So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
I think there is a tendency on this site, and in the BOO community to see all countries choices as being the same as the UK.
They're not.
The reason that people in a lot of countries seem strangely fond of the Euro, or dismantling border controls, is because the alternative - for these countries - is so expensive.
If you are the UK, you are one of the world ten largest economies. You may even be in the top five or six. You have sufficient heft to get get people to buy your bonds internationally. In our case, we also have an eminently defendable border, with a relatively small land border to the Republic of Ireland (which has been passport control free since Irish independence), a small number of sea ports, and - of course - the Channel Tunnel. If you are Belgium, you would need to have a massive portion of the population manning the borders with Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Their choices are not our choices. We have a wall - the sea - and they don't.
Continental European countries - long before the EU - didn't largely abandon border controls because they didn't want them. They abandoned them because erecting walls and having a massive border force was too expensive. We can therefore not be surprised when their priorities are different to ours.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So the EU will officially discriminate against Eddie Stobart and Norbert Dentressangle
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So the EU will officially discriminate against Eddie Stobart and Norbert Dentressangle
Well, it will be individual countries border guards... but yes, that's entirely possible
*Anecdote* An American friend of mine who has always voted Republican is now telling me she cannot imagine voting Republican this time around, and because the field of candidates is full on ridiculous. She also told me she quite likes Democrat Bernie Sanders as the best of a weak field of candidates on both sides.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton supporters.
My impression of grassroots Republicans is that they will forgive anything except "not being a real conservative". Is this angle not quite dangerous for Trump?
It depends on how you look at it - do you want a 'real conservative' or do you want a winner. At present Trump looks like a winner. Clinton is hemorrhaging except her base.
But nobody has cast a vote yet and all we have are voodoo polls. We will start to find out next week.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
The existence of a body like the EU is an almost inevitable consequence of having arrangements like Schengen and harmonised regulation and all the other common sense things that make people's lives easier. The EU won't cease to exist now unless there is a much more fundamental break-down of relations between European states.
So freedom of movement in the EU to be suspended temporarily for 2 years. I bet it will be permanent temporary suspension.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So the EU will officially discriminate against Eddie Stobart and Norbert Dentressangle
Well, it will be individual countries border guards... but yes, that's entirely possible
Another subject - didn't you say that you had a home on Long Island? I talked to friends on Shelter Island today (Suffolk county) and they said that the west end of L.I. got 2 feet of snow and the east end about 1 foot.
*Anecdote* An American friend of mine who has always voted Republican is now telling me she cannot imagine voting Republican this time around, and because the field of candidates is full on ridiculous. She also told me she quite likes Democrat Bernie Sanders as the best of a weak field of candidates on both sides.
I am a bit confused by the thread header. Who has produced this Trump tape? Is it CNN?
It sounds and looks like an attack ad.
The interesting question, unless I've been sleeping, is why it's taken these sorts of attack ads so long to emerge?
Quite so. If I had been asked before this electoral cycle I think that I would probably have classified Trump as more of a democrat than a republican to the extent that he was capable of being classified at all. I really don't get this accusation that he is some crazy right wing nut. Crazy and nut maybe, but right wing?
The ad was produced by a PAC run by a former Romney 2012 campaign staffer.
Thanks. So is this Republican establishment then? Presumably intended to support Rubio?
CNN and Fox News - and MsNBC on steroids - have all run this stuff for ages. There's nothing secret about Trump's political evolution. The question remains about just how 'conservative' he is at this point. Hence the National Review issue.
I doubt the magazine or the ad will have any effect. If you're for Trump you're all in. Ditto most Clinton supporters.
My impression of grassroots Republicans is that they will forgive anything except "not being a real conservative". Is this angle not quite dangerous for Trump?
It depends on how you look at it - do you want a 'real conservative' or do you want a winner. At present Trump looks like a winner. Clinton is hemorrhaging except her base.
But nobody has cast a vote yet and all we have are voodoo polls. We will start to find out next week.
That's like a lifelong Tory saying they're voting Corbyn.
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So the EU will officially discriminate against Eddie Stobart and Norbert Dentressangle
Well, it will be individual countries border guards... but yes, that's entirely possible
Another subject - didn't you say that you had a home on Long Island? I talked to friends on Shelter Island today (Suffolk county) and they said that the west end of L.I. got 2 feet of snow and the east end about 1 foot.
We're not far from there, our house is in Sag Harbor. Our house is rented out during the of season, so it's our tenant's problem right now
I think there is a tendency on this site, and in the BOO community to see all countries choices as being the same as the UK.
They're not.
The reason that people in a lot of countries seem strangely fond of the Euro, or dismantling border controls, is because the alternative - for these countries - is so expensive.
If you are the UK, you are one of the world ten largest economies. You may even be in the top five or six. You have sufficient heft to get get people to buy your bonds internationally. In our case, we also have an eminently defendable border, with a relatively small land border to the Republic of Ireland (which has been passport control free since Irish independence), a small number of sea ports, and - of course - the Channel Tunnel. If you are Belgium, you would need to have a massive portion of the population manning the borders with Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Their choices are not our choices. We have a wall - the sea - and they don't.
