And here's another one from the Grauniad - Toyota this time
'The head of one of the world's biggest car companies reignited the debate over the single currency yesterday with a warning for the government that its £1.5bn investment in the UK would be at risk if Britain stayed out of the euro.'
'Toyota managers said yesterday that its UK operations, including a new £200m plant at Burnaston, Derbyshire, would be at risk '
"We told him that if the present situation continues, then at the very least it will be impossible to expand our operations in the UK. If there is no change in the long term, then we will have to decide whether even our existing operations should continue."
All sound very familiar? Looks like the Remain team have been digging through Danny Alexander's old notes
@RuthDavidsonMSP: Corbyn's making a big speech on how Labour caused the financial crash.He's just trolling his own side now, isn't he? https://t.co/txO8HuQK8G
When will David Cameron release the data on the number of active EU national insurance numbers?? As EU supporter Jonathan Portes says, it is outrageous to hide critical information from the UK public before they make their choices.
The biggest risk would be to pay any attention to people who have been consistently wrong or misleading on this issue for forty years. Including the Lib Dems (remember them...?)
Mr. P, it's Corbyn's unique brand of idiocy that is giving the Conservatives licence to have a civil war, because they're so unconcerned by Labour now. Of course, if Corbyn walked and the reds got a leader who wasn't stupid...
Qualifying (under the new rules, which come in from Spain onwards, apparently) will have only 8 cars in the final session. Seven will be removed in each of the previous sessions. Worth bearing in mind if you partake in the To Reach Q3 market.
OT Cameron's scriptwriters have raised their game recently. I just heard him describe Corbyn's economic policy follwing the appointment of financial avisor Yanis Varoufakis the Greek held responsible for leaving their economy in ruins as 'Acropolis Now'.
Mind you the material has got a lot better
Roger, as a regular of pb.com, you will have read the Acropolis Now gag times aplenty. As, it appears, have the PM's speechwriters.
If only there were a close advisor to the PM who might have been in Australia between 1989 and 1992, we might have someone in the frame for that pun...
I regular use the Acropolis Now pun in PB headers.
Last there were an awful lot of/a lot of awful Hellenic puns in my PB thread headers
Some of my faves
1) Turning the Greek Euro crisis into a Drachma
2) The Greeks have lost their marbles
3) Like a bat out of Hellas
4) Greece is going to be the centaur of attention
surely "...awful Hellenic puns in my Greek columns"?
Excellent. I also compared Greece's relationship with the Euro as the most disastrous relationship in that part of the world since Helen eloped with Paris.
I'd have had a lot more respect for Cameron if he'd gone on to describe Corbyn as "the face that launched a thousand splits"
Or John Prescott - as the face that munched a thousand chips.....
'I think he was making the point that wage rises are a bad thing, which is probably true from his point of view, but perhaps not from the point of view of the average voter.'
Indeed he was. I can't see that line playing awfully well with the large fraction of the voters who have seen very slow, if any, real pay growth this last several years. Unlike people such as 'Lord' Rose of course.
@PatrickO'Flynn: Do you think we should pull back double agent Lord Rose from behind enemy lines now? I am worried his cover is in danger of being blown.
OT Cameron's scriptwriters have raised their game recently. I just heard him describe Corbyn's economic policy follwing the appointment of financial avisor Yanis Varoufakis the Greek held responsible for leaving their economy in ruins as 'Acropolis Now'.
Mind you the material has got a lot better
Roger, as a regular of pb.com, you will have read the Acropolis Now gag times aplenty. As, it appears, have the PM's speechwriters.
If only there were a close advisor to the PM who might have been in Australia between 1989 and 1992, we might have someone in the frame for that pun...
I regular use the Acropolis Now pun in PB headers.
Last there were an awful lot of/a lot of awful Hellenic puns in my PB thread headers
Some of my faves
1) Turning the Greek Euro crisis into a Drachma
2) The Greeks have lost their marbles
3) Like a bat out of Hellas
4) Greece is going to be the centaur of attention
surely "...awful Hellenic puns in my Greek columns"?
Excellent. I also compared Greece's relationship with the Euro as the most disastrous relationship in that part of the world since Helen eloped with Paris.
I'd have had a lot more respect for Cameron if he'd gone on to describe Corbyn as "the face that launched a thousand splits"
Or John Prescott - as the face that munched a thousand chips.....
In Hampton Court Palace, there's fresco of Putti, one of whom is the spitting image of John Prescott.
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Rubio will hold out until he loses Florida, but I can see that Cruz wants to keep going. President Cruz is a scarier thing than President Trump.
Why is it scary? I'd definitely be voting Cruz if I lived in the USA.
Trump is a bit of a buffoon at times, but at heart not that radical. Ted Cruz is much more purposeful, and I do not like his purpose! I cannot see him being a good friend of the UK.
As stated the only place Cruz would be welcomed is Israel although he and Trump would be more likely to back the UK if it does Brexit than Hillary Clinton would
Any American President will back the UK post-Brexit.
