Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
Yesterday you were telling us you were obliged to be "neutral" on the subject of immigration, as to do anything else would be a "dereliction of duty". Now you're suddenly 100% REMAIN as eurosceptics are horrible Nazis. Has it occurred to you that what you are, in fact, is a liar? Consider the possibility.
Sean, you know full well that the first person to mention the Nazis has thereby lost the argument. I thought you had more sense. A lot more sense.
To be fair, Mr Meeks did say "who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin". That is tantamount to calling Leavers Nazis.
He might have forgotten that my wife is a European, and an immigrant.
But never let facts get in the way of a good prejudice.
Oh, and on topic, Montie's leaving the party will likely increase Tory vote share. I'm not entirely kidding - if it can be painted as IDS loyalist and right wing Tory thinks the party is too moderate.
That said, the danger of several defections or submission of vote of no confidence to the '22 is now very, very high.
If you were a regular reader of Montie's Times articles you would realise portraying him as a hard right bigot simply doesn't wash. Montie passionately believes we should leave the EU but his early support for the Syrian refugees for example or advocacy of gay marriage were not popular within the wider Tory party and are not views Faragists would support.
I am a regular reader, actually, and a few choice articles aside I imagine that a majority of the public and a majority of the Tory party disagree with him on most issues.
It is the reason why he has never really fit into the modern Tory party. He isn't that interested in power, it would seem, instead more in commenting.
If he isn't interested in power, then Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is the place to be....
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
Was it you who suggested he joined Labour on the previous thread?
It made me LOL.
I'm sick of Montie's personal vendetta against Cameron. No doubt a book is in the offing where he can tell us how awful he's been. With the help of Ms Oakeshott.
Oh, and on topic, Montie's leaving the party will likely increase Tory vote share. I'm not entirely kidding - if it can be painted as IDS loyalist and right wing Tory thinks the party is too moderate.
That said, the danger of several defections or submission of vote of no confidence to the '22 is now very, very high.
If you were a regular reader of Montie's Times articles you would realise portraying him as a hard right bigot simply doesn't wash. Montie passionately believes we should leave the EU but his early support for the Syrian refugees for example or advocacy of gay marriage were not popular within the wider Tory party and are not views Faragists would support.
I am a regular reader, actually, and a few choice articles aside I imagine that a majority of the public and a majority of the Tory party disagree with him on most issues.
It is the reason why he has never really fit into the modern Tory party. He isn't that interested in power, it would seem, instead more in commenting.
If he isn't interested in power, then Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is the place to be....
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
Of all the posts this morning that from CR is possibly the least arrogant.
It is certainly less arrogant that suggesting you should vote with tribe, or perhaps worse, against a perceived tribe, rather than over issues.
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
Of all the posts this morning that from CR is possibly the least arrogant.
It is certainly less arrogant that suggesting you should vote with tribe, or perhaps worse, against a perceived tribe, rather than over issues.
This isn't Corbyn vs Cameron or whatever, it's where we choose to set the direction of our nation. It's akin to voting Sindy because you liked free tuition.
or voting against Sindy based on an estimate of the oil price
OT and briefly The HMRC are pursuing me for what they say is unpaid VAT for the period of 3rd quarter 2009..the demands, which are assessed and have no evidence to back them up, began in December 2014..Do any of the tax experts on PB know what, if any, is the time limIt on such claims.
OT and briefly The HMRC are pursuing me for what they say is unpaid VAT for the period of 3rd quarter 2009..the demands, which are assessed and have no evidence to back them up, began in December 2014..Do any of the tax experts on PB know what, if any, is the time limIt on such claims.
This isn't Corbyn vs Cameron or whatever, it's where we choose to set the direction of our nation. It's akin to voting Sindy because you liked free tuition.
or voting against Sindy based on an estimate of the oil price
Or voting to remain because you didn't like Farage's views on gay marriage ?
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
Whoever governs Britain in the short-term in the longer term the option would also be there for the election of the Left-wing government too with the tools to make it happen. Or even a Liberal government that wants to ultra devolve power with local sales/VAT tax.
This referendum isn't about any one political party or group or their views.
It's about Britain and its democracy; our choices.
Nothing to stop a left of centre govt with a policy of open door immigration from the EU post Brexit if the people will it
I suppose what worries some Remainers is that such a government would never get elected.
William Foxton Oh man. BBC publishing "know your russian jet" silhouettes: https://t.co/9Kfk6yMyWe
Ha. This is hide-and-seek for grown-ups. Happens every month or two, usually a Bear or two flying close by to make sure our Radar and QRA teams are still working properly.
It's been that way for decades, the worst that ever happens is the RAF gets the bill for a few broken windows after a supersonic intercept.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
Of all the posts this morning that from CR is possibly the least arrogant.
It is certainly less arrogant that suggesting you should vote with tribe, or perhaps worse, against a perceived tribe, rather than over issues.
Really? CR is disappointed because Mr Meeks who is one of the more thoughtful people on here does not agree with him? I think our good host has a point, although I disagree with him about the qualities of Montgomerie who is clearly a sad and embittered individual. It's quite remarkable isn't it when we see the abject lunacy going on in the Labour Party led by a total cretin that labour MPs still remain but Montgomerie feels the Tories are totally beyond the pale and ups and flounces out, no doubt bankrolled still by Ashcroft. Colour me unsurprised.
'I suppose what worries some Remainers is that such a government would never get elected.'
Well this is what the snobbish Europhiles in both the Conservative and Labour/Liberal parties have always been about. I can remember many years ago one ghastly Independent columnist gushing about how EU membership would transform the UK and get rid of all the nasty (as he saw it) Thatcherite/nativist elements in British society.
And the likes of Julian Critchley sneering at British culture and fawning over that of our European neighbours.
