The next debate is in 12 days of Fox Business, so I don't think they will ditch that, the one after though doesn't come until December 15th on CNN, a network which they hate, so they might ditch that one in favour of something else.
The moderators on the FBN debate will apparently be the same team as the Fox News debate, when they had some superbly researched and difficult questions for the candidates, unlike the biased personal and gotcha stuff of last night. They start their prep over the weekend.
CNN is a liberal network, but unlike the NBC networks, they at least attempt to be a serious news network. In their last Republican debate they at least got a conservative moderator on the team, and although the questioning format was a bit odd, there were no real claims of complete liberal bias such as we saw last night.
It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.
That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)
No, it is not gross. That's a net figure. In sterling we pay 11bn net and 19bn gross. If you divide those numbers by our population, you get about 174 pounds net and 300 gross.
Click on subnote 28 to get the EU budget. Go to sheet year 2014.
Line 84 gives the EU expenditure on the UK i.e. what we get back. It is €7.0b. Line 92 gives the UK National Contribution i.e. gross. That is €11.3b.
That leaves €4.3b as our net contribution. At €1.37 to £, that is roughly £3.2b. UK population of 64m means our net contribtuion is £50/head.
These are EU original sources. I don't know what sources you are using but I am about to leave for The Shooting Star so I will probably never find out (unless you are planning to be there).
The net figures – which take into account the UK’s rebate – show the UK’s contribution to the EU was £2.7bn in 2008, rising to £3.8bn in 2009, £7.2bn in 2010, £7.5bn in 2011, £8.5bn in 2012 and £11.3bn in 2013.
Dr. Prasannan, last ever? Has Dirty Dicks been demolished?
Mr. Royale, it takes a special sort of intellectually vacant clown to see a man and his colleagues almost get stoned to death by a mob because of a number plate, and then decide jail time may be an appropriate response. For the crime of having stones flung at him.
Glad the Aussies stuffed the Argies.
The levels of indoctrination down in Argentina are off the scale, and state sponsored.
They make the Yestapo look like disciples of the Dali Llama.
As martyrdoms go, it falls some way short of being stoned or thrown to the lions.
But it's pretty unpleasant to discipline people because they wouldn't go along with your plan for the taxpayer to fund your side of an election. Cameron has really dropped in my opinion over this.
As martyrdoms go, it falls some way short of being stoned or thrown to the lions.
But it's pretty unpleasant to discipline people because they wouldn't go along with your plan for the taxpayer to fund your side of an election. Cameron has really dropped in my opinion over this.
Prime Minister punishes rebels against his position. It's absolutely standard.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
The next debate is in 12 days of Fox Business, so I don't think they will ditch that, the one after though doesn't come until December 15th on CNN, a network which they hate, so they might ditch that one in favour of something else.
The moderators on the FBN debate will apparently be the same team as the Fox News debate, when they had some superbly researched and difficult questions for the candidates, unlike the biased personal and gotcha stuff of last night. They start their prep over the weekend.
No need to search for Jeb Bush though, as I predicted from years ago his candidacy is finally dead. The cherry on top is this, "hey kiddies I'm cool": https://vine.co/v/erQmKFXZ6OD
Rubio is next on my list of paper candidates that will implode after Bush, Fiorina, Kasich and Christie imploded before him.
It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.
That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)
No, it is not gross. That's a net figure. In sterling we pay 11bn net and 19bn gross. If you divide those numbers by our population, you get about 174 pounds net and 300 gross.
Click on subnote 28 to get the EU budget. Go to sheet year 2014.
Line 84 gives the EU expenditure on the UK i.e. what we get back. It is €7.0b. Line 92 gives the UK National Contribution i.e. gross. That is €11.3b.
That leaves €4.3b as our net contribution. At €1.37 to £, that is roughly £3.2b. UK population of 64m means our net contribtuion is £50/head.
These are EU original sources. I don't know what sources you are using but I am about to leave for The Shooting Star so I will probably never find out (unless you are planning to be there).
I don't know what that spreadsheet is without seeing the page it is from, and I don't have Excel on this computer anyway. But you can see full coverage of the subject here:
Mr. Royale, I would guess some Conservatives consider the softness (on migration) of the blues preferable to the harder line but more cultish/chaotic nature of the purples.
Farage's hokey-cokey resignation was the act of a fool.