They are excellent at dealing with the world as it is, not as they would like it to be.
If it's in America's interests to be friends with an independent Britain they will be. Although, I would expect them to take full advantage of that to screw us in a free trade agreement
It is precisely on any free trade agreement the Europhile Hillary Clinton would more likely screw the UK if it voted to quit the EU than Trump or Cruz would
No, they all will. American Presidents are very good at optimising the outcome for their country. Political calculation doesn't come into something like this (which would be waved through Congress on the nod)
Haven't they done enough screwing UK companies like BP and several of our banks? This is one of the reasons why being cast adrift with that lot as our main trading allies is so terrifying. At least the EU has clout and a clout that is growing as the US's is diminishing. Perhaps we'll soon start fining halliburton on an even playing field
@RuthDavidsonMSP: Corbyn's making a big speech on how Labour caused the financial crash.He's just trolling his own side now, isn't he? https://t.co/txO8HuQK8G
Maybe Corbyn read some old pb threads full of doubtless well-meant advice from Tory posters that Labour shoud fess up and move on.
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Indeed
Do you think ST changed anything?
Trump still value for POTUS?
No. Super Tuesday just reinforced the narrative.
It's Clinton v Trump in November with Clinton emerging the winner. The scale of her win being dependent on whether elements of the GOP decide to run a spoiler against him, well knowing it will be cataclysmic for Trump and down ticket races.
Jack how convinced are you Trump will be the nominee? I am not sure it's a banker yet. The current delegate count is 319 Trump/ 226 Cruz/ 110 Rubio.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
@RuthDavidsonMSP: Corbyn's making a big speech on how Labour caused the financial crash.He's just trolling his own side now, isn't he? https://t.co/txO8HuQK8G
Maybe Corbyn read some old pb threads full of doubtless well-meant advice from Tory posters that Labour shoud fess up and move on.
Ed Balls has been saying for years that Labour should have regulated more. This is another Corbyn strawman.
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Indeed
Do you think ST changed anything?
Trump still value for POTUS?
No. Super Tuesday just reinforced the narrative.
It's Clinton v Trump in November with Clinton emerging the winner. The scale of her win being dependent on whether elements of the GOP decide to run a spoiler against him, well knowing it will be cataclysmic for Trump and down ticket races.
Jack how convinced are you Trump will be the nominee? I am not sure it's a banker yet. The current delegate count is 319 Trump/ 226 Cruz/ 110 Rubio.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
I'm as convinced that Trump will be the GOP nominee as any rational analysis provides. You are correct to highlight the winner take all states looming but Trump is looking favourite to win most.
Trump would need to politically self combust not to be the nominee and if he is denied at the death having come so close I have little doubt he will run anyway and ensure a humiliation in November for the GOP.
Personally, I am now backing Hillary in hope of recovering losses on Rubio and Bush. I guess I'm an establishment sort of guy.
I'm laying Paul Ryan @ 579/1 if you're interested?
That's a *proper* establishment bet.
I've mostly written a thread about Paul Ryan becoming President next year. Might go up this weekend.
Hillary becomes POTUS, Hillary's VP is a Spiro Agnew, has to resign, the FBI indict and secure a conviction against Hillary, she resigns and next in line in the presidential line of succession is The Speaker of the House, one Paul Ryan.
Gently, Mr Tyrie returned him to the £3,000 claim. This was “a scandalous abuse of data,” said Mr Tyrie. “I deeply regret that you’re persisting in defending it.”
“You’re impugning my integrity!” shouted Lord Rose. “But that’s a fact of life!”
If it was a fact, it was the first one we’d heard all afternoon.
Personally, I am now backing Hillary in hope of recovering losses on Rubio and Bush. I guess I'm an establishment sort of guy.
I'm laying Paul Ryan @ 579/1 if you're interested?
That's a *proper* establishment bet.
I've mostly written a thread about Paul Ryan becoming President next year. Might go up this weekend.
Hillary becomes POTUS, Hillary's VP is a Spiro Agnew, has to resign, the FBI indict and secure a conviction against Hillary, she resigns and next in line in the presidential line of succession is The Speaker of the House, one Paul Ryan.
Unfortunately for @Pong and anyone green on Ryan, Betfair settles once the Electoral college vote decides I think.
Wow, the voice of Remain says if we Leave wages will rise.
In the Sun today Boris is in full flow, pointing out the same people predicting apocalypse if we didn't join the Euro are behind Project Fear now.
Nabavi gives an insightful view of the Cameroons - simply say what you have to, the truth is irrelevant. Cameron's "garbage" was "impressive". Admitting to being dishonest is a strange approach.
Personally, I am now backing Hillary in hope of recovering losses on Rubio and Bush. I guess I'm an establishment sort of guy.
I'm laying Paul Ryan @ 579/1 if you're interested?
That's a *proper* establishment bet.
I've mostly written a thread about Paul Ryan becoming President next year. Might go up this weekend.