And now we have our own dear Mr.Meeks dismissing EU opponents as 'the mob'.
The EU is an organisation that appeals to a certain kind of middle class mentality in the UK, to people who think they are terribly clever and superior to their fellow citizens. And of course they think they should be in charge and telling 'the mob' how to live and behave.
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
I don't think it's the *worst* thing, of course, just relatively speaking bad.
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
But as SE says, if the Tories move too far away from public opinion, they'll be voted out.
Now there is always the possibility (and this may be what concerns Alistair most) that post-Brexit, relations between the EU and UK would be so bad, that public opinion would shift in a belligerently nationalistic direction, and political parties would have to shift with it.
Hasn't it done so already, in shire England at least?
Too many people are anxious to send Britain in the crudest direction possible. The EU is a Trojan horse issue.
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
Of all the posts this morning that from CR is possibly the least arrogant.
It is certainly less arrogant that suggesting you should vote with tribe, or perhaps worse, against a perceived tribe, rather than over issues.
Really? CR is disappointed because Mr Meeks who is one of the more thoughtful people on here does not agree with him? I think our good host has a point, although I disagree with him about the qualities of Montgomerie who is clearly a sad and embittered individual. It's quite remarkable isn't it when we see the abject lunacy going on in the Labour Party led by a total cretin that labour MPs still remain but Montgomerie feels the Tories are totally beyond the pale and ups and flounces out, no doubt bankrolled still by Ashcroft. Colour me unsurprised.
The word was arrogant, not disappointed. There was othing arrogant about CR's post - it was far more humble than most of mine.
PULPSTAR.. Thank you..the current info on the HMRC website states 4 years..updated in 2010..I just needed some clarification....At the moment I am dealing woth three Inspectors..who all give different figures and dates..They never respond to requests for further information..like dealing with a " I speak your weight" machine
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
No wonder so many of the great and the good such as James Kelly, HD2PB, AlbiontillIdie, Chris Goo, Mick Pork and Rev Stuart Dickson have left the site
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
That is a very unfortunate position. I'm not particularly enamoured with the Leave side either, but surely you can see that the referendum is a matter of self-determination and goes beyond silly politics of UKIP vs Tory or conservative vs liberal?
If the leadership of Leave were cuddly liberals you would be voting to Leave, is what I gather from your post. Surely the problem is that George Osborne has been, in the background, promising to unleash the forces of Hell on any reasonable Tory that declares for Leave? Isn't that something you take issue with, one of the lieutenants of Remain is acting this way, or the dishonest manner in which Cameron's deal is being presented. You have said that the deal is piss poor, and yet take no issue with the depth of dishonesty being perpetrated by the Remain side when they present it as the key to our future in the EU?
I agree that the leadership of Leave could be a lot better, but there are a lot of Leave people who are not particularly concerned with immigration, who don't see Europeans as the "enemy" and who would be perfectly happy with an EEA/EFTA style solution. Come and join us, it's not as bad as you think.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Must say it sounds like you think we should leave, but that the most vocal leavers are people whom you dislike on a political/personal basis. Making the decision based on association with voters you dislike rather than the issue itself (you do describe the deal as 'pisspoor' and the EU as 'dysfunctional') is up to you, but I think the issue matters more, and hope you reconsider.
The question for me is about how Britain develops in the future. To Remain or to Leave is a question about means, not ends. Remain is a poor means. But Leave is showing itself to be a worse one.
I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future. For me, for the reasons I have spelt out before, I am concerned that how the EU intends developing is not in Britain's interests. And that is why, at present, I am more inclined towards Leave though it is a very difficult decision for me.
I do not hate the EU or think immigrants the enemy or vermin. But I do think that the Leave campaign should not be left with those who do have such views. There is an open bright future for Britain and those who want the best for it should stay in the ring.
Mr. Runnymede, suspect there'd be a large overlap of those who fall into the liberal white guilt camp and those who are very in favour of the EU.
Of course, the EU has moderate supporters too but, EU-philes aside, it's hard for me to see why a moderate would consider the deal a good thing. It's worse than the status quo ante.
Like Jovian, Cameron's rush to get a deal at any cost appears to be leading to a rubbish deal.
Of course, Jovian didn't last long after signing his Persian truce...
'I suppose what worries some Remainers is that such a government would never get elected.'
Well this is what the snobbish Europhiles in both the Conservative and Labour/Liberal parties have always been about. I can remember many years ago one ghastly Independent columnist gushing about how EU membership would transform the UK and get rid of all the nasty (as he saw it) Thatcherite/nativist elements in British society.
And the likes of Julian Critchley sneering at British culture and fawning over that of our European neighbours.
And now we have our own dear Mr.Meeks dismissing EU opponents as 'the mob'.
The EU is an organisation that appeals to a certain kind of middle class mentality in the UK, to people who think they are terribly clever and superior to their fellow citizens. And of course they think they should be in charge and telling 'the mob' how to live and behave.
And it gives politicians the perfect get out for not delivering on promises
UKIP certainly wouldn't come to power in the event of Leave, but the Tories probably would move towards a more right wing leadership. If you think that's the worst thing that could happen to this country (obviously I don't) then it makes sense to vote Remain.
I don't think it's the *worst* thing, of course, just relatively speaking bad.
I also don't think Remain is an irrevocable decision btw. We could easily have second referendum if public opinion demanded it.
And we could rejoin as well. A Labour govt could easily remain in the EEA but cosily abide by every EU ruling going and take us into Schengen. They could easily suggest that a successful eurozone would be suitable for Britain.
PULPSTAR.. Thank you..the current info on the HMRC website states 4 years..updated in 2010..I just needed some clarification....At the moment I am dealing woth three Inspectors..who all give different figures and dates..They never respond to requests for further information..like dealing with a " I speak your weight" machine
As someone who work in a business that is pretty much a net reclaimer of VAT I've had them a few times. Best of luck.
As many had previously predicted Europe had the potential to wreck the Tory Party for years and leave Labour a clear field. Unfortunately in one of those historical missed opportunities they had the wrong leader at the wrong time.....
As for Tim Montgomerie...I'd be surprised if he's known to 2% of the population and half of those will think he had something to do with the war
But he makes the point. This regerendum battle will come down to who is on which side. This is all about celebrity endorsement.
What the 'Leavers' have in common is that they seem to fit a mould. Mavericks dyed-in-the wool Tories or fuddy duddy fruitcakes.
My sense is that the more Boris's who clamber on board the bigger the lead for 'Remain' will be. When it comes to the real campaign this is a decision the public will take seriously.
'Remain' have all the respected politicians and commentators of the last 20 years. Major Blair Ashdown Cameron Hague Campbell Steel Owen David Miliband etc etc. Against a ragtag of fruitcakes and opportunists there really isn't a contest.
The only pity is that when it's over and the Tory Party start to eat itself the emasculated left-of-centre wont be in a position to take advantage
I think David Steel is dead. Certainly haven't heard from him lately.
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
Miss Plato, just wondering if you've got any classical history books yet (a little while ago you asked for recommendations).
Also, I'm thinking of blogging about good starting points (as in, periods/people) and was wondering which time periods/people you looked at [if you were asking for recommendations blind, as it were, and don't have an answer, that's cool, I just thought it'd be useful to get your perspective].
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
No - that is no more fair than saying that the More-in-Sorrow-than-in-Anger Remainers are the useful idiots of the scaredy cats.
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
Miss Plato, just wondering if you've got any classical history books yet (a little while ago you asked for recommendations).
Also, I'm thinking of blogging about good starting points (as in, periods/people) and was wondering which time periods/people you looked at [if you were asking for recommendations blind, as it were, and don't have an answer, that's cool, I just thought it'd be useful to get your perspective].
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
That is a very unfortunate position. I'm not particularly enamoured with the Leave side either, but surely you can see that the referendum is a matter of self-determination and goes beyond silly politics of UKIP vs Tory or conservative vs liberal?
If the leadership of Leave were cuddly liberals you would be voting to Leave, is what I gather from your post. Surely the problem is that George Osborne has been, in the background, promising to unleash the forces of Hell on any reasonable Tory that declares for Leave? Isn't that something you take issue with, one of the lieutenants of Remain is acting this way, or the dishonest manner in which Cameron's deal is being presented. You have said that the deal is piss poor, and yet take no issue with the depth of dishonesty being perpetrated by the Remain side when they present it as the key to our future in the EU?
I agree that the leadership of Leave could be a lot better, but there are a lot of Leave people who are not particularly concerned with immigration, who don't see Europeans as the "enemy" and who would be perfectly happy with an EEA/EFTA style solution. Come and join us, it's not as bad as you think.
No, Mr Meeks is striking the right note. I speak as someone who regards Cameron as too left wing for me (although no different from virtually all previous Tory leaders). Leaving the EU would be just the start of the troub!e coming from the Leavers.
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
It is extremely naive and wrong to assume that a UK outside the European Union would be any more independent. Sure we can create a talking shop parliament that passes endless laws and motions, but the global economic forces will still prevail. Arguably we will have less influence in shaping those forces.
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.
I'm astonished that some of the sophisticated PB audience are using the prospect of a short term potential political change of HMG as a reason for their EU ref vote.
This is a strategic decision that will last for decades. Just think of all the governments we've had since 1975.
This isn't Corbyn vs Cameron or whatever, it's where we choose to set the direction of our nation. It's akin to voting Sindy because you liked free tuition.
Some of the governments we have had since 1975 have had a far more profound impact on our lives than anything the EU has done or anything associated with EU membership.
Incidentally, if Remain wins it's not going to be accepted by Leave as a "decision that will last for decades". Couple of years, maybe. (In fairness there are Remainers who might like to reopen the issue too, but rejoining, which would presumably mean joining the Euro, would be entirely impossible politically.)
'I suppose what worries some Remainers is that such a government would never get elected.'
Well this is what the snobbish Europhiles in both the Conservative and Labour/Liberal parties have always been about. I can remember many years ago one ghastly Independent columnist gushing about how EU membership would transform the UK and get rid of all the nasty (as he saw it) Thatcherite/nativist elements in British society.
And the likes of Julian Critchley sneering at British culture and fawning over that of our European neighbours.
And now we have our own dear Mr.Meeks dismissing EU opponents as 'the mob'.
The EU is an organisation that appeals to a certain kind of middle class mentality in the UK, to people who think they are terribly clever and superior to their fellow citizens. And of course they think they should be in charge and telling 'the mob' how to live and behave.
And it gives politicians the perfect get out for not delivering on promises
That's the big one for me. If the UK is a democracy, then there has to be a mechanism for kicking the buggers out and reversing their decisions. It's a basic tenet of democracy.
How do we do that if the decision on taxing the City to death came via a QMV of countries with either no City or a wish to destroy ours?
I have to say I am more shocked to find out that Tim Montgomerie was still even a member of the Tories. I thought he was like your Dan Hodges of the right. Ripped up his membership card long ago.
PULPSTAR.. Thank you..the current info on the HMRC website states 4 years..updated in 2010..I just needed some clarification....At the moment I am dealing woth three Inspectors..who all give different figures and dates..They never respond to requests for further information..like dealing with a " I speak your weight" machine
As someone who work in a business that is pretty much a net reclaimer of VAT I've had them a few times. Best of luck.
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
Eh? No-one wants the British public to be "forced" to accept anything. We all have our views and the issue will be decided at the ballot box.
'It is extremely naive and wrong to assume that a UK outside the European Union would be any more independent. Sure we can create a talking shop parliament that passes endless laws and motions, but the global economic forces will still prevail. Arguably we will have less influence in shaping those forces.
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.'
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
It is extremely naive and wrong to assume that a UK outside the European Union would be any more independent. Sure we can create a talking shop parliament that passes endless laws and motions, but the global economic forces will still prevail. Arguably we will have less influence in shaping those forces.
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.
So we might as well leave a useless club that's costing us a fortune.
Got to love the twisting of language. Illegal Immigrant -> Migrant, Terrorist -> Militant, and latest one today, Total Utter F##k Up where we have cut the wrong leg off somebody -> "Never Event"
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
Is this relevant or indeed a realistic statistic? Are you suggesting to me that the MINI plant in Oxford is not competitive? The Nissan plant in Sunderland is one of if not the most efficient plant in the world. Are you telling me that the BAe plants making wings for airbus are not efficient? Is Rolls Royce making engines for aircraft manufacturers world wide not efficient? Manufacturing in Britain is bigger than ever.
Well one of the sectors to look at where there is a massive skills shortage is construction, and YoY pay growth is running at 6% there. If the skills shortage is being replicated in other sectors it won't be long until similar figures are seen.
Does anyone here discuss the betting markets any more, such as the EURef one?
In the next few days, the actions and statements of politicians on the EU membership issue is going to get huge media. Some of their actions and statements - and the operation of the buzzwords and buzzphrases that leave their mouths - will influence the markets.
Implied probabilities at the Betfair exchange are currently running at 66.5% REMAIN, 33.5% LEAVE. How is that likely to change, in view of
- whether Cameron
a) heralds a great deal and says vote REMAIN, b) heralds the best deal in the circumstances and says vote REMAIN, c) says wait until the next summit and he'll try for a better deal, and he loves the EU so much, as he announces a vote date, d) says the same and does not announce a vote date e) says that he tried hard but unfortunately no deal was struck, so vote LEAVE
- whether for example
Hollande and Valls insist that the City of London and its global network need to be more strictly regulated at an international level, and that the British government won't see sense on the issue, and that therefore France is walking out of the talks. So no deal, leaving Cameron no option but to recommend voting LEAVE. The British press and the dual US-British national Boris Johnson will lambaste the "cheese eaters" for "not supporting safeguards for the City" (!), and Cameron's support for LEAVE will be blamed not on British policymakers or negotiators (perish the thought), but on foreigners and especially the French. Politico chatterers will start chattering about which cabinet ministers will support the REMAIN campaign, if they can find any.
In short: stuff's gonna 'appen soon. How will it affect the betting markets? Is anyone here invested in that question?
Here's the summary of my take (and I support REMAIN, so I am not being biased):
Not only support for REMAIN, but also interest in the case being made for REMAIN is sticky upwards. It will be the politicians and journalists who back LEAVE that much of the population will watch most intensely. Therefore I think LEAVE is a massive BUY at 2\1.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Does anyone here discuss the betting markets any more, such as the EURef one?
In the next few days, the actions and statements of politicians on the EU membership issue is going to get huge media. Some of their actions and statements - and the operation of the buzzwords and buzzphrases that leave their mouths - will influence the markets.
Implied probabilities at the Betfair exchange are currently running at 66.5% REMAIN, 33.5% LEAVE. How is that likely to change, in view of
- whether Cameron
a) heralds a great deal and says vote REMAIN, b) heralds the best deal in the circumstances and says vote REMAIN, c) says wait until the next summit and he'll try for a better deal, and he loves the EU so much, as he announces a vote date, d) says the same and does not announce a vote date e) says that he tried hard but unfortunately no deal was struck, so vote LEAVE
- whether for example
Hollande and Valls insist that the City of London and its global network need to be more strictly regulated at an international level, and that the British government won't see sense on the issue, and that therefore France is walking out of the talks. So no deal, leaving Cameron no option but to recommend voting LEAVE. The British press and the dual US-British national Boris Johnson will lambaste the "cheese eaters" for "not supporting safeguards for the City" (!), and Cameron's support for LEAVE will be blamed not on British policymakers or negotiators (perish the thought), but on foreigners and especially the French. Politico chatterers will start chattering about which cabinet ministers will support the STAY campaign, if they can find any.
In short: stuff's gonna 'appen soon. How will it affect the betting markets? Is anyone here invested in that question?
Here's the summary of my take (and I support STAY, so I am not being biased):
Not only support for STAY, but also interest in the case being made for STAY is sticky upwards. It will be the politicians and journalists who back LEAVE that much of the population will watch most intensely. Therefore I think LEAVE is a massive BUY at 2\1.
Am green on leave and 000.000 on Remain. However I hope the market will get a bit more lively once/if a date for a referendum is announced.
My day has been made. I've been put in the same bracket as Emma Thompson.
Whisper it, but I think you are secretly quite well respected on here and not a few people are just a tad disappointed in you, particularly since you obviously have the intellectual heft and depth to know that the EU project is fundamentally flawed.
You could have made your own case independently for that, but chose not to - and I think it's because your emotions have taken over your better judgement.
Anyway, I'll say no more.
Incidentally, I clocked your message this morning - sorry I haven't had time to reply yet. I'll try to do so tonight.
What an arrogant position. This is beneath you.
I'm sorry if you think it's arrogant, I'm just saying what I think.
Got to love the twisting of language. Illegal Immigrant -> Migrant, Terrorist -> Militant, and latest one today, Total Utter F##k Up where we have cut the wrong leg off somebody -> "Never Event"
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Mr Meeks so you will be voting to remain because you do not like some of the people advocating Leave. SeanT summarises this as a dislike of the oiks, you respond by saying he read your statement wrong. I have re-read it. Do you include Dan Hannan in the "regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin"? Are you that desperate to find a reason to Remain?
