Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
I do think now would be a good time for the government to revisit the previously failed upgrade to the existing UK/Canada free trade deal. I'm sure they'll be more interested in compromising now.
You’d hope. But Canadian dairy farmers are utterly ruthless.
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Atlantis was supposed to be located BEYOND the Pillars of Heracles:
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Only the Lib Dems are actually proposing joining the customs union. That the EU is likely to be subject to US tariffs is no argument against improving the UK-EU trading arrangement. It may even be argument in favour.
I'm sorry why would it be an argument in favour if moving closer to the EU puts us in the line of fire? Trump is a dickhead and will likely take it personally if the government announces some kind of big improved trade deal with the EU. There's a very, very high likelihood that he will apply whatever tariff regime he sticks on the EU to the UK.
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Canada (and Newfoundland) immediately stood with the UK in both WW1 and WW2. They didn't keep their heads down hoping to not be noticed by the bully. Nor did they dilly-dally for several years before joining us.
We should do it diplomatically, but we should stand with Canada and condemn Trumps Trade War.
That is why Common Sense Conservatives condemn President Trump’s massive, unjust and unjustified tariffs on Canada’s already weak economy. Canada is the United States’ closest neighbour, greatest ally and best friend. We share the longest undefended border and fought alongside Americans in two world wars, Korea and Afghanistan, where 158 of our brave men and women died helping the U.S. avenge the 9/11 attacks. There is no justification whatsoever for this treatment.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Canada (and Newfoundland) immediately stood with the UK in both WW1 and WW2. They didn't keep their heads down hoping to not be noticed by the bully. Nor did they dilly-dally for several years before joining us.
We should do it diplomatically, but we should stand with Canada and condemn Trumps Trade War.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Only the Lib Dems are actually proposing joining the customs union. That the EU is likely to be subject to US tariffs is no argument against improving the UK-EU trading arrangement. It may even be argument in favour.
I'm sorry why would it be an argument in favour if moving closer to the EU puts us in the line of fire? Trump is a dickhead and will likely take it personally if the government announces some kind of big improved trade deal with the EU. There's a very, very high likelihood that he will apply whatever tariff regime he sticks on the EU to the UK.
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
It is certainly an argument for the EU to seek better terms with the UK. In theory, the EU should be more flexible in order to seek a deal, and one would hope that is in turn more attractive to the UK.
It’s unlikely in my view that any enhanced UK-EU deal crosses some kind of “how dare you” threshold from Trump.
If people want to try and tie Reform to Trumpism you'll have to do better than this. Holding a rally? Isn't that want political parties generally do? Has mass participatory democracy gone out of fashion with the establishment parties?
Out of interest is Birmingham twinned with Nuremberg?
Edit. Beaten to it by @Daveyboy1961 "Like" duly given.
Is that meant to be a joke? Do you think you are making yourself look clever? If you are then I'm afraid you just make yourself look like an idiot. Has Birmingham debased itself by twinning with Nuremberg? Or do you really think that's why the rally is in Birmingham? As opposed to it being the second largest city in the UK with a good central location (unless you live north of Leeds).
At the moment many Reform critics just seem to be behaving like a bunch of petty losers.
If a plane crashes on the border between Ukraine and Canada, where do they bury the survivors?
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Atlantis was supposed to be located BEYOND the Pillars of Heracles:
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Only the Lib Dems are actually proposing joining the customs union. That the EU is likely to be subject to US tariffs is no argument against improving the UK-EU trading arrangement. It may even be argument in favour.
I'm sorry why would it be an argument in favour if moving closer to the EU puts us in the line of fire? Trump is a dickhead and will likely take it personally if the government announces some kind of big improved trade deal with the EU. There's a very, very high likelihood that he will apply whatever tariff regime he sticks on the EU to the UK.
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
It is certainly an argument for the EU to seek better terms with the UK. In theory, the EU should be more flexible in order to seek a deal, and one would hope that is in turn more attractive to the UK.
It’s unlikely in my view that any enhanced UK-EU deal crosses some kind of “how dare you” threshold from Trump.
I think he's extremely petty and will take it personally if the UK sides with people he sees as being anti-America. As I said, we should do it within the scope of the existing trade deal which allows for both of those improvements, there's no need for any new deal(s) to be signed with the EU.
If people want to try and tie Reform to Trumpism you'll have to do better than this. Holding a rally? Isn't that want political parties generally do? Has mass participatory democracy gone out of fashion with the establishment parties?
Out of interest is Birmingham twinned with Nuremberg?
Edit. Beaten to it by @Daveyboy1961 "Like" duly given.
Is that meant to be a joke? Do you think you are making yourself look clever? If you are then I'm afraid you just make yourself look like an idiot. Has Birmingham debased itself by twinning with Nuremberg? Or do you really think that's why the rally is in Birmingham? As opposed to it being the second largest city in the UK with a good central location (unless you live north of Leeds).
At the moment many Reform critics just seem to be behaving like a bunch of petty losers.
If a plane crashes on the border between Ukraine and Canada, where do they bury the survivors?
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
On balance, I think it unlikely the UK escapes tariffs anywhere. Trump is a despotic lunatic.