Hillary becomes POTUS, Hillary's VP is a Spiro Agnew, has to resign, the FBI indict and secure a conviction against Hillary, she resigns and next in line in the presidential line of succession is The Speaker of the House, one Paul Ryan.
Unfortunately for @Pong and anyone green on Ryan, Betfair settles once the Electoral college vote decides I think.
I know. I would wonder if the FBi indictment falls between Election Day and Inauguration Day, what happens then?
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Indeed
Do you think ST changed anything?
Trump still value for POTUS?
No. Super Tuesday just reinforced the narrative.
It's Clinton v Trump in November with Clinton emerging the winner. The scale of her win being dependent on whether elements of the GOP decide to run a spoiler against him, well knowing it will be cataclysmic for Trump and down ticket races.
Jack how convinced are you Trump will be the nominee? I am not sure it's a banker yet. The current delegate count is 319 Trump/ 226 Cruz/ 110 Rubio.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
The delegate count has been skewed somewhat by Cruz having his home state early in the process.
Still to come in March we have the following major Winner Takes All Primaries for the Republicans:
Florida (99 delegates - last three polls there have Trump with 40%+); Missouri (52); Ohio (66 - question is whether Kasich still looks viable or whether he's gone - looks Trump's only adversary there); Arizona (58 - Trump has a 12% lead over Rubio, dated 23rd Feb).
I suspect things will look a little rosier for Trump after those...
Poor PMI figures this week. Feel like we're heading into slow down territory.
Poor in the UK and France. Germany had very good numbers, Italy improved and Spain continued to look positive.
Yes, well they have trillions of Mario's funny money sloshing around on the continent so positive figures in Europe are no surprise, France being unable to take advantage of the huge monetary stimulus is the bigger surprise (though only marginally).
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
"PredictIt is an educational purpose project of Victoria University, Wellington of New Zealand, a not-for-profit university, with support provided by Aristotle International, Inc., a U.S. provider of processing and verification services. Prediction markets, like this one, are attracting a lot of academic and practical interest (see our Research section). So, you get to challenge yourself and also help the experts better understand the wisdom of the crowd."
"Ladbrokes is an educational purpose project of @Shadsy. Prediction markets, like this one, are attracting a lot of academic and practical interest (see our Research section). So, you get to challenge yourself and also help the experts better understand the correct prices at Cheletenham."
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Rubio will hold out until he loses Florida, but I can see that Cruz wants to keep going. President Cruz is a scarier thing than President Trump.
Why is it scary? I'd definitely be voting Cruz if I lived in the USA.
Trump is a bit of a buffoon at times, but at heart not that radical. Ted Cruz is much more purposeful, and I do not like his purpose! I cannot see him being a good friend of the UK.
As stated the only place Cruz would be welcomed is Israel although he and Trump would be more likely to back the UK if it does Brexit than Hillary Clinton would
Any American President will back the UK post-Brexit.
They are excellent at dealing with the world as it is, not as they would like it to be.
If it's in America's interests to be friends with an independent Britain they will be. Although, I would expect them to take full advantage of that to screw us in a free trade agreement
It is precisely on any free trade agreement the Europhile Hillary Clinton would more likely screw the UK if it voted to quit the EU than Trump or Cruz would
No, they all will. American Presidents are very good at optimising the outcome for their country. Political calculation doesn't come into something like this (which would be waved through Congress on the nod)
Haven't they done enough screwing UK companies like BP and several of our banks? This is one of the reasons why being cast adrift with that lot as our main trading allies is so terrifying. At least the EU has clout and a clout that is growing as the US's is diminishing. Perhaps we'll soon start fining halliburton on an even playing field
We get screwed by the EU as well - even while we are inside.
For example: Germany and Italy want access for their auto engineering parts businesses to Mercosur. The trade off: opening the EU to prime Argentinian cattle.
The winners: Southern Germany / Northern Italy The losers: Scotland and Northern England
@RuthDavidsonMSP: Corbyn's making a big speech on how Labour caused the financial crash.He's just trolling his own side now, isn't he? https://t.co/txO8HuQK8G
Maybe Corbyn read some old pb threads full of doubtless well-meant advice from Tory posters that Labour shoud fess up and move on.
Ed Balls has been saying for years that Labour should have regulated more. This is another Corbyn strawman.
Just a shame Balls didn't think this when he was Brown's lackey...and could have actually done something about it (albeit, whilst wearing a Nokia phone deep within his forehead...)
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Indeed
Do you think ST changed anything?
Trump still value for POTUS?
No. Super Tuesday just reinforced the narrative.
It's Clinton v Trump in November with Clinton emerging the winner. The scale of her win being dependent on whether elements of the GOP decide to run a spoiler against him, well knowing it will be cataclysmic for Trump and down ticket races.