Mr. Royale, I quite agree. It's alarming, and the only good thing is that neither cast nor crew of Top Gear suffered serious injury, or worse.
Clarkson was fired in March, but BBC America is still running about 15 episodes per week, with new compilations of 'Best of Jeremy / Best of James / Best of Richard' plus repeats.
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Mr. Royale, I quite agree. It's alarming, and the only good thing is that neither cast nor crew of Top Gear suffered serious injury, or worse.
Clarkson was fired in March, but BBC America is still running about 15 episodes per week, with new compilations of 'Best of Jeremy / Best of James / Best of Richard' plus repeats.
That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.
The dirt i really want dished is why Cameron ratted on Ashcroft in the first place, if indeed he really did so.
We know when asked Cameron said, "how long have you got?"
What did Ashcroft do?
His late disclosure on his tax status and who was to blame over the Tories not winning a majority in 2010
Ashcroft blames Dave for agreeing to the debates, Dave blames Ashcroft for faulty polling and strategy/tactics.
For example Ashcroft said Hamsptead and Kilburn wasn't winnable and threw all resources at Westminster North.
That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.
The dirt i really want dished is why Cameron ratted on Ashcroft in the first place, if indeed he really did so.
We know when asked Cameron said, "how long have you got?"
What did Ashcroft do?
His late disclosure on his tax status and who was to blame over the Tories not winning a majority in 2010
Ashcroft blames Dave for agreeing to the debates, Dave blames Ashcroft for faulty polling and strategy/tactics.
For example Ashcroft said Hamsptead and Kilburn wasn't winnable and threw all resources at Westminster North.
Interesting. Thanks.
We all make mistakes. It feels a bit like there's almost something very personal going on here as well.
I'll drop you a message about this in the next few days.
That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.
The dirt i really want dished is why Cameron ratted on Ashcroft in the first place, if indeed he really did so.
We know when asked Cameron said, "how long have you got?"
What did Ashcroft do?
His late disclosure on his tax status and who was to blame over the Tories not winning a majority in 2010
Ashcroft blames Dave for agreeing to the debates, Dave blames Ashcroft for faulty polling and strategy/tactics.
For example Ashcroft said Hamsptead and Kilburn wasn't winnable and threw all resources at Westminster North.
That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.
The dirt i really want dished is why Cameron ratted on Ashcroft in the first place, if indeed he really did so.
We know when asked Cameron said, "how long have you got?"
What did Ashcroft do?
His late disclosure on his tax status and who was to blame over the Tories not winning a majority in 2010
Ashcroft blames Dave for agreeing to the debates, Dave blames Ashcroft for faulty polling and strategy/tactics.
For example Ashcroft said Hamsptead and Kilburn wasn't winnable and threw all resources at Westminster North.
Interesting. Thanks.
We all make mistakes. It feels a bit like there's almost something very personal going on here as well.
I'll drop you a message about this in the next few days.
It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.
That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)
Wrong Barnsian
As I pointed out on the previous thread your figures for the UK contributions were completely wrong. The actual figures for 2014 are £19.2 billion gross and £9.8 billion net.
As martyrdoms go, it falls some way short of being stoned or thrown to the lions.
But it's pretty unpleasant to discipline people because they wouldn't go along with your plan for the taxpayer to fund your side of an election. Cameron has really dropped in my opinion over this.
Prime Minister punishes rebels against his position. It's absolutely standard.
Precisely. I've been converted to the Leave position myself, but I am yet to be convinced that Cameron has committed any egregious sins by punishing those in his party who disagree with him. No doubt any number of PMs would have been well advised not to take certain positions, or not punish too severely those who do not go along with those positions, but it is also not the sort of thing that really concerns me. It's just a thing that PMs do, I may not like it, but I'm not about to get worked up about it either.
The funny thing is: it isn't the murdering that bothers her, it's the fact he's doing it for the British establishment, and isn't correctly following gender diversity protocol.
Worse, it's popular. Patriotic, un-PC and popular.
It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.
That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)
No, it is not gross. That's a net figure. In sterling we pay 11bn net and 19bn gross. If you divide those numbers by our population, you get about 174 pounds net and 300 gross.
Click on subnote 28 to get the EU budget. Go to sheet year 2014.
Line 84 gives the EU expenditure on the UK i.e. what we get back. It is €7.0b. Line 92 gives the UK National Contribution i.e. gross. That is €11.3b.
