whole can of worms again, going back to the EU must necessarily be a long-term project. A stable 2:1 majority in favour needs to be established amongst public opinion, and that's with an assumption that we're going to give up the pound and adopt the euro to boot. That's not going to be easy.
Too right.
You can be sure I'd do everything in my power to sabotage the fuck out of it if we went back in.
When will the Eurocrats realise we want a different and limited political model?
All the public will care about is “am I and my family better off”. They’ll conclude “no”. Therefore, we’ll go back on - either EEA or full EU with Ukraine (as someone has said)
We are a European nation - and we can’t escape the current reality.
We are and we aren't.
Even the Remainest of Remainers take all their cultural cues from the USA - not continental Europe - because if we did European style Christian Democracy/Social Democracy would be a thing, and we'd be far less ultra-individualist and more socially conservative about language, heritage, migration, and tradition, just like they are.
We are a bit of both, but neither, and they want to force us into a box.
That's the problem.
you truly are cracked if you think that
How so?
We adopt "Not my King" from "Not my President", the trans wars virtually word for word, and BLM took about 72 hours to get from Minnesota to Manchester. Our religions of veganism, Wokery, and Year Zero anti-patriotism are also very similar.
All of this stuff leaves most Europeans completely cold. The only thing that's broadly similar is concern about climate change.
I'd say my cultural views are far more European than those of some of the UTOA Remainers.
I ask you seriously if you have ever even visisted the States? I suspect you haven't. If you think our cultural values are more aligned to those of the US than Europe then you are visiting with your sensitivity switched off. I've now worked there maybe fifty times and every time I go I'm more surprised how foreign a place that largely speaks English can feel. I can hardly think of a European country that feels more foreign.
Well I have lived and worked extensively in both the US and Europe and definitely feel our cultural values are more closely aligned with the US than with Europe. I don't actually think that matters one way or another but it is certainly my experience.
Edit:
Though I should add of course that you hve in the past claimed to feel more European than British so you are hardly in a position to judge on whether Britain is culturally closer to the US or Europe.
Buyer's remorse. I would vote Rejoin in a heartbeat.
That just shows you're impulsive and don't think things through.
Er, I've had SEVEN years to think it through!
And, you were hysterical about it at the time, as you are about Rejoin and Starmer now, and also your republicanism: where you keep posting the same (decidedly weak) points endlessly, again and again.
Conclusion: you don't think things through.
You clearly didn't . Obviously not entirely stupid but you believed in Brexit. The biggest crock of shit that has ever been inflicted on a relatively sophisticated electorate. And, of course, it wasn't in any way influenced by Russian social media manipulation. Well, according to the now very believable "Russian Report" lol.
I believed in terminating our full membership of the European Union and negotiating a new one, yes. It wasn't working as a political model for us and never would have.
And I absolutely stand by that as the right decision.
You keep trying to convince yourself old chap. It was the dumbest decision this country has taken in a century at least. EU membership was not perfect, but it was not a disaster either. The benefits outweighed the disbenefits. Leaving it has not benefited one ordinary person one iota. It was pointless. Stupid. However we now have to live with that idiocy and move on. Rejoin is not an option IMHO.
I respectfully disagree: the flexibility required to accommodate a permanent settlement with the UK inside the EU wasn't there, together with a track record of creeping federalisation, so the only honest position was to Leave if you no longer had confidence in the organisation.
Of course, it would have been better to have negotiated this inside, and then gently moved to it, or an outer-tier membership system, but that wasn't on the table - so the break it was.
Creeping is the right word for the federalism. Or a ratchet that only turns once a decade.
Even if you thought the end game was bad, you ran from a large slug into moving traffic, you chopped off your feet to avoid the distant ratchet pull.