Jack how convinced are you Trump will be the nominee? I am not sure it's a banker yet. The current delegate count is 319 Trump/ 226 Cruz/ 110 Rubio.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
I'm as convinced that Trump will be the GOP nominee as any rational analysis provides. You are correct to highlight the winner take all states looming but Trump is looking favourite to win most.
Trump would need to politically self combust not to be the nominee and if he is denied at the death having come so close I have little doubt he will run anyway and ensure a humiliation in November for the GOP.
You are probably right but I still have a hunch that there might yet be final twist in the tale! I do agree that Trump will stand as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. GOP are in trouble either way - Tea Party Cruz is no certainly no upgrade on Trump, in fact some might say he is a step backwards.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
Peter Mandelson has been all over the media, wagging his finger and warning about Brexit like some deranged Old Testament prophet. It will be an economic disaster, he says.
We will lose trade, lose jobs, lose influence in Brussels. Well, he would have more credibility, frankly, if he had not said exactly the same thing 13 years ago.
“Staying out of the euro would prove a disaster”, he said then. “The price we would pay in lost trade and investment and jobs would be incalculable.”
Poor PMI figures this week. Feel like we're heading into slow down territory.
Poor in the UK and France. Germany had very good numbers, Italy improved and Spain continued to look positive.
Yes, well they have trillions of Mario's funny money sloshing around on the continent so positive figures in Europe are no surprise, France being unable to take advantage of the huge monetary stimulus is the bigger surprise (though only marginally).
Nevertheless, it does suggest that the developed world is not about to swing back into recession. (France excepted.)
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
Good Morning PBers Worldwide .... especially neurotic Bhutan travelling scribblers.
A whole day to get suitable comestibles at the ready for the GOP debate tonight.
Popcorn shares - Buy Buy Buy !!
Indeed
Do you think ST changed anything?
Trump still value for POTUS?
No. Super Tuesday just reinforced the narrative.
It's Clinton v Trump in November with Clinton emerging the winner. The scale of her win being dependent on whether elements of the GOP decide to run a spoiler against him, well knowing it will be cataclysmic for Trump and down ticket races.
Jack how convinced are you Trump will be the nominee? I am not sure it's a banker yet. The current delegate count is 319 Trump/ 226 Cruz/ 110 Rubio.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
I'm as convinced that Trump will be the GOP nominee as any rational analysis provides. You are correct to highlight the winner take all states looming but Trump is looking favourite to win most.
Trump would need to politically self combust not to be the nominee and if he is denied at the death having come so close I have little doubt he will run anyway and ensure a humiliation in November for the GOP.
You are probably right but I still have a hunch that there might yet be final twist in the tale! I do agree that Trump will stand as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. GOP are in trouble either way - Tea Party Cruz is no certainly no upgrade on Trump, in fact some might say he is a step backwards.
In terms of winning this year, if nominated, I think Trump would have a better chance than Cruz.
Mr. Roger, sounds like a super pub in your avatar. I wonder if it has a sister establishment called The Fabulous Lancer.
Ironically one of the few Soho establishments that isn't particularly gay. I just used it to seem inclusive
Err Roger, aside from Old Compton St, most of Soho isn't 'particularly gay'. Inclusive, yes, as is pretty much everywhere else.
The whole concept of a gay scene is dying. It has been disrupted by the internet. Why go to a pub that's a long way from home to drink bad overpriced beer and listen to awful music when you can get your oats at the click of a button or the swipe of a finger from the comfort of your own home?
Poor PMI figures this week. Feel like we're heading into slow down territory.
Poor in the UK and France. Germany had very good numbers, Italy improved and Spain continued to look positive.
Yes, well they have trillions of Mario's funny money sloshing around on the continent so positive figures in Europe are no surprise, France being unable to take advantage of the huge monetary stimulus is the bigger surprise (though only marginally).
Nevertheless, it does suggest that the developed world is not about to swing back into recession. (France excepted.)
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
If we vote to leave, I think Dave will just about hang on, he will placate the leavers by making Boris and Gove the chancellor and foreign secretary. The main issue is that there is no one to replace Dave. I'm more firmly in the leave camp than most and despite the crap and the lies, I still wouldn't want to remove Dave as PM in the event of a leave vote.
Peter Mandelson has been all over the media, wagging his finger and warning about Brexit like some deranged Old Testament prophet. It will be an economic disaster, he says.
We will lose trade, lose jobs, lose influence in Brussels. Well, he would have more credibility, frankly, if he had not said exactly the same thing 13 years ago.
“Staying out of the euro would prove a disaster”, he said then. “The price we would pay in lost trade and investment and jobs would be incalculable.”
These Euro-doom quotes are a hoot. Who could ever have thought that one day, we might have a referendum on the EU at which the veracity of these claims and the sagacity of those making them could be judged....
Poor PMI figures this week. Feel like we're heading into slow down territory.
Poor in the UK and France. Germany had very good numbers, Italy improved and Spain continued to look positive.
Yes, well they have trillions of Mario's funny money sloshing around on the continent so positive figures in Europe are no surprise, France being unable to take advantage of the huge monetary stimulus is the bigger surprise (though only marginally).