That leaves €4.3b as our net contribution. At €1.37 to £, that is roughly £3.2b. UK population of 64m means our net contribtuion is £50/head.
These are EU original sources. I don't know what sources you are using but I am about to leave for The Shooting Star so I will probably never find out (unless you are planning to be there).
I don't know what that spreadsheet is without seeing the page it is from, and I don't have Excel on this computer anyway. But you can see full coverage of the subject here:
Barnsian is completely wrong. He is using only one part of the UK EU contribution and ignoring the rest. Just go and look at the Treasury paper I linked to on the last thread for the correct figures. I can't link to them directly right at this moment as I am on a bus. I can resend later if he persists in quoting the wrong figures.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.
That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)
The BBC gave some figures for a few years ago which squinting at the graph looked to be close to €60 per head. So you might be right. Will people appologise to Cameron? Norway may have (or had) a nice little earner from north sea oil, but it has a tiny population. But again there are other ways of looking at it and our net contribution as a percent of income puts us bottom, the lowest contributor to the EU. Not sure how that compares with Norway, they are allegedly wealthy, high income. So on that meausre they might be below us.
Why on earth do people go to secondary sources like the BBC or Wikipedia when all the figures are available from the Treasury?
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
The fact is that if there is any advantage to the economy in us being in the EU, it is to the richer parts of society...employers not employees
It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
If the GDP impact was as negligible as it is but the poor were much better off and the rich a bit poorer, then it may be more acceptable to stay, but as it is the opposite its hard to warm to that argument
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
I think the best thing the Leave campaign could do is to stick Farage in a cupboard for 18 months
...apart from the fact that he is the most popular leader in the UK and his highest ever ratings coincide with the tightest LEAVE/REMAIN polling in years
Just being in the same room as James Bond is implied consent. Covered in gold? Oil? They were asking for it....
There was me thinking James Bond was just an overblown bit of fantasy .... all be it one which earns the nation a decent chunk of money. The NS need a sense of proportion.
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
Game of Thrones actively manufactures it even today. It's popular.
The real crime of Bond is that he represents a Britishness that many on the Left despise and wish would go away.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
The fact is that if there is any advantage to the economy in us being in the EU, it is to the richer parts of society...employers not employees
It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
If the GDP impact was as negligible as it is but the poor were much better off and the rich a bit poorer, then it may be more acceptable to stay, but as it is the opposite its hard to warm to that argument
Farage is right if he's saying politics isn't all about the money.
Meh. As a leftie who's on the fence about the EU, "warnings" from the CBI/credit-agency lobby are if anything more likely to push me towards Leave. I want to hear what the EU does (or could do) for me, and what it does for the things I care about - I don't want this generic doom-mongering from people who are only concerned that their own bank balances will be hit.
Mr. 565, not a lefty, but I was wondering if things like that might smack of a threat and push people towards Out rather than In.
TTIP's another example. Uncertain leftwingers will hear the US saying they won't sign a deal with the UK alone [a lie, in all likelihood] and move to Out.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
The fact is that if there is any advantage to the economy in us being in the EU, it is to the richer parts of society...employers not employees
It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
If the GDP impact was as negligible as it is but the poor were much better off and the rich a bit poorer, then it may be more acceptable to stay, but as it is the opposite its hard to warm to that argument
Farage is right if he's saying politics isn't all about the money.
If the population increases the way the ONS was projecting, then house prices are a one way bet. But we'll still have the same houses... will we be any richer in reality ? No - future owners will just be paying more for exactly the same as there is now. All the money spent on tax credits could have been pumped into house building. We'd have exactly the same deficit, but at least something to show for it.
I am sure S&P employ a few decent people but their track record leaves a lot to be desired, whether it be the AAA rating Enron enjoyed right up until their collapse, being fined for inflating the ratings on subrime mortgage bonds, etc.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
I think the best thing the Leave campaign could do is to stick Farage in a cupboard for 18 months
...apart from the fact that he is the most popular leader in the UK and his highest ever ratings coincide with the tightest LEAVE/REMAIN polling in years
And yet he has newer been elected as an MP...seven times
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
The fact is that if there is any advantage to the economy in us being in the EU, it is to the richer parts of society...employers not employees
It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
If the GDP impact was as negligible as it is but the poor were much better off and the rich a bit poorer, then it may be more acceptable to stay, but as it is the opposite its hard to warm to that argument
Farage is right if he's saying politics isn't all about the money.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
I think the best thing the Leave campaign could do is to stick Farage in a cupboard for 18 months
...apart from the fact that he is the most popular leader in the UK and his highest ever ratings coincide with the tightest LEAVE/REMAIN polling in years
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
I think the best thing the Leave campaign could do is to stick Farage in a cupboard for 18 months
...apart from the fact that he is the most popular leader in the UK and his highest ever ratings coincide with the tightest LEAVE/REMAIN polling in years
And yet he has newer been elected as an MP...seven times
Only once was he a realistic chance and yes fair enough, he didn't win
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
Game of Thrones actively manufactures it even today. It's popular.
The real crime of Bond is that he represents a Britishness that many on the Left despise and wish would go away.
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
Game of Thrones actively manufactures it even today. It's popular.
The real crime of Bond is that he represents a Britishness that many on the Left despise and wish would go away.
You and others seem to have rather missed the tone of Penny's article. She watches the films - a guilty pleasure - while understanding that they're really a load of piffle. And frankly I'd be rather worried about anyone who didn't watch them in that way.
Page 14 shows that the UK Gross contribution in 2014 was £19.2 billion. The net Contribution was £9.8 billion. Based on an estimated population of 64.1 million (the last available figures from the ONS for 2013) that means per capita is a few pennies short of £300 gross or £153 net.
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
Yaah, yeah, yeah. We heard all these scare stories when the issue of joining the Euro was debated. Do you remember? Unless we joined The City of London would be reduced to a financial backwater, Honda would pack up and leave, investment would cease, and all the rest of it. It never happened, though Ford have moved some of its manufacturing out of the UK - to Turkey.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
Theme tune by Matt Monro
"TWO Russia with Love" is the sequel
A theme tune that appears at the END of the movie, except for a few bars played on a radio at the start.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
I doubt it. If you work on the UK net contribution as how much we would save that leaves the difference between net and gross as the amount available for compensating those who have been in receipt of EU CAP funds (bear in mind the rebate is in parts because we have a smaller arming sector than many other parts of the EU).
And farmers detest the fact that EU rules change every few years so that they have to change completely what they are doing regarding environmental actions just to make sure they keep getting the funds.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
Promise you'll let me be there when you try explaining that to a farmer.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
You love a subsidy inspired vote don't you?!
The EU loves buying support. The Guardian have been publishing articles from an "independent" think tank claiming that in the event of a Brexit, UK farming will be destroyed. Turned out they were on the EU payroll and are anything but independent:
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
They would be replaced by UK subsidies as would the other EU spending in the UK. Leaving not much difference. As part of any EU 'trade deal' eg access to single market, we would make other contributions to EU budget.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
They would be replaced by UK subsidies as would the other EU spending in the UK. Leaving not much difference. As part of any EU 'trade deal' eg access to single market, we would make other contributions to EU budget.
Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year - which is the difference now between what we put in and what we get back.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
Promise you'll let me be there when you try explaining that to a farmer.
I know a few farmers who feel the CAP is more trouble than it's worth in terms of the conditions it places on them.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
Promise you'll let me be there when you try explaining that to a farmer.
I know a few farmers who feel the CAP is more trouble than it's worth in terms of the conditions it places on them.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
Promise you'll let me be there when you try explaining that to a farmer.
I know a few farmers who feel the CAP is more trouble than it's worth in terms of the conditions it places on them.
Shhh don't say that to Ian Duncan-Smith's family, they've received over a million in farm subsidies in the past decade
Meh. As a leftie who's on the fence about the EU, "warnings" from the CBI/credit-agency lobby are if anything more likely to push me towards Leave. I want to hear what the EU does (or could do) for me, and what it does for the things I care about - I don't want this generic doom-mongering from people who are only concerned that their own bank balances will be hit.
Yes, I feel the same. The Remain campaign has done an awful job so far. They started by giving themselves silly initials. They then had a conspiracy theorist no-one has heard of to appeal to the youth. They then started to insult half the electorate as 'quitters'. Now they're resorting to scare stories and easily disproven falsehoods.
I want a clear positive picture from Remain. I want to hear a vision of an EU future that maximises the benefits and neutralises the dangers, and how we're going to get there. Vague ideals about 'openness' and 'influence' simply won't cut it. Where's the beef?