The threat (if threat it ever was) of EU federalism is a straw man . It is only believed in by arch-federalists and arch-Europhobes. The EU, for all its faults, is a system built on compromise. That compromise system would never have allowed proper federalism with us or without us. The EU will continue to be a glorified trading block of sovereign nations for centuries. The hilarious thing is that it is simply too bureaucratic to force through federalism.
There is no other trading block in the world - glorified or otherwise - that has the ability to impose laws unrelated to trade on its members.
There is no other trading block in the world that has the full panolply of governmental institutions which rule their members.
The idea that the EU is just a trading bloc is completely gaga.
Note the word "glorified" Richard. The vast majority of the laws are trading regulations for the smooth running of trade, most of which UK firms will continue to adhere to as well you know. The only people who are gaga are those like the ERG who try and paint the EU as something that it isn't, wasn't and will never be.
This is simply unture. The majority of laws inside the EU are not trading regulations - not by a million miles. Only about 21% of EU law actually relates to trade either directly or indirectly. That is according to the EEA agreement and also includes Agricultural law even in areas not directly related to trade. So the amount of EU law directly related to trade is less than that.
Most is to do with alignment, which is essentially about trade directly or indirectly. There have been social aspects, which we once had an opt out on, but our democratically elected government decided to sign up. The hysteria over EU law is, well, just hysteria. The fact that we have chosen to not get rid of the laws show that they were not really detrimental to the average UK citizen. Brexit was pointless
Again just about every part of that answer from you is factually wrong.
And particularly on your last point. Not getting rid of the laws in a 'bonfire' does not indicate that the laws are not detrimental, just that we need to do all of this in a measured way. The argument is not that we should not get rid of the laws but that they are so interwoven into our legal system that we need to unravel them properly rather than trying to just cut through them.
Dude's whole wikipedia entry is, er, fascinating. From an OBE for military work in Afghanistan, to a right-wing political book with foreword by Lembit Opik, and all sorts of stuff in between:
What I want to know about Rishi and his bonfire of the EU regulations is this: was he lying when he first proposed it, or did someone (a civil servant presumably) have explain to him what a terrible idea it was and he backtracked? The answer will put Brexit and the quiddity of its proponents into two entirely different lights, neither of which is particularly flattering.
How on earth has the Conservative Party allowed itself to get to a place where net migration is about to surge to a historic high of 700,000 - 1 million while the Labour Party berates it for "losing control".
How on earth has the Conservative Party allowed itself to get to a place where net migration is about to surge to a historic high of 700,000 - 1 million while the Labour Party berates it for "losing control".
About 18 months ago there was a weird period where the number of vacancies far outstripped the number of people willing to take work. This was caused by various factors: boomers retiring, reluctance to work post-Covid, etc. So there were lots of lots of vacancies chasing people
To our East and South there are millions of refugees and migrants moving from Africa and Eurasia and we look rather nice to them. And no matter what party you vote for, we don't know how to handle it nor prevent it other than let them in and hope. So now there are lots and lots of people chasing vacancies
So there y'go. Simple supply and demand. When you find a party that has realistic plans on how to handle this, shout out because I'm sure we'd all like to know.
I think we will move closer to the Single Market over time but this will not involve full membership.
Just finished an international conference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsouJoc5-P8), where I was asked by three different EU nationals whether Britain would rejoin. I said I couldn't see it in the next 5 years, maybe the following Parliament, "but would you want us?" They all looked a bit taken back and said things like "Hmm, I see what you mean" and "Only if you were keen, not just to create trouble again".
Hence the fact that, even if popular support can be found to reopen the whole can of worms again, going back to the EU must necessarily be a long-term project. A stable 2:1 majority in favour needs to be established amongst public opinion, and that's with an assumption that we're going to give up the pound and adopt the euro to boot. That's not going to be easy.
Too right.
You can be sure I'd do everything in my power to sabotage the fuck out of it if we went back in.
When will the Eurocrats realise we want a different and limited political model?