Nul points could become a thing of the past at the Eurovision Song Contest.
This year’s countrywide sing-off is changing the presentation of the ballot results in an attempt to keep viewer interest until the bitter end.
For the first time, the professional juries and the public voters from each country will each award a set of points from one to eight, 10 and 12 for each of the top 10 places. With twice as many points to be awarded, the chance of ending up with zero points is lower than ever.
It means the top 10 countries in both the jury and TV audience vote will receive points, although they could be the same countries.
The show will then unveil the results in two parts. After the jury points from each of the 43 participating countries have been awarded by each national spokesperson, the televoting points from all participating countries will be combined.
The scores will then be presented by the show’s hosts, starting at the bottom of the scoreboard and working their way to the top, building up towards the hoped-for climax.
Nul points could become a thing of the past at the Eurovision Song Contest.
This year’s countrywide sing-off is changing the presentation of the ballot results in an attempt to keep viewer interest until the bitter end.
For the first time, the professional juries and the public voters from each country will each award a set of points from one to eight, 10 and 12 for each of the top 10 places. With twice as many points to be awarded, the chance of ending up with zero points is lower than ever.
It means the top 10 countries in both the jury and TV audience vote will receive points, although they could be the same countries.
The show will then unveil the results in two parts. After the jury points from each of the 43 participating countries have been awarded by each national spokesperson, the televoting points from all participating countries will be combined.
The scores will then be presented by the show’s hosts, starting at the bottom of the scoreboard and working their way to the top, building up towards the hoped-for climax.
Does anyone here discuss the betting markets any more, such as the EURef one?
In the next few days, the actions and statements of politicians on the EU membership issue is going to get huge media. Some of their actions and statements - and the operation of the buzzwords and buzzphrases that leave their mouths - will influence the markets.
Implied probabilities at the Betfair exchange are currently running at 66.5% REMAIN, 33.5% LEAVE. How is that likely to change, in view of
- whether Cameron
a) heralds a great deal and says vote REMAIN, b) heralds the best deal in the circumstances and says vote REMAIN, c) says wait until the next summit and he'll try for a better deal, and he loves the EU so much, as he announces a vote date, d) says the same and does not announce a vote date e) says that he tried hard but unfortunately no deal was struck, so vote LEAVE
- whether for example
Hollande and Valls insist that the City of London and its global network need to be more strictly regulated at an international level, and that the British government won't see sense on the issue, and that therefore France is walking out of the talks. So no deal, leaving Cameron no option but to recommend voting LEAVE. The British press and the dual US-British national Boris Johnson will lambaste the "cheese eaters" for "not supporting safeguards for the City" (!), and Cameron's support for LEAVE will be blamed not on British policymakers or negotiators (perish the thought), but on foreigners and especially the French. Politico chatterers will start chattering about which cabinet ministers will support the STAY campaign, if they can find any.
In short: stuff's gonna 'appen soon. How will it affect the betting markets? Is anyone here invested in that question?
Here's the summary of my take (and I support STAY, so I am not being biased):
Not only support for STAY, but also interest in the case being made for STAY is sticky upwards. It will be the politicians and journalists who back LEAVE that much of the population will watch most intensely. Therefore I think LEAVE is a massive BUY at 2\1.
Yes, let's get back to the real issues
We could see some dramatic developments very soon.
If there's a bust-up we will probably see Leave shorten as there will be speculation that Cameron will change horse or that he has lost control of the situation.
Or... would it be seen as scripted "panto" and favourable for Remain?
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
How do you reckon prices will move in the next few days?
The markets will most likely support the PM, for a few days anyway. Unless the PM declares himself for Leave, then Remain will come in and Leave will go out. Although if the deal is as bad as is being reported the effect could be minimal before the press and half his own party tear into Cameron!
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
No - that is no more fair than saying that the More-in-Sorrow-than-in-Anger Remainers are the useful idiots of the scaredy cats.
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
Well one of the sectors to look at where there is a massive skills shortage is construction, and YoY pay growth is running at 6% there. If the skills shortage is being replicated in other sectors it won't be long until similar figures are seen.
I'm hearing a lot of anecdotal evidence of fairly major wage pressure in quite a few different areas: development, compliance, etc.
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader. If you care to look on the last thread, you will find that my reaction to the news was a post very favourable to Tim Montgomerie.
SkyNews The Supreme Court has ruled the law on joint enterprise has been wrongly interpreted by criminal trial judges over the past 30 years
Can lawyers of this parish advise what the significance of this is?
Without reading the judgment difficult to say. But as a general point this has been used to convict those in gangs for murder even when those individuals have not wielded the weapon. I suspect that what it will mean that such people can still be convicted but that (a) the bar to make out such a case will be higher; and (b) judges will need to change how they direct juries as to what they need to find as facts and what tests need to be passed before they can convict.
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
I see all the Cameroon cheerleaders are desperate to play the man and not the ball, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I believe I'm regarded as Cameroon cheerleader. If you care to look on the last thread, you will find that my reaction to the news was a post very favourable to Tim Montgomerie.
I have just read that article. A very good and thoughtful one. Thank you for sharing.
Christopher Howard Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
It is extremely naive and wrong to assume that a UK outside the European Union would be any more independent. Sure we can create a talking shop parliament that passes endless laws and motions, but the global economic forces will still prevail. Arguably we will have less influence in shaping those forces.
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.
Is Canada not sovereign? Australia? Russia? India? South Africa? South Korea? Japan?
Apart from Japan, all these countries are smaller than the UK, economically.
If true sovereignty is the freedom to pursue policy in direct opposition to the economic interests of your neighbours, then on your list I would say that Russia is the only one who is remotely independent. If Canada decided to in any way challenge the US it would be slapped down immediately.