So far we've had they'll be no subsidies, £ 5 billion and 9 billion..Either way, it's something that will need to be addressed at some point before the referendum as it will clearly be a vote decider for many
On my Humanities course at Brighton Uni, the students were made to watch "To Russia With Love" and then given a lecture on how all Bond films were subversive Cold war propaganda, Bond was a misogynist, racist and Sean Connery bashed his missus up
Many years ago a religious publication (War Cry?) condemned the Bond novels as nothing but "sex, sadism, and snobbery." It was manna from heaven. The review helped to sell many Bond books in paperback, and was printed prominently on the covers.
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
Game of Thrones actively manufactures it even today. It's popular.
The real crime of Bond is that he represents a Britishness that many on the Left despise and wish would go away.
You and others seem to have rather missed the tone of Penny's article. She watches the films - a guilty pleasure - while understanding that they're really a load of piffle. And frankly I'd be rather worried about anyone who didn't watch them in that way.
I haven't missed it at all. I don't disagree that Bond is a flawed man and conflicted. I disagree with her conclusions - and yours - and certainly don't think all the films are a pile of piffle.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
New Zealand ended farming subsidies in the 1980s which resulted in a huge increase in productivity, diversification into new markets, increase in innovation, etc. A gradual reduction of farming subsidies in the UK would reinvigorate a stagnating sector.
Promise you'll let me be there when you try explaining that to a farmer.
I know a few farmers who feel the CAP is more trouble than it's worth in terms of the conditions it places on them.
Shhh don't say that to Ian Duncan-Smith's family, they've received over a million in farm subsidies in the past decade
So far we've had they'll be no subsidies, £ 5 billion and 9 billion..Either way, it's something that will need to be addressed at some point before the referendum as it will clearly be a vote decider for many
Absolute tosh. No one has said there will be £9 billion. And the only comment about there being none was made by someone pointing out how that had worked in another country. No one has suggested that woold be the case in the UK.
If you are going to make stuff up then at least try to be a bit more intelligent about it.
It's quite obvious that this is a coordinated series of annoucements today by the Government and BSE. Someone in No.10 has had a word with someone in DC: 'it would be awfully helpful if you could..'
What it tells us is that the Government and BSE is rattled. Project Fear indeed.
So far we've had they'll be no subsidies, £ 5 billion and 9 billion..Either way, it's something that will need to be addressed at some point before the referendum as it will clearly be a vote decider for many
Absolute tosh. No one has said there will be £9 billion. And the only comment about there being none was made by someone pointing out how that had worked in another country. No one has suggested that woold be the case in the UK.
If you are going to make stuff up then at least try to be a bit more intelligent about it.
You said it !!! "Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year"
Meh. As a leftie who's on the fence about the EU, "warnings" from the CBI/credit-agency lobby are if anything more likely to push me towards Leave. I want to hear what the EU does (or could do) for me, and what it does for the things I care about - I don't want this generic doom-mongering from people who are only concerned that their own bank balances will be hit.
Yes, I feel the same. The Remain campaign has done an awful job so far. They started by giving themselves silly initials. They then had a conspiracy theorist no-one has heard of to appeal to the youth. They then started to insult half the electorate as 'quitters'. Now they're resorting to scare stories and easily disproven falsehoods.
I want a clear positive picture from Remain. I want to hear a vision of an EU future that maximises the benefits and neutralises the dangers, and how we're going to get there. Vague ideals about 'openness' and 'influence' simply won't cut it. Where's the beef?
There isn't any. They are relying on the inconvenience of leaving.
As martyrdoms go, it falls some way short of being stoned or thrown to the lions.
But it's pretty unpleasant to discipline people because they wouldn't go along with your plan for the taxpayer to fund your side of an election. Cameron has really dropped in my opinion over this.
Prime Minister punishes rebels against his position. It's absolutely standard.
When your position is thoroughly undemocratic and against the fundamentals your party should believe in, you should admit your mistake and let it go. Cameron is proving here that he never realised why he was wrong in the first place. The more I think about it the more annoyed at him I get. He attempted to trample over long-established democratic precedents and now he's basically insisting he was right to do so. Profoundly unconservative.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
They would be replaced by UK subsidies as would the other EU spending in the UK. Leaving not much difference. As part of any EU 'trade deal' eg access to single market, we would make other contributions to EU budget.
Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year - which is the difference now between what we put in and what we get back.
There's another point. We'd have £10bn quid that the EU currently spends in the UK, that we'd get to choose how to spend instead!
