Suddenly you see why the US would never accept the UK or any other major economy in NAFTA, we would dilute their dominance of it, like EU expansion killed french influence in europe. From a political perceptive it will be unacceptable for the US.
I agree with that.
I'm not so sure - we would be another (somewhat bigger) Canada, in their eyes.
The French influence thing really died when Germany re-united and became bigger than them and regained their confidence...
The detailed politics would be interesting. There would be a big group in Congress who would agree with the UK joining - how big?
The GOP. But not Trump, not without a deal.
It will require political skills and bribery to give equal rights to member states in exchange for Britain entering NAFTA. You only have to provide convincing fig leaves plus bags of money to Congress and the White House to overrule the State Department. Political corruption is endemic in america but the bureaucrats in the State Department will be the problem, they are very idealistic and stubborn and have lots of people in the media to press their case.
The bureaucrats in State Department have any influence over anything? That's news to me.
In reality IS is comparatively weak in Libya compared to the imagined Caliphate further east; numbers believed less than 10k. In territory terms the area held is small and well sandwiched. If there is one lesson from Syria and Iraq it is, if you are going to want to intervene, do it early and do it with commitment.
A lesson we hadn't learnt at the time of the original intervention in Libya, otherwise we would have been on the other side.
We would have slaughtered the citizens of Benghazi for Gaddafi? Well, it's a view ...
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called? Or is Myanmar associated with the military regime, and the pro-democracy side still call it Burma?
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called? Or is Myanmar associated with the military regime, and the pro-democracy side still call it Burma?
You're talking to someone here who, like many of the locals, still refers to Bombay and Madras.
So he "wins" a temporary measure. This PB Tory is not amused.
That's can't really be "it", surely? Something temporary on migrant benefits but nothing at all on QMV, sovereignty, CAP and budgetary commitments? If that's really it I'm a Leave, so I suspect will be a few members of the Cabinet and a large bunch of Tory MPs.
They will give nothing that cannot be taken back the day after. The jam will not be given but be taken away tomorrow.. On top of that the demands if a remain vote is won will be massive and dig up so deep we will never ever escape. We already are a Provence of the EU we will then become one that can be totally ignored save for the contributions we make.
There is now nothing Cameron will come back with that I would truly believe. Not because it's Cameron per se but because the assurances have been given by the Eu. They are worthless. The EU "guarantees"...... guarantee nothing.
Vote leave and get out of this madness once and for all.
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called? Or is Myanmar associated with the military regime, and the pro-democracy side still call it Burma?
You're talking to someone here who, like many of the locals, still refers to Bombay and Madras.
Yeah, a chicken Chennai doesn't quite have the same ring to it!
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Hard to tell from one photo. Running a country's hard: just look at the way Blair noticeably aged during his ten years in charge. Cameron's also noticeably ageing, although not as badly.
Is Major the only PM this did not particularly happen to?
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
So he "wins" a temporary measure. This PB Tory is not amused.
That's can't really be "it", surely? Something temporary on migrant benefits but nothing at all on QMV, sovereignty, CAP and budgetary commitments? If that's really it I'm a Leave, so I suspect will be a few members of the Cabinet and a large bunch of Tory MPs.
They will give nothing that cannot be taken back the day after. The jam will not be given but be taken away tomorrow.. On top of that the demands if a remain vote is won will be massive and dig up so deep we will never ever escape. We already are a Provence of the EU we will then become one that can be totally ignored save for the contributions we make.
There is now nothing Cameron will come back with that I would truly believe. Not because it's Cameron per se but because the assurances have been given by the Eu. They are worthless. The EU "guarantees"...... guarantee nothing.
Vote leave and get out of this madness once and for all.
I once worked with an African guy who would have called it 'A promise written in water'
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
Germany is from the Latin Germania, Deutschland from the tribe the Diutsic who lived there.
I've always viewed the tiny bit of JSA I have claimed as a forward advance on future taxes to be completely honest.
Quite. For all the nonsense about "people taking out before they've put in", most young people will repay all the benefits they "borrow" in taxes over the course of time.
I'd also add that, if I'd been locked out of the benefits system before I'd "contributed" as some PB Rightwingers apparently want, I almost certainly wouldn't be in a position to be earning and contributing to the economy today -- apart from anything else, I needed to pay for private therapy to sort my problems out, since the NHS treatment available was so shockingly poor.
I dont think anyone would want to cut out someone who cant work.
I think we end up having to do that to stop an ill immigrant coming in today and claiming tomorrow that they can't work....
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
This is explained quite well in the Wikipedia page mentioned earlier.
So he "wins" a temporary measure. This PB Tory is not amused.
That's can't really be "it", surely? Something temporary on migrant benefits but nothing at all on QMV, sovereignty, CAP and budgetary commitments? If that's really it I'm a Leave, so I suspect will be a few members of the Cabinet and a large bunch of Tory MPs.
They will give nothing that cannot be taken back the day after. The jam will not be given but be taken away tomorrow.. On top of that the demands if a remain vote is won will be massive and dig up so deep we will never ever escape. We already are a Provence of the EU we will then become one that can be totally ignored save for the contributions we make.
There is now nothing Cameron will come back with that I would truly believe. Not because it's Cameron per se but because the assurances have been given by the Eu. They are worthless. The EU "guarantees"...... guarantee nothing.
Vote leave and get out of this madness once and for all.
The key thing (I think it was Juncker said when asked about the regnotiation) was that within the EU project there ways in which the speed at which some countries move to ever close union can be differed.
It seems mostly the opposition groups refer to it as Burma in English, whilst the military junta call it Myanmar.