All the public will care about is “am I and my family better off”. They’ll conclude “no”. Therefore, we’ll go back on - either EEA or full EU with Ukraine (as someone has said)
We are a European nation - and we can’t escape the current reality.
We are and we aren't.
Even the Remainest of Remainers take all their cultural cues from the USA - not continental Europe - because if we did European style Christian Democracy/Social Democracy would be a thing, and we'd be far less ultra-individualist and more socially conservative about language, heritage, migration, and tradition, just like they are.
We are a bit of both, but neither, and they want to force us into a box.
That's the problem.
you truly are cracked if you think that
How so?
We adopt "Not my King" from "Not my President", the trans wars virtually word for word, and BLM took about 72 hours to get from Minnesota to Manchester. Our religions of veganism, Wokery, and Year Zero anti-patriotism are also very similar.
All of this stuff leaves most Europeans completely cold. The only thing that's broadly similar is concern about climate change.
I'd say my cultural views are far more European than those of some of the UTOA Remainers.
I ask you seriously if you have ever even visisted the States? I suspect you haven't. If you think our cultural values are more aligned to those of the US than Europe then you are visiting with your sensitivity switched off. I've now worked there maybe fifty times and every time I go I'm more surprised how foreign a place that largely speaks English can feel. I can hardly think of a European country that feels more foreign.
Well I have lived and worked extensively in both the US and Europe and definitely feel our cultural values are more closely aligned with the US than with Europe. I don't actually think that matters one way or another but it is certainly my experience.
Edit:
Though I should add of course that you hve in the past claimed to feel more European than British so you are hardly in a position to judge on whether Britain is culturally closer to the US or Europe.
The other thing about this is that Europe and the US are both really big and diverse, and the cultural difference from the UK is wildly different depending where you are. I think this is pretty obvious for Europe but until I went to a few different parts of the US I wouldn't have guessed how different the different parts of it would feel.
Comments
I'm not sure the homeless heroin addicts are caused by software engineers, but I'll do some research if you like.
https://twitter.com/pinguhatesyou/status/1657044223491727367/photo/2
https://www.advocate.com/love-and-sex/2018/8/30/27-lesbian-sex-tips-porn-wont-teach-you#rebelltitem1
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1769005/rishi-sunak-no-confidence-letters-1922-committee-brexit
"Labour party plans ‘right to switch off’ for out-of-hours workers"
https://www.ft.com/content/85771e1e-97fc-4b86-bd4f-37a10721d37e
What is it that David Cameron said?
Edit:
Though I should add of course that you hve in the past claimed to feel more European than British so you are hardly in a position to judge on whether Britain is culturally closer to the US or Europe.
And particularly on your last point. Not getting rid of the laws in a 'bonfire' does not indicate that the laws are not detrimental, just that we need to do all of this in a measured way. The argument is not that we should not get rid of the laws but that they are so interwoven into our legal system that we need to unravel them properly rather than trying to just cut through them.
I blame the fifteen years spent in the Lib Dems, obviously... 😆
Edit: Divorced one person 2007, married another 2006?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Bolton_(British_politician)
@GoodwinMJ
How on earth has the Conservative Party allowed itself to get to a place where net migration is about to surge to a historic high of 700,000 - 1 million while the Labour Party berates it for "losing control".
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1657138982134730752
- About 18 months ago there was a weird period where the number of vacancies far outstripped the number of people willing to take work. This was caused by various factors: boomers retiring, reluctance to work post-Covid, etc. So there were lots of lots of vacancies chasing people
- To our East and South there are millions of refugees and migrants moving from Africa and Eurasia and we look rather nice to them. And no matter what party you vote for, we don't know how to handle it nor prevent it other than let them in and hope. So now there are lots and lots of people chasing vacancies
So there y'go. Simple supply and demand. When you find a party that has realistic plans on how to handle this, shout out because I'm sure we'd all like to know.https://9to5google.com/2023/05/11/google-bard-european-union/