It's quite obvious that this is a coordinated series of annoucements today by the Government and BSE. Someone in No.10 has had a word with someone in DC: 'it would be awfully helpful if you could..'
What it tells us is that the Government and BSE is rattled. Project Fear indeed.
The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.
Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.
Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.
Why don't we let in another 300 million and we could surpass the US?
If the Tories don't fix this a substantial chunk of their voters will elect someone who says they will.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
Well, if we vote to leave and the economy tanks then no one will want to come here anyway
Nigel Farage would prefer that over more migrants:
I am sure S&P employ a few decent people but their track record leaves a lot to be desired, whether it be the AAA rating Enron enjoyed right up until their collapse, being fined for inflating the ratings on subrime mortgage bonds, etc.
I don't think that's true re Enron, it was "investment grade" but not AAA. Very, very few companies are rated AAA - only three in the whole of the US today.
As martyrdoms go, it falls some way short of being stoned or thrown to the lions.
But it's pretty unpleasant to discipline people because they wouldn't go along with your plan for the taxpayer to fund your side of an election. Cameron has really dropped in my opinion over this.
Prime Minister punishes rebels against his position. It's absolutely standard.
When your position is thoroughly undemocratic and against the fundamentals your party should believe in, you should admit your mistake and let it go. Cameron is proving here that he never realised why he was wrong in the first place. The more I think about it the more annoyed at him I get. He attempted to trample over long-established democratic precedents and now he's basically insisting he was right to do so. Profoundly unconservative.
It's very unwise when your party is split down the middle. But unless you're in Cameron's inner circle unless you keep your nose clean and play by the rules, you're history.
It will be interesting to see how the farming community view prospects of an OUT vote. The industry is a hefty recipient of EU subsidies (around £3.6 billion) so the implications of that would have to be taken in to account. If those subsidies slide away expect to see mile upon mile of IN posters erected on every field in the country.
They would be replaced by UK subsidies as would the other EU spending in the UK. Leaving not much difference. As part of any EU 'trade deal' eg access to single market, we would make other contributions to EU budget.
Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year - which is the difference now between what we put in and what we get back.
There's another point. We'd have £10bn quid that the EU currently spends in the UK, that we'd get to choose how to spend instead!
By the way, re transhipments: around 250,000 TEUs go from the UK via Rotterdam each year.
Interestingly, more than 1,000,000 come the other way. Which means that the figures for the EU's trade surplus with the UK are overstated, as they include a lot of imports that are from China (or wherever) via Rotterdam.
I am sure S&P employ a few decent people but their track record leaves a lot to be desired, whether it be the AAA rating Enron enjoyed right up until their collapse, being fined for inflating the ratings on subrime mortgage bonds, etc.
I don't think that's true re Enron, it was "investment grade" but not AAA. Very, very few companies are rated AAA - only three in the whole of the US today.
I am sure S&P employ a few decent people but their track record leaves a lot to be desired, whether it be the AAA rating Enron enjoyed right up until their collapse, being fined for inflating the ratings on subrime mortgage bonds, etc.
I don't think that's true re Enron, it was "investment grade" but not AAA. Very, very few companies are rated AAA - only three in the whole of the US today.
If you read it, it's a notch for leaving and another notch for ajockalypse now.
Creditworthiness and prosperity of a free UK, or rUK, doesn't appear to enter into it.
It's quite obvious that this is a coordinated series of annoucements today by the Government and BSE. Someone in No.10 has had a word with someone in DC: 'it would be awfully helpful if you could..'
What it tells us is that the Government and BSE is rattled. Project Fear indeed.
It's interesting if you read the books that James Bond's profession is destroying him. The drinking, womanising, and gambling are all ways of coping with the fact that he kills for a living.
I don't know if you ever Jack's Return Home (filmed as Get Carter) and its successor novels by Ted Lewis. He's very much a working class James Bond.
So far we've had they'll be no subsidies, £ 5 billion and 9 billion..Either way, it's something that will need to be addressed at some point before the referendum as it will clearly be a vote decider for many
Absolute tosh. No one has said there will be £9 billion. And the only comment about there being none was made by someone pointing out how that had worked in another country. No one has suggested that woold be the case in the UK.
If you are going to make stuff up then at least try to be a bit more intelligent about it.
You said it !!! "Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year"
That was the difference between the amount contributed by the UK and the amount received back (the latter including, but not limited to, farming subsidies).