However, if the UK is very nimble it could profit from escaping this tariffpalooza by seeking to grow trade with the U.S., while working for improved terms with Canada and the EU respectively.
It should also be working hard to attract U.S. science capability that is having government grants cut off.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
They want to give away Chagos and pay ten billion for the privilege. I’m not sure they know what they are doing…
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Atlantis was supposed to be located BEYOND the Pillars of Heracles:
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
They want to give away Chagos and pay ten billions for the privilege. I’m not sure they know what they are doing…
Keir should simply renounce that now. Suggest that Mauritius has failed to provide guarantees that it will deter greater influence from potentially hostile powers.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
If the US invaded Canada then we should help them defend themselves, in a trade war it's really up to them to resolve it and I'll remind you that Canada gave us a very hard time when we left the EU wrt a trade deal and just recently ended talks unilaterally on enhanced trade terms for protectionist reasons. I like Canada, I think they're one of our key global allies, when it comes to trade it really is every country for themselves. Canadians are grown ups and will have it within themselves to deal with it alone.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
If the US invaded Canada then we should help them defend themselves, in a trade war it's really up to them to resolve it and I'll remind you that Canada gave us a very hard time when we left the EU wrt a trade deal and just recently ended talks unilaterally on enhanced trade terms for protectionist reasons. I like Canada, I think they're one of our key global allies, when it comes to trade it really is every country for themselves. Canadians are grown ups and will have it within themselves to deal with it alone.
I wonder how much of this is Trudeau versus “Canada”.
Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.
An academic bloke who researched this sort of stuff fairly rigorously is the late Ian Stevenson, University of Virginia. His apparently robust data, much about reincarnation and also weird cognitions and precognitions like this one (this one is fairly mild by his standards, I think he would it put down as interesting coincidence) is bizarre and extraordinary. Personally i find his stuff uncomfortable because I would mostly prefer him to be wrong.
Co-incidences are far more common than lay people think.
"But there's a lab there in that very city!"
🤔
Maybe also sometimes less common. I find it hard to believe, though I think it must be true, that it is highly unlikely that two identical hands from 52 cards have ever been dealt in the whole of history.
Again it is down to the maths. When I first heard that one (quite recently) I thought it can't be true, but when you do the maths the number is mind boggling.
The number of possible hands is 52! which is roughly 10^68. 10 followed by 68 zeros.
To put it in context there are roughly 10^23 stars in the observable universe. And 10^57 atoms in a typical star. So roughly 10^80 atoms in the observable universe. 10 followed by 80 zeros.
That's a lot.
It would be a huge coincidence if you dealt two identical hands. Unless the pack wasn't shuffled.
What odds would PB numerates assign to my Tony Martin miracle?
Not particularly long odds. As you say, you’ve had similar conversations about other rather elderly individuals, who haven’t died.
You’re far less likely to be struck by lightning, which we know isn’t a miracle, but still manages to happen to people.
A better way of thinking about it is “how likely is it that someone in the U.K. happens to be talking about someone moderately well known, on the day they die ?” Extremely likely, I think.
Indeed. And I had a hole in one in Sept 21. That's enormously unlikely. Even if you play golf.
I wonder what the odds are of living a life without any unbelievably long shot things happening to you? Must be astronomical.
Ok so if you play golf once a week for twenty years that’s roughly 1000 rounds. Assuming at least one par three and also assuming you are able to hit the green on said par three then the odds would on you getting lucky at least once surely? Are there any stats on this out there?
There are. Most recreational golfers never do it but it's a sizeable minority who do.
I have once. A genuine hole in one across water, about 150 yards. I kept quiet about it.
Had I ever played golf, I'm not sure I'd admit to it.
On balance, I think it unlikely the UK escapes tariffs anywhere. Trump is a despotic lunatic.
However, if the UK is very nimble it could profit from escaping this tariffpalooza by seeking to grow trade with the U.S., while working for improved terms with Canada and the EU respectively.
It should also be working hard to attract U.S. science capability that is having government grants cut off.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
Well it may have worked for you and that's good, but it's often nonsense for many others. Bullies are not all cowards, and consequences can be too dire to deal with, that's why bullying usually works.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
On balance, I think it unlikely the UK escapes tariffs anywhere. Trump is a despotic lunatic.
However, if the UK is very nimble it could profit from escaping this tariffpalooza by seeking to grow trade with the U.S., while working for improved terms with Canada and the EU respectively.
It should also be working hard to attract U.S. science capability that is having government grants cut off.
Sounds eminently sensible
It’s an obvious opportunity, but I think Labour are to wedded to the idea of rejoining the EU to actually do anything with it.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Only the Lib Dems are actually proposing joining the customs union. That the EU is likely to be subject to US tariffs is no argument against improving the UK-EU trading arrangement. It may even be argument in favour.
I'm sorry why would it be an argument in favour if moving closer to the EU puts us in the line of fire? Trump is a dickhead and will likely take it personally if the government announces some kind of big improved trade deal with the EU. There's a very, very high likelihood that he will apply whatever tariff regime he sticks on the EU to the UK.
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
Sounds like you're advocating appeasement with a bully.
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
There's a theory but it's bollocks.