I am hugely cynical about the power states have wrt to global economics and don't see independence from the EU making a huge difference.
At best we'll get a lot more rhetoric at Westminster from the likes of Mogg and co, some superficial policy changes. All the substantial stuff will carry on.
At worst we'll be back to the 1970s and the mercy of economic events, but with far fewer friends than before. We might try to go it alone with a few odd policies, but with huge economic cost.
For me the EU holds the small possibility of a route out of such impotence. But I have no idea how a political culture will emerge to make the EU genuinely democratic.
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
No - that is no more fair than saying that the More-in-Sorrow-than-in-Anger Remainers are the useful idiots of the scaredy cats.
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
And when in practice Britain post-Leave became illiberal and much more closed to the world, all you would have done is enabled those who you dislike to achieve their aims.
I see the question of EU membership as a means, not an end. I do not will the ends that the bulk of Leavers will. Therefore I cannot sensibly line up with them.
The markets will most likely support the PM, for a few days anyway. Unless the PM declares himself for Leave, then Remain will come in and Leave will go out. Although if the deal is as bad as is being reported the effect could be minimal before the press and half his own party tear into Cameron!
Even if it's only a quarter of his own (parliamentary) party, they will get a lot of attention.
How do you reach the conclusion in your second sentence? If Cameron backs LEAVE, then REMAIN will be finished. Cameron's popularity will rise - he'll be seen as a Churchill, not a Chamberlain - and REMAIN will be lucky to get as much support as the LDs did for electoral reform.
Meanwhile, any points raised by France about the City of London might get discussed on page 17 where few will notice. The British media will never accuse a British government and civil service elite of cocking up negotiations.
Others can expend their emotional energy poring over a draft that will no doubt be renegotiated further. It seems a fruitless endeavour to me unless you're on the negotiating team.
'I share your view about the EU and agree that the question is about how Britain develops in the future'
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
It is extremely naive and wrong to assume that a UK outside the European Union would be any more independent. Sure we can create a talking shop parliament that passes endless laws and motions, but the global economic forces will still prevail. Arguably we will have less influence in shaping those forces.
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.
Is Canada not sovereign? Australia? Russia? India? South Africa? South Korea? Japan?
Apart from Japan, all these countries are smaller than the UK, economically.
If true sovereignty is the freedom to pursue policy in direct opposition to the economic interests of your neighbours, then on your list I would say that Russia is the only one who is remotely independent. If Canada decided to in any way challenge the US it would be slapped down immediately.
I am hugely cynical about the power states have wrt to global economics and don't see independence from the EU making a huge difference.
At best we'll get a lot more rhetoric at Westminster from the likes of Mogg and co, some superficial policy changes. All the substantial stuff will carry on.
At worst we'll be back to the 1970s and the mercy of economic events, but with far fewer friends than before. We might try to go it alone with a few odd policies, but with huge economic cost.
For me the EU holds the small possibility of a route out of such impotence. But I have no idea how a political culture will emerge to make the EU genuinely democratic.
It's a tough call.
Thats not true. If Canada wanted to cut sales tax beneath US level, It would be in direct opposition to interests of US but US could and would not do anything about it. Its nonsense to say tax and regulation of domestic economy are just superficial. It makes and breaks economies.
The markets will most likely support the PM, for a few days anyway. Unless the PM declares himself for Leave, then Remain will come in and Leave will go out. Although if the deal is as bad as is being reported the effect could be minimal before the press and half his own party tear into Cameron!
Even if it's only a quarter of his own (parliamentary) party, they will get a lot of attention.
How do you reach the conclusion in your second sentence? If Cameron backs LEAVE, then REMAIN will be finished. They'll be lucky to get as much support as the LDs did for electoral reform.
Imo there's very little chance Cameron will back Leave but speculation that he will should (should!) bring Leave in.
'Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
correct Robert, though harder to use that kind of argument about the US
Christopher Howard Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
Christopher Howard Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
Miss Vance, that may be the aim, but Cameron may surprise (or not) the eurocrats by recommending it anyway.
Mr. Meeks, still on the fence? Surely the progression of negotiations will influence your decision?
No, I've come decisively off the fence now on the Remain side. The EU is seriously dysfunctional and the proposed deal is pisspoor. The Eurocrats are mediocre, reactive and short-sighted and the EU is in need of major reform that it's not going to get.
But it is now abundantly apparent that the Leave side is going to be overwhelmingly dominated by people with no judgement and very different values from me, who regard other Europeans as the enemy and immigrants as vermin, and whatever the fallout of a Leave vote it would leave Britain poorer, spiritually if not economically, as such people gained the ascendancy in public debate.
Totally wrong, as people like Robert Smithson, DavidL and Cyclefree demonstrate. Your prejudices showing again.
This is about your indulgence of those, and the fact you dislike UKIP and their attitudes to gay marriage. None of which have anything to do with it.
You are completely wrong about UKIP too. Brexit is likely to kill it off and the U.K. to be no more 'reactionary' than Canada, Australia or New Zealand.
Rational Leavers are going to be the useful idiots of the mob.
No - that is no more fair than saying that the More-in-Sorrow-than-in-Anger Remainers are the useful idiots of the scaredy cats.
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
And when in practice Britain post-Leave became illiberal and much more closed to the world, all you would have done is enabled those who you dislike to achieve their aims.
Why would Britain more illiberal? Being in the EC does not make us more liberal.
One gets the impression that the Remainders thought they were going to be sailing through this Referendum, enjoying the Leavers discomfort along the way.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I read a report the other day which said Cameron and Remain expected to be 20-30 points ahead at this stage. It may be an exaggeration, but I am damn sure they didn't expect to be starting the campaign with some polls putting them BEHIND.