He hasn't said how much should or would be given over to farming subsidies if no contribution at all was made or receipts taken.
What is arithmetically undeniable is that if subsidies were retained at exactly the same level, and all other spending from EU receipts maintained (that is, if we funded it domestically out of some of the money we would otherwise have used to pay the EU), we could maintain all that and still be better off by 9.8 billion per year (thus "the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year")
Meh. As a leftie who's on the fence about the EU, "warnings" from the CBI/credit-agency lobby are if anything more likely to push me towards Leave. I want to hear what the EU does (or could do) for me, and what it does for the things I care about - I don't want this generic doom-mongering from people who are only concerned that their own bank balances will be hit.
Yes, I feel the same. The Remain campaign has done an awful job so far. They started by giving themselves silly initials. They then had a conspiracy theorist no-one has heard of to appeal to the youth. They then started to insult half the electorate as 'quitters'. Now they're resorting to scare stories and easily disproven falsehoods.
I want a clear positive picture from Remain. I want to hear a vision of an EU future that maximises the benefits and neutralises the dangers, and how we're going to get there. Vague ideals about 'openness' and 'influence' simply won't cut it. Where's the beef?
The problem is that the fear card is the strongest they have. I suspect they are worried that 'going positive' won't work because there is so much distrust of the EU as an institution. The 'stick with nurse' argument seems to be the dominant narrative and I don't expect that to change.
I am genuinely undecided but I do admit that I am beginning to lean towards leave.
It's interesting if you read the books that James Bond's profession is destroying him. The drinking, womanising, and gambling are all ways of coping with the fact that he kills for a living.
I don't know if you ever Jack's Return Home (filmed as Get Carter) and its successor novels by Ted Lewis. He's very much a working class James Bond.
Read them all, and love them. You known that, I know that, but the plethora of morons with whom we also inhabit this island with seem sadly oblivious to it.
So far we've had they'll be no subsidies, £ 5 billion and 9 billion..Either way, it's something that will need to be addressed at some point before the referendum as it will clearly be a vote decider for many
Absolute tosh. No one has said there will be £9 billion. And the only comment about there being none was made by someone pointing out how that had worked in another country. No one has suggested that woold be the case in the UK.
If you are going to make stuff up then at least try to be a bit more intelligent about it.
You said it !!! "Actually the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year"
That was the difference between the amount contributed by the UK and the amount received back (the latter including, but not limited to, farming subsidies).
He hasn't said how much should or would be given over to farming subsidies if no contribution at all was made or receipts taken.
What is arithmetically undeniable is that if subsidies were retained at exactly the same level, and all other spending from EU receipts maintained (that is, if we funded it domestically out of some of the money we would otherwise have used to pay the EU), we could maintain all that and still be better off by 9.8 billion per year (thus "the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year")
Don't misunderstand me, I wasn't trying to prove a point. I'm genuinely undecided - just concerned that we'd being taking a huge leap of faith to leave without being fully aware of the circumstances...the concern being is that those circumstances would really be known until after we'd done it.
I appreciate the desire for the leavers for the UK to be in charge of its own destiny but if that destiny is to face financial ruin as a result of leaving (in the short term anyway) it doesn't sound that appealing.
Comments
CNN is a liberal network, but unlike the NBC networks, they at least attempt to be a serious news network. In their last Republican debate they at least got a conservative moderator on the team, and although the questioning format was a bit odd, there were no real claims of complete liberal bias such as we saw last night.
They make the Yestapo look like disciples of the Dali Llama.
That will probably take place under FPTP and knock the Tories out of power, and Labour in, but only once the deficit is under control.
There will then be one hell of a reckoning in opposition. Why smart Tories can't see this baffles me.
Meanwhile public dissatisfaction and frustration will grow, but unless we have a gamechanger like leaving the EU I think inward net migration will be in the 200-400k per year annual band for until at least 2030.
The cherry on top is this, "hey kiddies I'm cool":
https://vine.co/v/erQmKFXZ6OD
Rubio is next on my list of paper candidates that will implode after Bush, Fiorina, Kasich and Christie imploded before him.
https://fullfact.org/economy/cost_eu_membership_gross_net_contribution-30887
Farage's hokey-cokey resignation was the act of a fool.
"Nothing he can do can displease EU remain guys..."