I have a few Burmese friends, and have been there a decade ago. It is a beautiful country with some amazing sites like Pagan. They all refer to the country as Burma, but that may just because that is the spoken version. There is a degree of association of the Myanmar name with the military regime and the dominant ethnic group.
Great to see democracy breaking out in the Far East. The number of Democracies in the world keeps increasing. It is now the norm in Latin America and much of Africa. Even in Europe dictatorships were common in recent decades, but now they are history.
A committee of MPs has judged that the oversight of Kids Company, the collapsed south London youth charity, was weak enough that the Charity Commission should consider whether it should bar its trustees from leading other charities in future.
While Camila Batmanghelidjh, the former chief executive, is criticised in a new report by the committee, MPs have aimed their fire on the trustees to whom she was supposed to answer.
Alan Yentob, a long-serving chairman of the trustees and former BBC creative director, receives particular scorn.
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
This is explained quite well in the Wikipedia page mentioned earlier.
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
This is explained quite well in the Wikipedia page mentioned earlier.
Hungary springs to mind, too.
Switzerland too.
Die Schweiz? Sounds quite similar to me. Or is it very different in Roman?
Now our troops face being hounded in court by the TALIBAN: Iraq witch-hunt lawyers set sights on Afghan claims
Leigh Day – which is under investigation for alleged unscrupulous practices – said it was acting for about 80 Afghans who said they were unlawfully detained or mistreated.
While I too prefer Burma (mainly because of familiarity), isn't it up to them what they want to be called?
If the Bundestag decided that the name of their country in English should be "Deutschland", would we comply?
If it was a decision made by a democratic government for the country to be renamed such in English, then so be it. But given the English-speaking countries links with Germany, it would probably be at a certain financial and reputational cost.
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know why the name for that territory in English is so different to that used by the inhabitants?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
This is explained quite well in the Wikipedia page mentioned earlier.
"The top 0.1% of income taxpayers – just 30,000 individuals – pay 14% of all income tax receipts. The country’s tax base is very dependent on a very few very wealthy individuals. I’ll call these the super-rich"
14% of 29% = 4.08%. A major chunk, no doubt, but 'very dependent'??
All of which might explain why Osborne is now looking at targeting not just the super-rich, or the affluent, but the aspirational career-focussed middle-class in the top 20%.
A lovely tax base to lick his lips at there.
Ha Ha Ha , only a halfwit if you believe that will happen, he will not tax himself or any of his super-rich pals. The irony in your post is perfect
I remain of the opinion that everyone with an income should pay tax, at least notionally. It is a necessary peg to the reality of the country's financial affairs. No representation without taxation, sort of thing.
All benefits should come with a slip of paper similar to a pay slip, showing how much it would have been before the removal of the notional income tax.
After all, state pensions are taxable.
Benefits should be taxed, it is bizarre that you can work and earn 15K and get taxed but if you lie in your bed and collect 25K in benefits it is all tax free.
The best way to avoid taxation is to cut spending. Tory backbenchers as usual are a bit dim.
BTW its easy to programme SNP MPs, they have nothing to do and no interest in doing it because they have no power. Only a mug would vote SNP in a Westminster election. I do hate upseting nats because Scotland is a lovely place and scots are lovely people.
Hmm, surprised to read that. – We are bombarded daily with the wages of premier footballers and BBC executives that I thought it would be a much higher figure. – Running the country appears to pay peanuts by comparison.
You can bump up the Prime Minister's salary by adding in the notional rent for Number Ten and Chequers: that probably doubles it. Really, it's a daft comparison.
Wrong, perks and benefits count for very little when your pension is based on final salary.
Yes Simon, Dave will be depending on his pension to scratch a living for sure
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-35456982
Good luck to their fledgling democracy.
I thought Myanmar was a military-rule era thing. Still, it sounds crap: it hangs awkwardly in the throat like a hard-boiled cough lozenge.
There is now nothing Cameron will come back with that I would truly believe. Not because it's Cameron per se but because the assurances have been given by the Eu. They are worthless. The EU "guarantees"...... guarantee nothing.
Vote leave and get out of this madness once and for all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Myanmar
It seems mostly the opposition groups refer to it as Burma in English, whilst the military junta call it Myanmar.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-refugees-idUSKCN0V80IH
Truly, she looks broken.
Is Major the only PM this did not particularly happen to?
From my boyhood stamp-collecting days, the only other country with a totally different name is Finland.
Hungary springs to mind, too.
Not reversed, not stopped, basically slowed.
Great to see democracy breaking out in the Far East. The number of Democracies in the world keeps increasing. It is now the norm in Latin America and much of Africa. Even in Europe dictatorships were common in recent decades, but now they are history.
While Camila Batmanghelidjh, the former chief executive, is criticised in a new report by the committee, MPs have aimed their fire on the trustees to whom she was supposed to answer.
Alan Yentob, a long-serving chairman of the trustees and former BBC creative director, receives particular scorn.
http://www.bbc.com/news/the-reporters-35455888
And still Batwomen and Robin will claim they did nothing wrong and it is all a media witchhunt and think of the kids...
Leigh Day – which is under investigation for alleged unscrupulous practices – said it was acting for about 80 Afghans who said they were unlawfully detained or mistreated.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3425756/Now-troops-face-hounded-court-TALIBAN-Iraq-witch-hunt-lawyers-set-sights-Afghan-claims.html
Mrs Bouquet...lady of the house speaking....oh wonderful news...
In general, having a different name for a place in your own language is a sign of its importance and should be seen as a mark of respect.