The Minoan civilization flourished after the Santorini eruption, and the story of Atlantis was created by Plato in an obviously fictional allegorical tale he made up.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
They want to give away Chagos and pay ten billions for the privilege. I’m not sure they know what they are doing…
Keir should simply renounce that now. Suggest that Mauritius has failed to provide guarantees that it will deter greater influence from potentially hostile powers.
Which is true.
The government seems to be extremely keen to secure the deal, it doesn't sound likely.
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Atlantis was supposed to be located BEYOND the Pillars of Heracles:
At the heart of Canadian national memory is the awareness that Canadians twice came to the UK's aid in world wars years before the Americans showed up.
It will not be forgottem if the Brits now hide in a corner and say nothing when Canada faces existential threats.
On balance, I think it unlikely the UK escapes tariffs anywhere. Trump is a despotic lunatic.
However, if the UK is very nimble it could profit from escaping this tariffpalooza by seeking to grow trade with the U.S., while working for improved terms with Canada and the EU respectively.
It should also be working hard to attract U.S. science capability that is having government grants cut off.
Yes, there is a narrow path to success available. I don't think the current government has the ability to walk it though.
What I would actually offer the EU is Schengen membership on a 10 year timeframe alongside the UK helping patrol the external border and a doing a deportation deal with them so that all countries stop blocking each other and agree to ECHR reforms to allow for deportation of criminals, failed asylum seekers and illegal immigrants without endless appeals and blocking action by courts. I actually think Schengen is more important to the EU than trade, it's culturally something that separates the English speaking bit of Europe from the non-English parts and they'd love to bring us into that tent so we could place a very high price on agreeing to join.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
A lot can happen in four years, and any choices come with risks, including trying not to be involved with things. That's one of the many reasons 'none of our business' foreign policy advocates, even when right, tend to be for the wrong reasons.
In this case, with an unstable figure at the helm? Hard to know what option is most risky.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
“Vote for me and you’ll never have to vote again.” Less than 2 weeks into his presidency, how do you now interpret this statement?
You posted a version of this point earlier but I don't get it. The argument seems to be that Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do) that he can't be worried about facing the electorate again so should be taken as proof that he plans to become a dictator. It's incoherent on every level.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
If the US invaded Canada then we should help them defend themselves, in a trade war it's really up to them to resolve it and I'll remind you that Canada gave us a very hard time when we left the EU wrt a trade deal and just recently ended talks unilaterally on enhanced trade terms for protectionist reasons. I like Canada, I think they're one of our key global allies, when it comes to trade it really is every country for themselves. Canadians are grown ups and will have it within themselves to deal with it alone.
I wonder how much of this is Trudeau versus “Canada”.
s Carney and even Poilevre back retaliatory tariffs
At the heart of Canadian national memory is the awareness that Canadians twice came to the UK's aid in world wars years before the Americans showed up.
It will not be forgottem if the Brits now hide in a corner and say nothing when Canada faces existential threats.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
‘…on which President Trump has wiped his arse. We take this as a token of the enduring special relationship and have invited the president to a state visit later this year.’
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Only the Lib Dems are actually proposing joining the customs union. That the EU is likely to be subject to US tariffs is no argument against improving the UK-EU trading arrangement. It may even be argument in favour.
I'm sorry why would it be an argument in favour if moving closer to the EU puts us in the line of fire? Trump is a dickhead and will likely take it personally if the government announces some kind of big improved trade deal with the EU. There's a very, very high likelihood that he will apply whatever tariff regime he sticks on the EU to the UK.
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
Sounds like you're advocating appeasement with a bully.
I'm not, I'm suggesting we do nothing, I'm not suggesting we praise Trump or jump on the tariff train with him. Simply that trade is not an actual war. Canada has the means to fend this off and if they want to do a better deal with the UK then that's also something we can do separately. I see absolutely no sense in "condemning" Trump or jumping into bed with the EU when there's tariffs coming for them too.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
‘…on which President Trump has wiped his arse. We take this as a token of the enduring special relationship and have invited the president to a state visit later this year.’
No one tell Trump about the Groom of the Stool position, or he'll make someone serving in that position for him a part of any trade deal.
You posted a version of this point earlier but I don't get it. The argument seems to be that Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do) that he can't be worried about facing the electorate again so should be taken as proof that he plans to become a dictator. It's incoherent on every level.
If you understood your own post it would make sense...
Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do)
He said "you'll never have to vote again"
The implication is that Trump intends to dispense with elections, because that's WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.
At the heart of Canadian national memory is the awareness that Canadians twice came to the UK's aid in world wars years before the Americans showed up.
It will not be forgottem if the Brits now hide in a corner and say nothing when Canada faces existential threats.
In particular, the Brexity folks who claimed to be all about the Commonwealth are nowhere to be seen.
More generally, anyone who claims to support free trade but also supports Trump should never be taken seriously ever again.
Again, it’s not clear what Britain ought do. Also, while not at all wanting to undermine Canadian sacrifice, Canada was essentially “British” at the time, so it was not really “coming to the UK’s aid”.
The last point is critical though. Let’s the Brexiters condemn Trump. To be fair, many are doing so on here.