But now One Direction awaits me.
https://twitter.com/EuroGuido/status/659774991441993728
As I pointed out on the previous thread your figures for the UK contributions were completely wrong. The actual figures for 2014 are £19.2 billion gross and £9.8 billion net.
Covered in gold? Oil? They were asking for it....
Worse, it's popular. Patriotic, un-PC and popular.
Is there a worse crime these days?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10555158/Id-rather-be-poorer-with-fewer-migrants-Farage-says.html
Britain faces losing its AAA status with S&P for the first time in nearly 40 years if it leaves the European Union
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11963978/Britains-credit-rating-could-be-cut-by-two-notches-if-it-leaves-EU-warns-SandP.html
It's FROM Russia with Love, by the way.
It makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
If the GDP impact was as negligible as it is but the poor were much better off and the rich a bit poorer, then it may be more acceptable to stay, but as it is the opposite its hard to warm to that argument
The moderators are Trish Regan, Sandra Smith, Maria Bartiromo, and Neil Cavuto.
The real crime of Bond is that he represents a Britishness that many on the Left despise and wish would go away.
TTIP's another example. Uncertain leftwingers will hear the US saying they won't sign a deal with the UK alone [a lie, in all likelihood] and move to Out.
I still think In will win relatively comfortably.
All the money spent on tax credits could have been pumped into house building. We'd have exactly the same deficit, but at least something to show for it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388882/EU_finances_2014_final.pdf
Page 14 shows that the UK Gross contribution in 2014 was £19.2 billion. The net Contribution was £9.8 billion. Based on an estimated population of 64.1 million (the last available figures from the ONS for 2013) that means per capita is a few pennies short of £300 gross or £153 net.
"TWO Russia with Love" is the sequel
And farmers detest the fact that EU rules change every few years so that they have to change completely what they are doing regarding environmental actions just to make sure they keep getting the funds.
http://order-order.com/2015/10/29/shameless-eu-sockpuppets-bunged-another-e200000-by-brussels/
When there is no demos support has to be bought.
As part of any EU 'trade deal' eg access to single market, we would make other contributions to EU budget.
I want a clear positive picture from Remain. I want to hear a vision of an EU future that maximises the benefits and neutralises the dangers, and how we're going to get there. Vague ideals about 'openness' and 'influence' simply won't cut it. Where's the beef?
If you are going to make stuff up then at least try to be a bit more intelligent about it.
What it tells us is that the Government and BSE is rattled. Project Fear indeed.
Early night it is.
It's my biggest criticism of him.
http://www.oann.com/gopdebate/
Trump 33
Carson 23
Rubio 14
Cruz 8
Fiorina 6
Paul 4
Bush 4
Christie 3
Kasich 2
Huckabee 1
Others less than 1.
Trump+Carson+Cruz= 63% (Trump gets about half of votes in that group)
Rubio+Bush+Christie+Kasich= 24% ( Rubio gets 60% of votes in that group)
Has your opinion become more or less favourable after the debate:
Trump
More: 50
Less: 23
Carson
More: 51
Less: 20
Rubio
More: 64
Less: 16
Cruz
More: 62
Less: 16
Bush
More: 17
Less: 51
A negative campaign is all they have.
Interestingly, more than 1,000,000 come the other way. Which means that the figures for the EU's trade surplus with the UK are overstated, as they include a lot of imports that are from China (or wherever) via Rotterdam.
Creditworthiness and prosperity of a free UK, or rUK, doesn't appear to enter into it.
I don't know if you ever Jack's Return Home (filmed as Get Carter) and its successor novels by Ted Lewis. He's very much a working class James Bond.
He hasn't said how much should or would be given over to farming subsidies if no contribution at all was made or receipts taken.
What is arithmetically undeniable is that if subsidies were retained at exactly the same level, and all other spending from EU receipts maintained (that is, if we funded it domestically out of some of the money we would otherwise have used to pay the EU), we could maintain all that and still be better off by 9.8 billion per year (thus "the 'difference' would be £9.8 billion a year")
I am genuinely undecided but I do admit that I am beginning to lean towards leave.
I shall try the latter. Thanks.
I appreciate the desire for the leavers for the UK to be in charge of its own destiny but if that destiny is to face financial ruin as a result of leaving (in the short term anyway) it doesn't sound that appealing.
Ellie Reeves
Jennie Formby (Len McCluskey's ex girlfriend)
Keith Vaz