Nevertheless, it does suggest that the developed world is not about to swing back into recession. (France excepted.)
Yes, I did say slow down rather than recession. I could see a few quarters of bumping along at 0.2-0.3% with manufacturing in reverse.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
Mr. Roger, sounds like a super pub in your avatar. I wonder if it has a sister establishment called The Fabulous Lancer.
Ironically one of the few Soho establishments that isn't particularly gay. I just used it to seem inclusive
Err Roger, aside from Old Compton St, most of Soho isn't 'particularly gay'. Inclusive, yes, as is pretty much everywhere else.
The whole concept of a gay scene is dying. It has been disrupted by the internet. Why go to a pub that's a long way from home to drink bad overpriced beer and listen to awful music when you can get your oats at the click of a button or the swipe of a finger from the comfort of your own home?
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
If we vote to leave, I think Dave will just about hang on, he will placate the leavers by making Boris and Gove the chancellor and foreign secretary. The main issue is that there is no one to replace Dave. I'm more firmly in the leave camp than most and despite the crap and the lies, I still wouldn't want to remove Dave as PM in the event of a leave vote.
If Leave win, Cameron will go. He would only have been staying on for a year or two more anyway and he won't view it as worth his time and effort to stay. Plus his authority will be shot and enough of the awkward squad will be making his life too difficult.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
We are fair bursting with anticipation at another of your even-handed screeds....
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
Why bother. The same can easily be said of many in the Remain camp too.
However I am looking forward to your article on pensions, should the Smirking Osborne wreck the future prospects of yet more savers in the Budget, and nuke his leadership chances from orbit.
I know that everyone is only interested in the referendum, with the US election lagging a distant second, but there is some other news.
A few months ago there was a lot of discussion on here about a Court of Appeal decision about the application of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 in a case where an estranged daughter was provided for out of the estate in direct contradiction of a will that left everything to animal charities. This case is to be heard by the Supreme Court:
Peter Mandelson has been all over the media, wagging his finger and warning about Brexit like some deranged Old Testament prophet. It will be an economic disaster, he says.
We will lose trade, lose jobs, lose influence in Brussels. Well, he would have more credibility, frankly, if he had not said exactly the same thing 13 years ago.
“Staying out of the euro would prove a disaster”, he said then. “The price we would pay in lost trade and investment and jobs would be incalculable.”
These Euro-doom quotes are a hoot. Who could ever have thought that one day, we might have a referendum on the EU at which the veracity of these claims and the sagacity of those making them could be judged....
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
No, I'm interested in the views of people who aren't massive Europhiles. Honestly, that's why I read your headers Alastair! I think your reason for voting to remain is weak, but I wouldn't put you in the same camp as RichardN. If the FT get a few europhiles to feed them an article about how awful leaving the EU will be there shouldn't be much surprise as to the "meh" response it generates.
You say that the sceptics only want to listen to other sceptics, to me it is the europhiles who only want to hear from other europhiles. Maybe both statements are true.
As for the City, my view, and the view of our CEO/board, is that it won't make much difference. If we go for an EEA/EFTA style arrangement it will probably be a net gain as we could set our own terms of trade with RoW nations and only our financial trade with the EU would be governed by EU regulations.
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
If we vote to leave, I think Dave will just about hang on, he will placate the leavers by making Boris and Gove the chancellor and foreign secretary. The main issue is that there is no one to replace Dave. I'm more firmly in the leave camp than most and despite the crap and the lies, I still wouldn't want to remove Dave as PM in the event of a leave vote.
If Leave win, Cameron will go. He would only have been staying on for a year or two more anyway and he won't view it as worth his time and effort to stay. Plus his authority will be shot and enough of the awkward squad will be making his life too difficult.
If leave win, Corbyn is still in charge and Labour has no money, isn't there a fair chance of Cameron making the "principled" argument that an immediate GE is necessary so that the public can decide on the prospectus they want to bring to the Leave negotiations? Obviously he *really* doesn't want to stand but the risk of instability in a change of leader would be far too great so he can then rebrand his legacy as "the PM who lost the EU (and Scotland)" to "the PM who increased his vote at three consecutive GEs".
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
If we vote to leave, I think Dave will just about hang on, he will placate the leavers by making Boris and Gove the chancellor and foreign secretary. The main issue is that there is no one to replace Dave. I'm more firmly in the leave camp than most and despite the crap and the lies, I still wouldn't want to remove Dave as PM in the event of a leave vote.
If Leave win, Cameron will go. He would only have been staying on for a year or two more anyway and he won't view it as worth his time and effort to stay. Plus his authority will be shot and enough of the awkward squad will be making his life too difficult.
Which is why he will hand them Osborne and Hammond's heads on a platter. That will be enough, the awkward squad loathe Osborne (they think he isn't a real Tory) and they think Hammond is a traitor.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
Will there be a balancing article setting out all the list of folk who have the opposite view?