But Farage, Johnson, Carswell, Braverman, Truss (the convert) etc? Crickets.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
If the US invaded Canada then we should help them defend themselves, in a trade war it's really up to them to resolve it and I'll remind you that Canada gave us a very hard time when we left the EU wrt a trade deal and just recently ended talks unilaterally on enhanced trade terms for protectionist reasons. I like Canada, I think they're one of our key global allies, when it comes to trade it really is every country for themselves. Canadians are grown ups and will have it within themselves to deal with it alone.
I wonder how much of this is Trudeau versus “Canada”.
You're probably right, but maybe we should wait until Pierre Polievre becomes PM before opening up talks.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Hitler had a point? I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
You posted a version of this point earlier but I don't get it. The argument seems to be that Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do) that he can't be worried about facing the electorate again so should be taken as proof that he plans to become a dictator. It's incoherent on every level.
If you understood your own post it would make sense...
Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do)
He said "you'll never have to vote again"
The implication is that Trump intends to dispense with elections, because that's WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.
Do you get it now?
No, the implication was that he would reshape the country sufficiently that apathetic non-voters will be able to go back to not caring about politics again.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
Well it may have worked for you and that's good, but it's often nonsense for many others. Bullies are not all cowards, and consequences can be too dire to deal with, that's why bullying usually works.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
OK Face up to bullies rather than face down bullies. I'm not sure what the difference is.
But the evidence is that Trump is a cowardly bully and can be faced down.
A small example: He really badmouthed Newsom over the fires and then when Newsom showed up on the tarmac to greet him, he was all pally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn7q0k1yY3s There are other many other examples.
You posted a version of this point earlier but I don't get it. The argument seems to be that Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do) that he can't be worried about facing the electorate again so should be taken as proof that he plans to become a dictator. It's incoherent on every level.
If you understood your own post it would make sense...
Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do)
He said "you'll never have to vote again"
The implication is that Trump intends to dispense with elections, because that's WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.
Do you get it now?
No, the implication was that he would reshape the country sufficiently that apathetic non-voters will be able to go back to not caring about politics again.
I know you're trolling, but fuck me, that is perhaps the dumbest take ever posted in this long standing forum.
You posted a version of this point earlier but I don't get it. The argument seems to be that Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do) that he can't be worried about facing the electorate again so should be taken as proof that he plans to become a dictator. It's incoherent on every level.
If you understood your own post it would make sense...
Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do)
He said "you'll never have to vote again"
The implication is that Trump intends to dispense with elections, because that's WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.
Do you get it now?
No, the implication was that he would reshape the country sufficiently that apathetic non-voters will be able to go back to not caring about politics again.
I know you're trolling, but fuck me, that is perhaps the dumbest take ever posted in this long standing forum.
Congratulations.
It's the only sane interpretation of what he said, and the fact that he isn't messing around with reshaping the country shows that he was serious about it.
“That statement is very simple, I said, ‘Vote for me, you’re not gonna have to do it ever again,’” Trump told Ingraham. “It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.”
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Canada is a member of the Commonwealth. Now is the time for all fellow @commonwealthsec members to state: no to economic coercion. 🇨🇦🇬🇧
The USA invaded a Commonwealth country (Grenada) and that wimp Thatcher just let them.
It was, more importantly, a Commonwealth *realm*.
However, the rightfully elected Prime Minister had been deposed and executed by a military junta.
Rather than complain, Thatcher should have offered military support. Indeed, many Caribbean nations (and other realms) did.
Grenada remains a Commonwealth realm.
The description of the government of Grenada at the time given by Wikipedia is pretty wild “ Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party parliamentary socialist constitutional monarchy”.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Hitler had a point? I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
Yes, he did. Germany was scapegoated for the Great War, when in reality there were a lot of countries fighting for a lot of reasons. Losing, they then saw their nation dismembered, their army shrank, no air force allowed, economic sanctions in the form of crippling reparations. Up to 1938 Hitler oversaw the reintegration of Germans the Reich, remilitarisation of German land in the Rhineland, the restoration of the military. The sudetan Germans was a legitimate question.
We colour our view if the Nazi period 1933 to 1938 with our hindsight. If Hitler had died in 1938, savage by one of his dogs, for instance, he would gave gone down in history as a great German
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
Well it may have worked for you and that's good, but it's often nonsense for many others. Bullies are not all cowards, and consequences can be too dire to deal with, that's why bullying usually works.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
OK Face up to bullies rather than face down bullies. I'm not sure what the difference is.
There wasn't a distinction between those, my point was casually dismissing bullying as something to just stand up to whatever the cost can be dangerous and stupid. I don't know the context you made the reference in regard to and great that it worked out apparently, but for many people an exhortation to stand up or be labelled a coward is terrible, terrible advice, and it is something that gets me riled up.
My reference to policy was because bullying in that sense is different to personal, emotional, or physical bullying, and so in national terms we have more options.
But on an individual level 'you have to face down bullies' is bloody awful advice. Sometimes you have to. Sometimes you can. Sometimes it is very very unwise.
If people want to try and tie Reform to Trumpism you'll have to do better than this. Holding a rally? Isn't that want political parties generally do? Has mass participatory democracy gone out of fashion with the establishment parties?
Out of interest is Birmingham twinned with Nuremberg?
Edit. Beaten to it by @Daveyboy1961 "Like" duly given.