It seems to me that a winning trajectory for Remain would have it comfortably ahead now and losing some (but not too much) advantage in the campaign.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
What you have to consider as well is that REMAIN will almost certainly be over-stated in the polls with this.
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Pretty sure bunch of African economies have worst participation and productivity than us. You are correct that you can't interpret productiviy on own, but it still matters once you adjust for participation effect.
ONS UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
When you keep employing cheap imported labor and wont invest in robots that''s what you get. Services won't be that much different.
Also, what's German unemployment / non-participation like? In the US it's only 62% working, the rest being retired, students, unemployed or off the grid. Having little more than half your people working will make the productivity stats look great!
Comments
But never let facts get in the way of a good prejudice.
It made me LOL.
I'm sick of Montie's personal vendetta against Cameron. No doubt a book is in the offing where he can tell us how awful he's been. With the help of Ms Oakeshott.
It is certainly less arrogant that suggesting you should vote with tribe, or perhaps worse, against a perceived tribe, rather than over issues.
William Foxton
Oh man. BBC publishing "know your russian jet" silhouettes: https://t.co/9Kfk6yMyWe
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/chmanual/ch15400.htm
I'm sure there would be no objections from us to them rejoining the UK
Update on Mr fox at top of the hour. Closer analysis suggests it might be a dead duck being carried from no 10... https://t.co/VwEmf5ZoXn
ONS
UK 24% less productive in manufacturing than Germany and 45% less productive than the USA in 2010/14 https://t.co/Wa8yPlQ53f
It's been that way for decades, the worst that ever happens is the RAF gets the bill for a few broken windows after a supersonic intercept.
But the Remainders don't seem to be enjoying anything very much at the moment.
"If misery loves company, misery has company enough."
Henry David Thoreau
I think our good host has a point, although I disagree with him about the qualities of Montgomerie who is clearly a sad and embittered individual.
It's quite remarkable isn't it when we see the abject lunacy going on in the Labour Party led by a total cretin that labour MPs still remain but Montgomerie feels the Tories are totally beyond the pale and ups and flounces out, no doubt bankrolled still by Ashcroft. Colour me unsurprised.
Well this is what the snobbish Europhiles in both the Conservative and Labour/Liberal parties have always been about. I can remember many years ago one ghastly Independent columnist gushing about how EU membership would transform the UK and get rid of all the nasty (as he saw it) Thatcherite/nativist elements in British society.
And the likes of Julian Critchley sneering at British culture and fawning over that of our European neighbours.
And now we have our own dear Mr.Meeks dismissing EU opponents as 'the mob'.
The EU is an organisation that appeals to a certain kind of middle class mentality in the UK, to people who think they are terribly clever and superior to their fellow citizens. And of course they think they should be in charge and telling 'the mob' how to live and behave.
If the leadership of Leave were cuddly liberals you would be voting to Leave, is what I gather from your post. Surely the problem is that George Osborne has been, in the background, promising to unleash the forces of Hell on any reasonable Tory that declares for Leave? Isn't that something you take issue with, one of the lieutenants of Remain is acting this way, or the dishonest manner in which Cameron's deal is being presented. You have said that the deal is piss poor, and yet take no issue with the depth of dishonesty being perpetrated by the Remain side when they present it as the key to our future in the EU?
I agree that the leadership of Leave could be a lot better, but there are a lot of Leave people who are not particularly concerned with immigration, who don't see Europeans as the "enemy" and who would be perfectly happy with an EEA/EFTA style solution. Come and join us, it's not as bad as you think.
Whether win or lose, it's almost as amusing as Vince getting thumped at GE 2015.
I do not hate the EU or think immigrants the enemy or vermin. But I do think that the Leave campaign should not be left with those who do have such views. There is an open bright future for Britain and those who want the best for it should stay in the ring.
Of course, the EU has moderate supporters too but, EU-philes aside, it's hard for me to see why a moderate would consider the deal a good thing. It's worse than the status quo ante.
Like Jovian, Cameron's rush to get a deal at any cost appears to be leading to a rubbish deal.
Of course, Jovian didn't last long after signing his Persian truce...
How Britain develops in the future should be a decision made by the British people.
But EU supporters of the Meeks tendency don't accept that. They want the British public to be forced to accept whatever 'more civilised' version of society they favour, if necessary by having the UK governed from abroad.
Also, I'm thinking of blogging about good starting points (as in, periods/people) and was wondering which time periods/people you looked at [if you were asking for recommendations blind, as it were, and don't have an answer, that's cool, I just thought it'd be useful to get your perspective].
The mob only gains ground if that ground is ceded. I refuse to cede the ground to the Kippers who I dislike (as a party - not R Tyndall of iSam of this parish) and think they are a busted flush. I value Britain for what it is and what it can be - socially liberal and open to the world. I refuse to let it be defined either by a closed minded hatred of foreigners or a fundamentally fearful desire to remain attached to an outdated and closed minded organisational structure better suited to an earlier age.
A blog sounds most interesting and a good prod for me.
I read a lot of Hadrians accounts in Latin at school and would love to learn more about this.
Hope to put it up tomorrow, so I'll post a link here.
https://twitter.com/samueltombs/status/699895158972801024
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.
Cameron is presently on the wrong side of the people who voted him in.
Incidentally, if Remain wins it's not going to be accepted by Leave as a "decision that will last for decades". Couple of years, maybe. (In fairness there are Remainers who might like to reopen the issue too, but rejoining, which would presumably mean joining the Euro, would be entirely impossible politically.)
How do we do that if the decision on taxing the City to death came via a QMV of countries with either no City or a wish to destroy ours?
SkyNews
The Supreme Court has ruled the law on joint enterprise has been wrongly interpreted by criminal trial judges over the past 30 years
Leaving the EU is about creating an illusion of sovereignty not actual sovereignty itself.'