Since I want to "play in the green" on the republican side (Who knows at this point) 21.0 may well be worth taking. His chances in Florida might be better than the polls indicate as it is a closed primary.
Claim: Norway and Switzerland have to accept EU laws despite not being members in order to trade with it.
Conclusion: This is about right. Both Norway and Switzerland keep out of some EU activities, such as the Common Agricultural Policy. But they bring many of their laws into line with EU rules, on the single market in particular. Norway incorporates single market rules as they’re made, while Switzerland accepts EU law from time to time in return for more market access.
The Boris vs Osborne debate is interesting as it shows who Boris is really gunning for. I think Boris knows that there is no way he can become PM without serious Cabinet experience, if Leave wins he can make Osborne the fall guy and force his way into the Treasury. That lines him up well for 2018/19/20 when Dave stands down.
While Dave helpfully hangs around as a lame duck while he gains experience?
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
If we vote to leave, I think Dave will just about hang on, he will placate the leavers by making Boris and Gove the chancellor and foreign secretary. The main issue is that there is no one to replace Dave. I'm more firmly in the leave camp than most and despite the crap and the lies, I still wouldn't want to remove Dave as PM in the event of a leave vote.
If Leave win, Cameron will go. He would only have been staying on for a year or two more anyway and he won't view it as worth his time and effort to stay. Plus his authority will be shot and enough of the awkward squad will be making his life too difficult.
Which is why he will hand them Osborne and Hammond's heads on a platter. That will be enough, the awkward squad loathe Osborne (they think he isn't a real Tory) and they think Hammond is a traitor.
Why would Cameron want to limp on? He would be, to coin a phrase, in office but not in power. Unless he has a taste for public humiliation I can't see it.
Next from Project Fear “Head of the TUC The alternative is that we pay a heavy price for staying outside, and .... to have any real say in shaping the .... future.” , the chairman of Britain in Europe and a former President of the CBI, felt “convinced that inside .... on the right terms, Britain will be stronger in the world, not weaker; our economy and our people will be more prosperous not less; and our future will be confident, not backward looking.”
From 15 and 16 years ago. All about us staying out of the disastrous euro. Anyone remember that advice?
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
That'll be the FT that supported the ERM and Euro then.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
That'll be the FT that supported the ERM and Euro then.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
These are the same types who predicted (along with the FT) doom and gloom if we didn't join the Euro. You won't mind if I don't take them very seriously, especially Mike Rake, the CBI may as well be called the CEI.
One of the articles that I am planning to run in the near future will comprise simply a list of relatively disinterested establishment figures, home and abroad, and their comments on the idea of Britain leaving the EU, and the dismissive responses of prominent Leave campaigners. It should be quite a long list.
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
Doing your best to campaign for BSE. Every one is a keeper.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
That'll be the FT that supported the ERM and Euro then.
Bear defecates in wood - shock.
These quotes were from regular attendees at a forum that the FT organises most months. Previous recent subjects have included "Is the outlook all doom?", cybercrime and backstop liquidity facilities. Not so much the FT as people who the FT regards as the great and the good of the City.
Next from Project Fear “Head of the TUC The alternative is that we pay a heavy price for staying outside, and .... to have any real say in shaping the .... future.” , the chairman of Britain in Europe and a former President of the CBI, felt “convinced that inside .... on the right terms, Britain will be stronger in the world, not weaker; our economy and our people will be more prosperous not less; and our future will be confident, not backward looking.”
From 15 and 16 years ago. All about us staying out of the disastrous euro. Anyone remember that advice?
And never, EVER, a word of contrition......
Guys, the Euro: you got it horribly, hideously, stupendously wrong - wrong as wrong can ever be. We only ever want to hear one more word from you on matters European before you STFU about it for ever more.
Claim: Norway and Switzerland have to accept EU laws despite not being members in order to trade with it.
Conclusion: This is about right. Both Norway and Switzerland keep out of some EU activities, such as the Common Agricultural Policy. But they bring many of their laws into line with EU rules, on the single market in particular. Norway incorporates single market rules as they’re made, while Switzerland accepts EU law from time to time in return for more market access.
Seems this sad tale is a rather more complex story than some people have been pushing.
The British Transport Police report leaked to the press revealed Elliott’s three previous suicide attempts and battle with depression. The police report suggested Elliott, who was gay, had rowed with his parents about his sexuality – a claim they deny.
Claim: Norway and Switzerland have to accept EU laws despite not being members in order to trade with it.
Conclusion: This is about right. Both Norway and Switzerland keep out of some EU activities, such as the Common Agricultural Policy. But they bring many of their laws into line with EU rules, on the single market in particular. Norway incorporates single market rules as they’re made, while Switzerland accepts EU law from time to time in return for more market access.
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
That'll be the FT that supported the ERM and Euro then.
Bear defecates in wood - shock.