Is that meant to be a joke? Do you think you are making yourself look clever? If you are then I'm afraid you just make yourself look like an idiot. Has Birmingham debased itself by twinning with Nuremberg? Or do you really think that's why the rally is in Birmingham? As opposed to it being the second largest city in the UK with a good central location (unless you live north of Leeds).
At the moment many Reform critics just seem to be behaving like a bunch of petty losers.
If a plane crashes on the border between Ukraine and Canada, where do they bury the survivors?
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Hitler had a point? I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
I think by the mid 1930s there was a lot of British and European feeling that the terms of the Treaty of Versailles were too harsh, particularly around borders drawn after 1918. The line was truly crossed when Hitler occupied Moravia in 1939, rather than just the Sudetenland.
Sure it appears foolish through the retrospectoscope but no one knew what was to lie ahead, at least not with any certainty. Neither was there the means or will for Britain to fight for Czechoslovakia, hence the crowds cheering Chamberlain on landing.
Trump joked about running for a third term just last week.
He's got an ego big enough for it, but I genuinely don't think he has any need to. He needed to become President again because even with the Supreme Court making most things a President might do immune from prosecution he had some potential for legal trouble, and financial trouble, if he was just citizen Trump again.
Even assuming his health holds up as a very very old man in 4 years, I should think his person and wealth is now assured forevermore. He will live out his days as a very powerful, very rich man, facing no negative consequences for anything he might ever have done.
Even for an ego boost I don't think he even needs a third time now.
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Hitler had a point? I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
Yes, he did. Germany was scapegoated for the Great War, when in reality there were a lot of countries fighting for a lot of reasons. Losing, they then saw their nation dismembered, their army shrank, no air force allowed, economic sanctions in the form of crippling reparations. Up to 1938 Hitler oversaw the reintegration of Germans the Reich, remilitarisation of German land in the Rhineland, the restoration of the military. The sudetan Germans was a legitimate question.
We colour our view if the Nazi period 1933 to 1938 with our hindsight. If Hitler had died in 1938, savage by one of his dogs, for instance, he would gave gone down in history as a great German
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
There hasn't been any change with the pollsters apart from EKOS.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
Well it may have worked for you and that's good, but it's often nonsense for many others. Bullies are not all cowards, and consequences can be too dire to deal with, that's why bullying usually works.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
OK Face up to bullies rather than face down bullies. I'm not sure what the difference is.
There wasn't a distinction between those, my point was casually dismissing bullying as something to just stand up to whatever the cost can be dangerous and stupid. I don't know the context you made the reference in regard to and great that it worked out apparently, but for many people an exhortation to stand up or be labelled a coward is terrible, terrible advice, and it is something that gets me riled up.
My reference to policy was because bullying in that sense is different to personal, emotional, or physical bullying, and so in national terms we have more options.
But on an individual level 'you have to face down bullies' is bloody awful advice. Sometimes you have to. Sometimes you can. Sometimes it is very very unwise.
That's a fair comment. Sometimes it is wiser to hand them your mobile phone than get stabbed.
At a national level, as you say, we have more options. But my starting point is always to face down the bully. Putin and his sabre rattling on World War 3 and what he will do to the UK is a good example. You can't submit to that.
I remember people saying "Better red than dead". I don't agree.
Nope, nope, nope. We should stay out of this and keep our heads down for four years until the senile bastard fucks off.
I'm pretty sure history has several examples of why that idea doesn't work well.
"I hold in my hand a peace of paper..."
Which is rather unfair on Chamberlain. Mist right thinking people were desperate to avoid war. And many conceded that Hitler had a point up to 1938. Plus noone knew what was to follow. There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Hitler had a point? I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
Yes, he did. Germany was scapegoated for the Great War, when in reality there were a lot of countries fighting for a lot of reasons. Losing, they then saw their nation dismembered, their army shrank, no air force allowed, economic sanctions in the form of crippling reparations. Up to 1938 Hitler oversaw the reintegration of Germans the Reich, remilitarisation of German land in the Rhineland, the restoration of the military. The sudetan Germans was a legitimate question.
We colour our view if the Nazi period 1933 to 1938 with our hindsight. If Hitler had died in 1938, savage by one of his dogs, for instance, he would gave gone down in history as a great German
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
I also think that's why Pierre Polievre has hit back today against Trump to separate himself from this all. The CPC will still win but it won't be the thumping majority they were expecting. It's another oddity with Trump, surely he should have held off until his ally was in power and then rolled over the Canadian Tories with a very unfavorable deal.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
They want to give away Chagos and pay ten billion for the privilege. I’m not sure they know what they are doing…
The Attorney General seems obsessed with giving away Chagos. His Chatham House speech showed total ignorance of realpolitik.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Canada is a member of the Commonwealth. Now is the time for all fellow @commonwealthsec members to state: no to economic coercion. 🇨🇦🇬🇧
The USA invaded a Commonwealth country (Grenada) and that wimp Thatcher just let them.
It was, more importantly, a Commonwealth *realm*.
However, the rightfully elected Prime Minister had been deposed and executed by a military junta.
Rather than complain, Thatcher should have offered military support. Indeed, many Caribbean nations (and other realms) did.
Grenada remains a Commonwealth realm.