Well that is just complete b*llsh*t
Are you suggesting to me that the MINI plant in Oxford is not competitive? The Nissan plant in Sunderland is one of if not the most efficient plant in the world. Are you telling me that the BAe plants making wings for airbus are not efficient? Is Rolls Royce making engines for aircraft manufacturers world wide not efficient?
Manufacturing in Britain is bigger than ever.
In the next few days, the actions and statements of politicians on the EU membership issue is going to get huge media. Some of their actions and statements - and the operation of the buzzwords and buzzphrases that leave their mouths - will influence the markets.
Implied probabilities at the Betfair exchange are currently running at 66.5% REMAIN, 33.5% LEAVE. How is that likely to change, in view of
- whether Cameron
a) heralds a great deal and says vote REMAIN,
b) heralds the best deal in the circumstances and says vote REMAIN,
c) says wait until the next summit and he'll try for a better deal, and he loves the EU so much, as he announces a vote date,
d) says the same and does not announce a vote date
e) says that he tried hard but unfortunately no deal was struck, so vote LEAVE
- whether for example
Hollande and Valls insist that the City of London and its global network need to be more strictly regulated at an international level, and that the British government won't see sense on the issue, and that therefore France is walking out of the talks. So no deal, leaving Cameron no option but to recommend voting LEAVE. The British press and the dual US-British national Boris Johnson will lambaste the "cheese eaters" for "not supporting safeguards for the City" (!), and Cameron's support for LEAVE will be blamed not on British policymakers or negotiators (perish the thought), but on foreigners and especially the French. Politico chatterers will start chattering about which cabinet ministers will support the REMAIN campaign, if they can find any.
In short: stuff's gonna 'appen soon. How will it affect the betting markets? Is anyone here invested in that question?
Here's the summary of my take (and I support REMAIN, so I am not being biased):
Not only support for REMAIN, but also interest in the case being made for REMAIN is sticky upwards. It will be the politicians and journalists who back LEAVE that much of the population will watch most intensely. Therefore I think LEAVE is a massive BUY at 2\1.
Betting-wise I am happy with my Leave investment.
I half heard someone expecting their appendix out had their fallopian tubes removed instead.
Nul points could become a thing of the past at the Eurovision Song Contest.
This year’s countrywide sing-off is changing the presentation of the ballot results in an attempt to keep viewer interest until the bitter end.
For the first time, the professional juries and the public voters from each country will each award a set of points from one to eight, 10 and 12 for each of the top 10 places. With twice as many points to be awarded, the chance of ending up with zero points is lower than ever.
It means the top 10 countries in both the jury and TV audience vote will receive points, although they could be the same countries.
The show will then unveil the results in two parts. After the jury points from each of the 43 participating countries have been awarded by each national spokesperson, the televoting points from all participating countries will be combined.
The scores will then be presented by the show’s hosts, starting at the bottom of the scoreboard and working their way to the top, building up towards the hoped-for climax.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/18/eurovision-song-contest-nul-points-uk
Need to while away the time as PM tries to thrash out deal? Try @thetimes' snakes & ladders, #EU style. Brilliant https://t.co/Yf1ZIWudrb
We could see some dramatic developments very soon.
If there's a bust-up we will probably see Leave shorten as there will be speculation that Cameron will change horse or that he has lost control of the situation.
Or... would it be seen as scripted "panto" and favourable for Remain?
Ipsos MORI CON voter split
REMAIN 53%
LEAVE 41%
Services won't be that much different.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/breaking-news-south-carolina-gov-nikki-haley-to-endorse-marco-rubio-219390
Please don't pay any attention to productivity statistics.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
Productivity correlated almost perfectly with economic participation rate: high levels of participation = low levels of productivity.
The best way to 'get productivity up' is to lower participation.
If British productivity was so bad, we would be the third most popular destination (as a % of GDP) in Europe for Foreign Direct Investment.
Neil Kinnock @BBCr4today says "its a true fact" that 51% of UK exports go to EU. Odd emphasis as it actually 44.6% https://t.co/RBP0CvfdwG
I am hugely cynical about the power states have wrt to global economics and don't see independence from the EU making a huge difference.
At best we'll get a lot more rhetoric at Westminster from the likes of Mogg and co, some superficial policy changes. All the substantial stuff will carry on.
At worst we'll be back to the 1970s and the mercy of economic events, but with far fewer friends than before. We might try to go it alone with a few odd policies, but with huge economic cost.
For me the EU holds the small possibility of a route out of such impotence. But I have no idea how a political culture will emerge to make the EU genuinely democratic.
It's a tough call.
I see the question of EU membership as a means, not an end. I do not will the ends that the bulk of Leavers will. Therefore I cannot sensibly line up with them.
How do you reach the conclusion in your second sentence? If Cameron backs LEAVE, then REMAIN will be finished. Cameron's popularity will rise - he'll be seen as a Churchill, not a Chamberlain - and REMAIN will be lucky to get as much support as the LDs did for electoral reform.
Meanwhile, any points raised by France about the City of London might get discussed on page 17 where few will notice. The British media will never accuse a British government and civil service elite of cocking up negotiations.
Essentially, if you price 'lower paid' workers out of the market (as France has done through its social charges) then you 'increase your productivity'.
correct Robert, though harder to use that kind of argument about the US
The demographic that actually turns out and votes (oldies) are the most likely to vote to LEAVE. Younger voters (most likely to REMAIN) are less likely to turn out on the day.
We also have to think about people lying to pollsters. REMAIN is perceived as trendy. Metropolitan.
LEAVE is perceived as xenophobes and closet racists. How many people will admit this to pollsters?
In this referendum REAMIN - Ed Miliband/Labour LEAVE - David Cameron/Conservatives.
Ironic...
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/feb/18/being-red-a-politics-for-the-future-ken-livingstone-review
No laughing at the back...