These quotes were from regular attendees at a forum that the FT organises most months. Previous recent subjects have included "Is the outlook all doom?", cybercrime and backstop liquidity facilities. Not so much the FT as people who the FT regards as the great and the good of the City.
If the Daily Mail had some quotes from "regular" people, do you think that would be representative of the population at large, or what the DM wanted to quote?
Claim: Norway and Switzerland have to accept EU laws despite not being members in order to trade with it.
Conclusion: This is about right. Both Norway and Switzerland keep out of some EU activities, such as the Common Agricultural Policy. But they bring many of their laws into line with EU rules, on the single market in particular. Norway incorporates single market rules as they’re made, while Switzerland accepts EU law from time to time in return for more market access.
Conveniently not mentioning its only a tiny fraction of the laws we have to abide by.
Nope......it does:
While emphasising that this isn’t an exact calculation, it concluded that Norway is roughly three quarters integrated into the EU compared to a typical EU member country......
......Leaving the numbers aside, the overall point the Outside and Inside report makes is that the EU has a great deal of influence over what Norway does.
'While emphasising that this isn’t an exact calculation, it concluded that Norway is roughly three quarters integrated into the EU compared to a typical EU member country'
Comments
https://t.co/txO8HuQK8G
That's a *proper* establishment bet.
Qualifying (under the new rules, which come in from Spain onwards, apparently) will have only 8 cars in the final session. Seven will be removed in each of the previous sessions. Worth bearing in mind if you partake in the To Reach Q3 market.
ere are some delegate-rich winner-takes-all states still to come - Florida (99) Illinois (69) Ohio (66) PA (71) and California (172)
If a stop-Trump movement got its act together we could still get a brokered convention from which Trump would be unlikely to emerge the winner. It's unlikely but I was surprised how close the delegate count still is. If Rubio somehow managed to take his own state (FLA) which is the next winner-take-all state up then it could get interesting.
Agree with your analysis that Clinton beats Trump although I think it could become quite close. All candidates tack to the centre in the general but Trump has made too many hostages to fortune in the past which will come back to haunt him. I'm sure the Dems will paint him as a very erratic man to have his finger on the nuclear button.
https://www.predictit.org/Contract/730/Will-Paul-Ryan-win-the-2016-US-presidential-election
Trump would need to politically self combust not to be the nominee and if he is denied at the death having come so close I have little doubt he will run anyway and ensure a humiliation in November for the GOP.
Hillary becomes POTUS, Hillary's VP is a Spiro Agnew, has to resign, the FBI indict and secure a conviction against Hillary, she resigns and next in line in the presidential line of succession is The Speaker of the House, one Paul Ryan.
"Will Bush be at 5% in the RCP average trolololol"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12180580/EU-referendum-Lord-Rose-makes-his-most-remarkable-blunder-yet.html
In the Sun today Boris is in full flow, pointing out the same people predicting apocalypse if we didn't join the Euro are behind Project Fear now.
Nabavi gives an insightful view of the Cameroons - simply say what you have to, the truth is irrelevant. Cameron's "garbage" was "impressive". Admitting to being dishonest is a strange approach.
Still to come in March we have the following major Winner Takes All Primaries for the Republicans:
Florida (99 delegates - last three polls there have Trump with 40%+); Missouri (52); Ohio (66 - question is whether Kasich still looks viable or whether he's gone - looks Trump's only adversary there); Arizona (58 - Trump has a 12% lead over Rubio, dated 23rd Feb).
I suspect things will look a little rosier for Trump after those...
http://goo.gl/KaKNYd
Now who is providing that quality service
(Apologies Sir Thomas More)
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10153963114934592&id=510394591&_rdr&fbt_id=10153963114934592&lul&ref_component=mbasic_photo_permalink_actionbar#s_9d943dd7911a7aebd392ecee92c27e21
I agree the chance of it happening is miniscule, but can you put enough money to work that the absolute returns justify the potential tail risk?
"Ladbrokes is an educational purpose project of @Shadsy. Prediction markets, like this one, are attracting a lot of academic and practical interest (see our Research section). So, you get to challenge yourself and also help the experts better understand the correct prices at Cheletenham."
For example: Germany and Italy want access for their auto engineering parts businesses to Mercosur. The trade off: opening the EU to prime Argentinian cattle.
The winners: Southern Germany / Northern Italy
The losers: Scotland and Northern England
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/03/david-davis-with-the-eu-referendum-looming-the-government-must-give-us-reliable-immigration-figures.html
I do agree that Trump will stand as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. GOP are in trouble either way - Tea Party Cruz is no certainly no upgrade on Trump, in fact some might say he is a step backwards.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e48f84de-e065-11e5-9217-6ae3733a2cd1.html#axzz41pF1NOz3
Those without access behind the paywall will probably be unsurprised to note that the consensus was firmly that Brexit was a bad idea. Sample quotes:
Stephen Hester: "I think most would accept that Brexit is unlikely to represent a long-term economic disaster for the UK or the City. However, there is virtually no argument that it would produce a better economic result than staying in, except one — animal spirits. The argument [is implausible] that somehow there is a well of entrepreneurship waiting to rise phoenixlike from an economy liberated from the dead hand of Brussels bureaucracy."