Continental European countries - long before the EU - didn't largely abandon border controls because they didn't want them. They abandoned them because erecting walls and having a massive border force was too expensive. We can therefore not be surprised when their priorities are different to ours.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
Could be. The Schengen argreement dates from when? The 1980s I think. Yet in 1965 I remember driving from London to deliver stuff to the Portuguese Llamas near Lisbon. We had to show our passports at Dover and at the Portuguese Border with Spain (Franco's border guards weren't interested nor were the Frogs). The following year we drove from London, across France, Switzerland and down to Rome; then back via Austria, Germany, Luxemburg, and Belgium. We showed our passports only at Dover and at the hotels we used in France and Italy.
There is a tendency for people to forget that people did travel quite freely long before there was a Schengen Agreement or European Union. People even bought property and lived in other european countries (e.g. the Portuguese llamas) with really no more bureaucracy than we have today. Crumbs it was possible in those far off days to enter most European Countries (including the dictatorships of Spain and Portugal) without even needing a proper passport - one could acquire a British Visitors Passport over the counter for ten bob at the your local post office.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
The existence of a body like the EU is an almost inevitable consequence of having arrangements like Schengen and harmonised regulation and all the other common sense things that make people's lives easier. The EU won't cease to exist now unless there is a much more fundamental break-down of relations between European states.
I would point out that lots of non EU countries (Switzerland fit example) are members of Schengen and border free travel long predates the EU
I think there is a tendency on this site, and in the BOO community to see all countries choices as being the same as the UK.
They're not.
The reason that people in a lot of countries seem strangely fond of the Euro, or dismantling border controls, is because the alternative - for these countries - is so expensive.
If you are the UK, you are one of the world ten largest economies. You may even be in the top five or six. You have sufficient heft to get get people to buy your bonds internationally. In our case, we also have an eminently defendable border, with a relatively small land border to the Republic of Ireland (which has been passport control free since Irish independence), a small number of sea ports, and - of course - the Channel Tunnel. If you are Belgium, you would need to have a massive portion of the population manning the borders with Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Their choices are not our choices. We have a wall - the sea - and they don't.
Continental European countries - long before the EU - didn't largely abandon border controls because they didn't want them. They abandoned them because erecting walls and having a massive border force was too expensive. We can therefore not be surprised when their priorities are different to ours.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
Could be. The Schengen argreement dates from when? The 1980s I think. Yet in 1965 I remember driving from London to deliver stuff to the Portuguese Llamas near Lisbon. We had to show our passports at Dover and at the Portuguese Border with Spain (Franco's border guards weren't interested nor were the Frogs). The following year we drove from London, across France, Switzerland and down to Rome; then back via Austria, Germany, Luxemburg, and Belgium. We showed our passports only at Dover and at the hotels we used in France and Italy.
There is a tendency for people to forget that people did travel quite freely long before there was a Schengen Agreement or European Union. People even bought property and lived in other european countries (e.g. the Portuguese llamas) with really no more bureaucracy than we have today. Crumbs it was possible in those far off days to enter most European Countries (including the dictatorships of Spain and Portugal) without even needing a proper passport - one could acquire a British Visitors Passport over the counter for ten bob at the your local post office.
I missed the earlier thread on what happened in New Hampshire back in 2008. It was a classic case of not listening to the herd and using your own loaf when betting.
This time round, I haven't got a clue at all. Trump goes against all my betting instincts; over-hyped, over-talked, the kind of favourite I always look to go against. Yet, I just can't quite see how to take the guy on in the betting markets right now.
Clinton I'm convinced is no shoo-in. She is as divisive on the domestic scene as ever and you have that FBI investigation still waiting in the wings. Yet again, though, whats the alternative?
Suspension of Passport-free movement, not of freedom of movement. A perfectly reasonable approach to an unprecedented migration crisis. Schengen always had provisions for suspensions in unusual times.
Surely restictions on people moving around Europe are very much in line with what BOOers desire?
When has anyone in the Better Off Out movement said anything about wishing to restrict what rules other countries have. That the Schengen rules are being suspended is an interesting item of news but has sod all to do with the UK's relationship with the EU or whether we should remain within it.
The BOOers on here always seem gleeful when such things are suggested as suspending Schengen. Indeed many do not merely want the UK to leave but also for the EU and its institutions to be brought down. Schadenfreude is the word.
I am with you though, so if we Leave, I am not troubled how the EU runs its affairs. It ceases to be any business of ours.
As I understand it - and I make no claims to be an expert - Schengen means freedom of movement within the EU once you have crossed an EU border within the Schengen countries. Countries at this point - not unnaturally - want to track who enters and leaves their borders, hence border controls and passports. But that surely doesn't limit freedom of movement?