The description of the government of Grenada at the time given by Wikipedia is pretty wild “ Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party parliamentary socialist constitutional monarchy”.
Pretty sure I've seen that exact thing on many a twitter bio apart from the last two words though.
If people want to try and tie Reform to Trumpism you'll have to do better than this. Holding a rally? Isn't that want political parties generally do? Has mass participatory democracy gone out of fashion with the establishment parties?
Out of interest is Birmingham twinned with Nuremberg?
Edit. Beaten to it by @Daveyboy1961 "Like" duly given.
Is that meant to be a joke? Do you think you are making yourself look clever? If you are then I'm afraid you just make yourself look like an idiot. Has Birmingham debased itself by twinning with Nuremberg? Or do you really think that's why the rally is in Birmingham? As opposed to it being the second largest city in the UK with a good central location (unless you live north of Leeds).
At the moment many Reform critics just seem to be behaving like a bunch of petty losers.
If a plane crashes on the border between Ukraine and Canada, where do they bury the survivors?
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
There is a massive constitutional and diplomatic crisis looming for Starmer and King Charles if Trump continues in his attempts to make Canada the 51st state.
Brace.
Why?
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
Canada is a member of the Commonwealth. Now is the time for all fellow @commonwealthsec members to state: no to economic coercion. 🇨🇦🇬🇧
The USA invaded a Commonwealth country (Grenada) and that wimp Thatcher just let them.
It was, more importantly, a Commonwealth *realm*.
However, the rightfully elected Prime Minister had been deposed and executed by a military junta.
Rather than complain, Thatcher should have offered military support. Indeed, many Caribbean nations (and other realms) did.
Grenada remains a Commonwealth realm.
The description of the government of Grenada at the time given by Wikipedia is pretty wild “ Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party parliamentary socialist constitutional monarchy”.
Pretty sure I've seen that exact thing on many a twitter bio apart from the last two words though.
The Americans re-established parliamentary democracy on Grenada - it was, indeed, one party marxist state before - which it has remained.
The real issue was that Bishop was running a Dave Spart style Marxist regime. The people who murdered him wanted… purity.
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
Don't bow the knee to a bully.
Population EU 450m UK 68m US 340m
GDP EU $20T UK $3Y US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
I'm sorry that's just stupid. Solidarity doesn't pay the bills and I'm sure the people put out of work when the economy goes into a recession after Trump tariffs will be extremely happy to give up their livelihoods for it.
That's cowardly. You have to face down bullies even if it costs. That's what I've learned in life.
Well it may have worked for you and that's good, but it's often nonsense for many others. Bullies are not all cowards, and consequences can be too dire to deal with, that's why bullying usually works.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
OK Face up to bullies rather than face down bullies. I'm not sure what the difference is.
There wasn't a distinction between those, my point was casually dismissing bullying as something to just stand up to whatever the cost can be dangerous and stupid. I don't know the context you made the reference in regard to and great that it worked out apparently, but for many people an exhortation to stand up or be labelled a coward is terrible, terrible advice, and it is something that gets me riled up.
My reference to policy was because bullying in that sense is different to personal, emotional, or physical bullying, and so in national terms we have more options.
But on an individual level 'you have to face down bullies' is bloody awful advice. Sometimes you have to. Sometimes you can. Sometimes it is very very unwise.
That's a fair comment. Sometimes it is wiser to hand them your mobile phone than get stabbed.
At a national level, as you say, we have more options. But my starting point is always to face down the bully. Putin and his sabre rattling on World War 3 and what he will do to the UK is a good example. You can't submit to that.
I remember people saying "Better red than dead". I don't agree.
I think we better brace for the unedifying sight, yet again, of a British government giving it the old yes sir no sir three bags full sir to a US president. Max will get his wish.
Chirac showed how it’s done in 2003. A few months of Americans eating “freedom fries”, met with uniform Gallic shrugs, and the schadenfreude of being proved right within a couple of years.
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
There hasn't been any change with the pollsters apart from EKOS.
No they all have the Liberals up on their pre Christmas polls, just Ekos has it now a hung parliament
Can someone explain to me why Labour are making noises about having a closer trade relationship with the EU just as Trump is saddling up to hit the EU with gigantic tariffs which he hasn't yet said will be applied to the UK? I don't understand this thinking at all, surely just staying where we are with a tariff free trade deal with the EU and no formal trade deal with the US (and no punitive tariff regime) is the best possible move. Anything that antagonises Trump by moving closer to the EU and results in similar tariffs to Canada being applied to our US trade and then being involved in retaliatory ones will result in a recession regardless of what minute gains there might be in having a a closer relationship to the EU.
Like it or not, Trump is the only game in town right now and by luck or by design we've managed to escape his immediate ire, why trade that away for no gain?
They want to give away Chagos and pay ten billion for the privilege. I’m not sure they know what they are doing…
The Attorney General seems obsessed with giving away Chagos. His Chatham House speech showed total ignorance of realpolitik.
Offer to sell the Chagos to Trump for $1 million $100 Billion.
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
I also think that's why Pierre Polievre has hit back today against Trump to separate himself from this all. The CPC will still win but it won't be the thumping majority they were expecting. It's another oddity with Trump, surely he should have held off until his ally was in power and then rolled over the Canadian Tories with a very unfavorable deal.
But what, exactly, does Trump want out of Canada?
Trudeau rolled on immigration control pretty much immediately, so it isn't that.
Trump claims it's about Fentanyl, but really, it's about a bilateral trade surplus that was created by the keystone pipeline that he supported.
Kazakhstan just found a way around Russia's oil dominance.
The massive Kashagan field sent its first shipment via Azerbaijan, aiming to slash Russian transit by 80%. 13 billion barrels of oil will now flow west without Moscow's control. https://x.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1886119917717471722
Greece’s most famous island Santorini has experienced more than 200 earthquakes over just 48 hours.
Why is this important?
It exists on top of a seismic region and has a dormant volcanο. The last eruption happened in the 1950s and so was a 6.9 mag earthquake w/ 25m tsunami.
Isn't there a theory that Santorini erupting wiped out the Minoan civilisation and created the myth of Atlantis?
Atlantis was supposed to be located BEYOND the Pillars of Heracles:
There's a long way to go with all this, but. There is a persistent belief amongst many Americans, (and this is not a Party Political view), that other countries' citizens deep down wish they were American. However much they pretend otherwise. It is now, and always has been, save for a few, utter and total bollocks. A bit like the idea that India was proud to be British.
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
I also think that's why Pierre Polievre has hit back today against Trump to separate himself from this all. The CPC will still win but it won't be the thumping majority they were expecting. It's another oddity with Trump, surely he should have held off until his ally was in power and then rolled over the Canadian Tories with a very unfavorable deal.
But what, exactly, does Trump want out of Canada?
Trudeau rolled on immigration control pretty much immediately, so it isn't that.
Trump claims it's about Fentanyl, but really, it's about a bilateral trade surplus that was created by the keystone pipeline that he supported.
He's also broken the re-negotiated NAFTA treaty. A treaty that was the idea of a certain deal maker. Stop it everyone! I call fuck Trump and the horse he rode in on. Sanctions now.
Not been following the detail, but has any of this Canada stuff aided the government ratings there? The Liberals needed a big boost.
Worth about five percentage points to the Liberals. However Canadian polling companies have very strong house effects. The company most favourable to the Liberals has the results more or less back to the last general election, while with others it's gone from wipeout to landslide.
There hasn't been any change with the pollsters apart from EKOS.
Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.
Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
Many, many years ago, long before I met the girl who is now Mrs Cole, I had a girl-friend who I then thought likely to be Mrs Cole. And we discussed the possibility and she thought so too. However as romances at that stage often do, it collapsed. She met someone else at Uni and .....many of us have been there. At our somewhat emotional parting I promised, as one does, that if she ever needed me, I'd be there. Which got a scornful reply. Fifty or so years later I suddenly started to see her, "just round the corner"; to have visions of her. I couldn't get her out of my my mind. Went on for a couple of months. Then she vanished. Later I went on one of the genealogical research sites, checked on her and found that when she'd 'appeared to me' she'd been dying in Canada, divorced from the chap she left me for. Weird.
Amazing story, Thankyou
You might be interested to know this is an established phenomenon. It’s called a “crisis apparition”
Comments
Population
EU 450m
UK 68m
US 340m
GDP
EU $20T
UK $3Y
US $30T
Don't cower. Step up.
https://grahamhancock.com/drsunilatlantis/
Really the best thing for us to do is nothing, maybe talk to them about mutual recognition on agricultural exports and customs pre-clearance for semi manufactured good all within the scope of the existing trade deal when the Trump tariffs arrive and the EU is looking for new export markets.
We should do it diplomatically, but we should stand with Canada and condemn Trumps Trade War.
We must put CANADA FIRST.
That is why Common Sense Conservatives condemn President Trump’s massive, unjust and unjustified tariffs on Canada’s already weak economy. Canada is the United States’ closest neighbour, greatest ally and best friend. We share the longest undefended border and fought alongside Americans in two world wars, Korea and Afghanistan, where 158 of our brave men and women died helping the U.S. avenge the 9/11 attacks. There is no justification whatsoever for this treatment.
The British public, the government (and probably the King, in private) are supportive of Canada in this.
It’s unlikely in my view that any enhanced UK-EU deal crosses some kind of “how dare you” threshold from Trump.
That's what I've learned in life.
“Vote for me and you’ll never have to vote again.” Less than 2 weeks into his presidency, how do you now interpret this statement?
However, if the UK is very nimble it could profit from escaping this tariffpalooza by seeking to grow trade with the U.S., while working for improved terms with Canada and the EU respectively.
It should also be working hard to attract U.S. science capability that is having government grants cut off.
Suggest that Mauritius has failed to provide guarantees that it will deter greater influence from potentially hostile powers.
Which is true.
'Facing up to bullies' in polucy terms may be slightly more palatable at least.
It’s not even obvious what the UK would do.
Tell Trump that it’s really not on?
At the heart of Canadian national memory is the awareness that Canadians twice came to the UK's aid in world wars years before the Americans showed up.
It will not be forgottem if the Brits now hide in a corner and say nothing when Canada faces existential threats.
@stevepeers.bsky.social
In particular, the Brexity folks who claimed to be all about the Commonwealth are nowhere to be seen.
More generally, anyone who claims to support free trade but also supports Trump should never be taken seriously ever again.
What I would actually offer the EU is Schengen membership on a 10 year timeframe alongside the UK helping patrol the external border and a doing a deportation deal with them so that all countries stop blocking each other and agree to ECHR reforms to allow for deportation of criminals, failed asylum seekers and illegal immigrants without endless appeals and blocking action by courts. I actually think Schengen is more important to the EU than trade, it's culturally something that separates the English speaking bit of Europe from the non-English parts and they'd love to bring us into that tent so we could place a very high price on agreeing to join.
In this case, with an unstable figure at the helm? Hard to know what option is most risky.
Paul Mason
@paulmasonnews
Canada is a member of the Commonwealth. Now is the time for all fellow
@commonwealthsec members to state: no to economic coercion. 🇨🇦🇬🇧
There is also the idea that the piece of paper was to provide the causes belli - if Hitler reneges then you have what you need to go to war.
Carney and even Poilevre back retaliatory tariffs
Trump is doing such crazy things (which happen to be what he said he was going to do)
He said "you'll never have to vote again"
The implication is that Trump intends to dispense with elections, because that's WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO.
Do you get it now?
Also, while not at all wanting to undermine Canadian sacrifice, Canada was essentially “British” at the time, so it was not really “coming to the UK’s aid”.
The last point is critical though.
Let’s the Brexiters condemn Trump.
To be fair, many are doing so on here.
But Farage, Johnson, Carswell, Braverman, Truss (the convert) etc? Crickets.
I suppose before then he built the autobahns...
However, the rightfully elected Prime Minister had been deposed and executed by a military junta.
Rather than complain, Thatcher should have offered military support. Indeed, many Caribbean nations (and other realms) did.
Grenada remains a Commonwealth realm.
But the evidence is that Trump is a cowardly bully and can be faced down.
A small example: He really badmouthed Newsom over the fires and then when Newsom showed up on the tarmac to greet him, he was all pally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn7q0k1yY3s
There are other many other examples.
Congratulations.
"Opinion polling for the 2025 Canadian federal election - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2025_Canadian_federal_election
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/30/donald-trump-wont-have-to-vote-anymore-fox-interview
“That statement is very simple, I said, ‘Vote for me, you’re not gonna have to do it ever again,’” Trump told Ingraham. “It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.”
We colour our view if the Nazi period 1933 to 1938 with our hindsight. If Hitler had died in 1938, savage by one of his dogs, for instance, he would gave gone down in history as a great German
My reference to policy was because bullying in that sense is different to personal, emotional, or physical bullying, and so in national terms we have more options.
But on an individual level 'you have to face down bullies' is bloody awful advice. Sometimes you have to. Sometimes you can. Sometimes it is very very unwise.
Zen! You! Vill! Go! Un! Zee! List!
Sure it appears foolish through the retrospectoscope but no one knew what was to lie ahead, at least not with any certainty. Neither was there the means or will for Britain to fight for Czechoslovakia, hence the crowds cheering Chamberlain on landing.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/02/trumps-trade-war-isnt-as-mad-as-it-seems/
Even assuming his health holds up as a very very old man in 4 years, I should think his person and wealth is now assured forevermore. He will live out his days as a very powerful, very rich man, facing no negative consequences for anything he might ever have done.
Even for an ego boost I don't think he even needs a third time now.
Dachau was opened in 1933
At a national level, as you say, we have more options.
But my starting point is always to face down the bully.
Putin and his sabre rattling on World War 3 and what he will do to the UK is a good example. You can't submit to that.
I remember people saying "Better red than dead". I don't agree.
The real issue was that Bishop was running a Dave Spart style Marxist regime. The people who murdered him wanted… purity.
Chirac showed how it’s done in 2003. A few months of Americans eating “freedom fries”, met with uniform Gallic shrugs, and the schadenfreude of being proved right within a couple of years.
The establishment of the Second British Empire follows…
Trudeau rolled on immigration control pretty much immediately, so it isn't that.
Trump claims it's about Fentanyl, but really, it's about a bilateral trade surplus that was created by the keystone pipeline that he supported.
The massive Kashagan field sent its first shipment via Azerbaijan, aiming to slash Russian transit by 80%. 13 billion barrels of oil will now flow west without Moscow's control.
https://x.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1886119917717471722
Further cement's Turkey's strategic position.
There is a persistent belief amongst many Americans, (and this is not a Party Political view), that other countries' citizens deep down wish they were American. However much they pretend otherwise.
It is now, and always has been, save for a few, utter and total bollocks.
A bit like the idea that India was proud to be British.
A treaty that was the idea of a certain deal maker.
Stop it everyone!
I call fuck Trump and the horse he rode in on.
Sanctions now.
https://x.com/Orangeman1992/status/1886065147791163537
It's Danish
You might be interested to know this is an established phenomenon. It’s called a “crisis apparition”
Allez les bleues!
https://x.com/RBReich/status/1886187851361943674
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/trump-suffers-humiliating-greenland-backlash-as-macron-readies-eu-army-to-defend-island/ar-AA1y3oHg?ocid=BingNewsVerp