Sir Mike Rake: "at best a vote to leave will lead to significant uncertainty, slow up of investment, growth and jobs, and at worst could lead to unnecessary long term economic damage, both to the city and the UK as a whole."
Colm Kelleher: "The fact that so many Europeans can come here so easily to work in the services industries has had a very positive impact on making the City the leading global services centre that it is. And it’s a virtuous circle. As a major global financial centre, and EU’s pre-eminent financial centre, the City is a magnet for the brightest and best from across the continent. If the City’s status diminishes — as it would if the EU’s financial centre of gravity shifts to within the EU — then clearly the flow of talent to London would reduce as it went elsewhere. The virtuous circle would reverse, to the long-term detriment of the City."
A compromise *establishment* candidate really isn't a likely outcome, even if a contested convention is starting to look possible.
Still, who knows?
Jeb!'s time may yet come...
Cameron is gone if Leave win. That becomes clearer by the day.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/504661/Alternatives_to_membership_possible_models_for_the_UK_outside_the_EU_Accessible.pdf
Clinton 41 .. Trump 36
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/clinton_edges_ahead_of_trump_in_presidential_matchup
It seems that Leavers are only interested in the views of other Leavers.
clusterfuckParty.Just need to replay that absurd quote over and over again.
However I am looking forward to your article on pensions, should the Smirking Osborne wreck the future prospects of yet more savers in the Budget, and nuke his leadership chances from orbit.
A few months ago there was a lot of discussion on here about a Court of Appeal decision about the application of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 in a case where an estranged daughter was provided for out of the estate in direct contradiction of a will that left everything to animal charities. This case is to be heard by the Supreme Court:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e0db31d4-e07a-11e5-9217-6ae3733a2cd1.html#axzz41pF1NOz3
That the Eurozone has been a total dog's breakfast, just adds to the gaiety of the doom mongering. These Euro-doom quotes are a hoot. Who could ever have thought that one day, we might have a referendum on the EU at which the veracity of these claims and the sagacity of those making them could be judged....
You say that the sceptics only want to listen to other sceptics, to me it is the europhiles who only want to hear from other europhiles. Maybe both statements are true.
As for the City, my view, and the view of our CEO/board, is that it won't make much difference. If we go for an EEA/EFTA style arrangement it will probably be a net gain as we could set our own terms of trade with RoW nations and only our financial trade with the EU would be governed by EU regulations.
One of the benefits of betfair.
Since I want to "play in the green" on the republican side (Who knows at this point) 21.0 may well be worth taking. His chances in Florida might be better than the polls indicate as it is a closed primary.
Claim: Norway and Switzerland have to accept EU laws despite not being members in order to trade with it.
Conclusion: This is about right. Both Norway and Switzerland keep out of some EU activities, such as the Common Agricultural Policy. But they bring many of their laws into line with EU rules, on the single market in particular. Norway incorporates single market rules as they’re made, while Switzerland accepts EU law from time to time in return for more market access.
https://fullfact.org/europe/norway-switzerland-eu-laws/
“Head of the TUC The alternative is that we pay a heavy price for staying outside, and .... to have any real say in shaping the .... future.” , the chairman of Britain in Europe and a former President of the CBI, felt “convinced that inside .... on the right terms, Britain will be stronger in the world, not weaker; our economy and our people will be more prosperous not less; and our future will be confident, not backward looking.”
From 15 and 16 years ago. All about us staying out of the disastrous euro. Anyone remember that advice?
Bear defecates in wood - shock.
How real is Donald Trump's hair?
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35711752
It's unlikely but boy oh boy do I hope Leave win.
Your posts here afterwards would be priceless.
Guys, the Euro: you got it horribly, hideously, stupendously wrong - wrong as wrong can ever be. We only ever want to hear one more word from you on matters European before you STFU about it for ever more.
That word? "Sorry...."
I'm sure we all look forward to your list of these 'disinterested' individuals. I imagine most will be about as 'disinterested' as you are.
The British Transport Police report leaked to the press revealed Elliott’s three previous suicide attempts and battle with depression. The police report suggested Elliott, who was gay, had rowed with his parents about his sexuality – a claim they deny.
http://order-order.com/2016/03/02/johnson-family-lawyers-play-down-pre-existing-vulnerabilities/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgrB2yAPPlQ
If the Daily Mail had some quotes from "regular" people, do you think that would be representative of the population at large, or what the DM wanted to quote?
Apply to FT.
While emphasising that this isn’t an exact calculation, it concluded that Norway is roughly three quarters integrated into the EU compared to a typical EU member country......
......Leaving the numbers aside, the overall point the Outside and Inside report makes is that the EU has a great deal of influence over what Norway does.
What does that mean - precisely?