No landlocked EU country has the police, army or border force to genuinely control freedom of movement. There are residential streets that cross borders. There are delivery routes that criss-cross from one country to the next.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
So the EU will officially discriminate against Eddie Stobart and Norbert Dentressangle
Well, it will be individual countries border guards... but yes, that's entirely possible
Another subject - didn't you say that you had a home on Long Island? I talked to friends on Shelter Island today (Suffolk county) and they said that the west end of L.I. got 2 feet of snow and the east end about 1 foot.
We're not far from there, our house is in Sag Harbor. Our house is rented out during the of season, so it's our tenant's problem right now
Know it well - aren't you posh
Actually, by southeast England prices it's probably quite reasonable.
@Yokel Ted Cruz or John Kasich to take on Trump methinks at their current odds.
The problem with Cruz is that he's the only candidate Hillary beats...
Oh the presidency is a whole another ballgame. My only recent bet there was Bloomberg (Off the back of what you'd said) (Some slight Rubio hedging too)
@Yokel Ted Cruz or John Kasich to take on Trump methinks at their current odds.
The problem with Cruz is that he's the only candidate Hillary beats...
Oh the presidency is a whole another ballgame. My only recent bet there was Bloomberg (Off the back of what you'd said) (Some slight Rubio hedging too)
I don't think he's likely to win, but if it's Trump vs Sanders, I reckon he'll run
Watching Panorama. Is there betting on which Putinista will be first on to denounce it?
I didn't see Panorama tonight, these days I try to avoid the BBC at all cost, but this was one of the best put downs of the wretched attempt to blame Putin:
In particular, why would you try to poison someone with polonium on cost grounds alone? The whole establishment story just makes no sense whatsoever.
Boris Berezovsky just so happens to be the Israeli-Russian oligarch who lived in London after fleeing the Russian judicial system for a multitude of crimes too long to list. He was on Interpol’s most wanted list.
And how did he get on 'Interpol's most wanted list'?
Russia put him there....
And the inquiry rejected evidence that the Polonium would have cost 'millions' instead accepting that $20,000 was nearer the mark.....assuming the assassins had to pay for it at all.....
Bloomberg is a gun control advocate, against sugary drinks, and is a big nanny state advocate. There is no chance he could win.
Bloomberg wouldn't be after the Republican nomination, he'd be after Rep, Dem and Independents who didn't like their party's choices (presumably Trump and Sanders). In any case is the American public against gun control? Apparently not http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
Comments
They're not.
The reason that people in a lot of countries seem strangely fond of the Euro, or dismantling border controls, is because the alternative - for these countries - is so expensive.
If you are the UK, you are one of the world ten largest economies. You may even be in the top five or six. You have sufficient heft to get get people to buy your bonds internationally. In our case, we also have an eminently defendable border, with a relatively small land border to the Republic of Ireland (which has been passport control free since Irish independence), a small number of sea ports, and - of course - the Channel Tunnel. If you are Belgium, you would need to have a massive portion of the population manning the borders with Germany, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Their choices are not our choices. We have a wall - the sea - and they don't.
Continental European countries - long before the EU - didn't largely abandon border controls because they didn't want them. They abandoned them because erecting walls and having a massive border force was too expensive. We can therefore not be surprised when their priorities are different to ours.
I think there is a very real possibility the EU will not exist in a decade. But I suspect Son of Schengen will exist for 100s of years.
Suspending Schengen really means that on a few major cross points there will be some guys that will stop certain vehicles for spot checks.
There is a tendency for people to forget that people did travel quite freely long before there was a Schengen Agreement or European Union. People even bought property and lived in other european countries (e.g. the Portuguese llamas) with really no more bureaucracy than we have today. Crumbs it was possible in those far off days to enter most European Countries (including the dictatorships of Spain and Portugal) without even needing a proper passport - one could acquire a British Visitors Passport over the counter for ten bob at the your local post office.
This time round, I haven't got a clue at all. Trump goes against all my betting instincts; over-hyped, over-talked, the kind of favourite I always look to go against. Yet, I just can't quite see how to take the guy on in the betting markets right now.
Clinton I'm convinced is no shoo-in. She is as divisive on the domestic scene as ever and you have that FBI investigation still waiting in the wings. Yet again, though, whats the alternative?
Right now, its a state by state thing for me.
Trump 38% Clinton 43%
Trump 37% Sanders 53%
Cruz 45% Clinton 43%
Rubio 49% Clinton 40%
http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-poll-results-presidential-race/366232021/
And how did he get on 'Interpol's most wanted list'?
Russia put him there....
And the inquiry rejected evidence that the Polonium would have cost 'millions' instead accepting that $20,000 was nearer the mark.....assuming the assassins had to pay for it at all.....
No, I don't feel bullied. In the looking-glass world of Twitter, vitriol is so often the tribute inadequacy pays to articulacy.
Worth remembering here too, eh, malcolmg?
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-republican-party-may-be-failing/
In any case is the American public against gun control?
Apparently not http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm