Mr. Tyson, must admit that modern painters aren't a group with which I'm familiar.
Ramses II lived so long it was a disaster when he died. All his children were already dead and nobody could remember how the ceremonies for a new pharaoh were meant to go.
MD - that's complete conjecture isn't it? The chance of the Egyptian Super-state saying that they don't have a clue must be small.
I have consistently said that I expected Remain to win and frankly expected them to win fairly easily given all the advantages that they had.
Now, at the end of days (according to Alastair at least) I have changed my mind. I think Leave are going to win. Just. Or Remain. Not sure. Yeah, Leave. 52:48.
Gulp.
PS how do you think BREXIT would play out in Scotland?
I think Sturgeon is bluffing. She won't call indyref 2 on the basis of a future iScotland joining the EU because that really WOULD mean frontiers at Berwick and a true currency nightmare. so even if she could negotiate the legal obstacles to a second vote (very hard as the UK would at the same time be thrashing out its own EU divorce) she'd likely lose her next referendum, too.
But I have called Scottish politics wrong, in the recent past. And she would be under severe pressure from frothier Nats to stage another plebiscite.
In terms of Scottish Independence, a Brexit vote puts Unionists in a rather difficult situation. They need to hope that the fallout post Leave is bad enough to confirm their dire warnings. If it is not, and I think it will be relatively benign, then the likelihood of another Project Fear working in a second Indyref becomes very unlikely.
That's not good for the Establishment. Hope the economy tanks or accept Scotland goes her own way. A poorer Britain or a broken Britain, if you will.
Yep, that sounds about right to me. Though if things really tank post-Brexit, Scots may well conclude that they have very little left to lose anyway. If English voters can vote against their economic self-interest, why not Scots?
Yes, I think you are right. A Leave vote is the ideal scenario for Scottish Independence. If the economy doesn't tank, the warnings will fail next referendum, if it does tank, there is going to be no reason not to jettison the rest of the UK. Its a proper win/win.
Yep, that's how I see it. Experts can be safely ignored in our new post-truth world. I don't think it is a huge coincidence that every Unionist big hitter in Scotland is on the Remain side. They know what's coming when we Leave.
The problem is that "experts" have been soundly abused by the Remain camp. If a scientist talks to me about his or her area of expertise I'm fascinated and keen to learn more. If they talk to me about university finance I get a little bit skeptical about vested interests. If they talk to me about politics, I'll give their views as much time as I did give to the views of, say, Posh Spice.
The maths are awful for Remain. As I said this morning.
Electorate 46 Million
NI, Scotland, London = 10 Million
Wales and Rest of England = 36 Million.
Even if Scotland/NI/London vote 70-30 remain a 55.5-44.5 leave vote in Rest of England is enough.
Outside the university cities like Oxford, Norwich, Exeter and a few other Cities like Brighton & Manchester (city not greater) where will the votes for Remain come from?
Sorry but Remain have had it.
'Kin hell, even IOS would blush at the hubris you're displaying.
Hubris? I was being kind and working on 100% turnout.
If you want hubris plug the yougov age/turnout figures in and it gets even worse for remain.
maths dosent lie
You wrote Sorry but Remain have had it.
Considering your hyperbole the other day that 27% of the electorate have already voted for Leave by post, I'm finding your posts really funny.
The maths are awful for Remain. As I said this morning.
Electorate 46 Million
NI, Scotland, London = 10 Million
Wales and Rest of England = 36 Million.
Even if Scotland/NI/London vote 70-30 remain a 55.5-44.5 leave vote in Rest of England is enough.
Outside the university cities like Oxford, Norwich, Exeter and a few other Cities like Brighton & Manchester (city not greater) where will the votes for Remain come from?
Sorry but Remain have had it.
Rubbish, the Kent poll posted earlier showed Remain winning Tunbridge Wells, Tonbridge and Malling, Sevenoaks, Canterbury and Gravesham. Yes Leave won more Kent seats overall but results like that should be enough to keep Leave under 55% across England even if it wins a majority in England thus allowing Scotland and London to give Remain a narrow lead across the UK
And I will raise you with remain wont get anywhere near the 70% worst case I assumed in those places. Probably nearer 60-40
I will also argue Leave will be much nearer 50% than 55% in England and Wales if they break 50% at all, in Scotland Remain will certainly get more than 60%
Scotland I agree, but NI and London will bring down the average.
If you think rest of england and wales excl london will get below 50% you are being very optimistic to say the least.
Including London England and Wales may well be under 50% Leave , excluding London I would agree it will probably be above 50% Leave but still not above 55%
If Remain has to win I would actually hope Leave is under in England and Wales, just so there less (but not no) hard feelings about the biggest Home nation voting for Leave. I know include London separate to the south, but it is the capital, so it's ok it pushes Leave in England under 50, it counts.
Indeed, I would agree Leave will certainly win provincial England, if Remain win 51-49 it will be touch and go whether London adds enough to Remain's total to take it over 50% in England
Does that make me a failure in PB world or someone who spends too much time in the real world ?
Actually I do have a few utterly insignificant anecdotes but I'd have to multiply them by ten to make them seem worthwhile. Is that what you're meant to do ?
Although not yet coming off the fence as such, OGH seems to be giving us a gentle nudge towards LEAVE. Looking at the state of the polls and their direction of travel, it seems extraordinary to me that 36 hours before the polling stations open it's still possible to back LEAVE at fully 3/1. I can only assume that there is a firm belief that when it actually comes to entering the cross in the box the status quo/hold on to nurse factor, call it what you will, comes into play and will ultimately determine the outcome in favour of REMAIN. That may well prove to be the case, but I for one wouldn't be prepared to bet on it at odds of 1/4.
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
I'd say it prospered between 1460 and 1509 before being frittered away on monarchical grandstanding and religious bigotry during the following half century.
Mr. Tyson, longevity can be dashed hard to predict. In the Middle Ages life expectancy was atrocious, but Henry III, Edward I and Edward III all lived very long lives (Edward II didn't, but that was due to incompetence on his part).
Mr. Dancer, medieval life-expectancy figures are often skewed by the very large numbers of people who died in childhood. If a person could get through to adulthood, then they had a pretty good chance of making a decent innings. That applied especially to the wealthier classes who lived in more sanitary conditions and so were less exposed to the infectious diseases that today we shrug off but in those days were real killers.
Until the mid-twentieth century possibly the biggest medical advance in terms of lives saved was getting doctors to wash their hands before and after attending ladies in childbirth.
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
If you add in the totals for NI Remain parties at the general election (25% SF, 16% UUP, 14% SDLP, 9% Alliance) you get to 64% while the NI Leave parties (26% DUP, 3% UKIP, 2% TUV) total 31%
The papers are all over the Queen's three questions
Is this getting serious?
God Save our Gracious Queen. Long live our noble Queen. God Save our Queen. Send her victorious. Happy and Glorious. Long to reign over us. God save our Queen.
I will stop here before I write some stanzas that will really annoy Malcolm in a General Way(de)
BBC has a shortened evening news for the football tonight. And its being dominated by an interview with Jo Cox widower. The first 6 minutes of a 15 minute bulletin. Then they follow it up with Dave's pleading at the lectern.
If anything, I would suggest the BBC bias this week is worse than that in the Scottish referendum.
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
I'd say it prospered between 1460 and 1509 before being frittered away on monarchical grandstanding and religious bigotry during the following half century.
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
If you add in the totals for NI Remain parties at the general election (25% SF, 16% UUP, 14% SDLP, 9% Alliance) you get to 64% while the NI Leave parties (26% DUP, 3% UKIP, 2% TUV) total 31%
I haven't read his piece, but I think the case that the UK economy is uniquely vulnerable does have some merit. I call this the Triple Deficit problem.
Of all the major economies in the world, we run by far the biggest current account deficit (current account is like trade balance, plus a few other things, such as investment income / cost). This means that to pay our bills, we need to import capital from abroad. This can be achieved in a number of ways: we can issue debt that is bought by foreigners, or we can sell assets (like expensive London real estate or British businesses). In both cases, however, the impact is that you bring capital into the UK now, but you set up a long-term stream of payments out of the UK. It becomes, therefore, a long-term tax on the UK economy.
Furthermore, we still have one of the worst budget deficits of the major economies. This means that we have remarkably little flexibility should things go wrong.
Finally, UK households are extremely indebted. Yes, yes, I know this is because house prices are so high in the UK. But this also brings with it fragility: imagine that UK housing moved down 25% in Sterling terms. (And I believe - and I realise I'm in a minority of one - that prime London could easily move 50%.)
The problem is a simple one: staying in the EU is likely to exacerbate these issues over time. Leaving the EU is likely to result in them being solved in an extremely painful and abrupt manner.
Addressing that means addressing the 'spend,me, now' culture. We are living greatly beyond our means, borrowing from the future and selling off the past, as well as spending today's income. Putting things back on a stable footing will mean addressing that mentality as much as the finances.
I've said repeatedly here and elsewhere that we have to concentrate on quality of life rather than wealth and living standards.
One of the many problems in using wealth as a measure of success is that it encourages resentment to others - if 'keeping up with the Joneses' is how you are judged, then taking from the Joneses becomes an inevitable goal.
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
If you add in the totals for NI Remain parties at the general election (25% SF, 16% UUP, 14% SDLP, 9% Alliance) you get to 64% while the NI Leave parties (26% DUP, 3% UKIP, 2% TUV) total 31%
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
If you add in the totals for NI Remain parties at the general election (25% SF, 16% UUP, 14% SDLP, 9% Alliance) you get to 64% while the NI Leave parties (26% DUP, 3% UKIP, 2% TUV) total 31%
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
I'd say it prospered between 1460 and 1509 before being frittered away on monarchical grandstanding and religious bigotry during the following half century.
During the War of the Roses?!?
Edward IV was a very progressive king IIRC and Towton in 1461 was the decisive battle.
The maths are awful for Remain. As I said this morning.
Electorate 46 Million
NI, Scotland, London = 10 Million
Wales and Rest of England = 36 Million.
Even if Scotland/NI/London vote 70-30 remain a 55.5-44.5 leave vote in Rest of England is enough.
Outside the university cities like Oxford, Norwich, Exeter and a few other Cities like Brighton & Manchester (city not greater) where will the votes for Remain come from?
Sorry but Remain have had it.
'Kin hell, even IOS would blush at the hubris you're displaying.
Hubris? I was being kind and working on 100% turnout.
If you want hubris plug the yougov age/turnout figures in and it gets even worse for remain.
maths dosent lie
You wrote Sorry but Remain have had it.
Considering your hyperbole the other day that 27% of the electorate have already voted for Leave by post, I'm finding your posts really funny.
Tempers starting to fray here, emotions running high, insults coming thick and fast, no real surprise as the vote gets nearer. Whatever the result, one side will be elated, the other in the depths of despair - but - life will go on, whoever loses will get over it, and eventually normality will return.
Personally, I'll probably be better off with a Remain vote (I have a sizeable share portfolio), but I still believe Leave is the way to go - even if I lose out in the short term.
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
If you add in the totals for NI Remain parties at the general election (25% SF, 16% UUP, 14% SDLP, 9% Alliance) you get to 64% while the NI Leave parties (26% DUP, 3% UKIP, 2% TUV) total 31%
BBC has a shortened evening news for the football tonight. And its being dominated by an interview with Jo Cox widower. The first 6 minutes of a 15 minute bulletin. Then they follow it up with Dave's pleading at the lectern.
If anything, I would suggest the BBC bias this week is worse than that in the Scottish referendum.
Why do you think David Cameron spoke from Downing Street this pm if it wasn't to dominate the news until the post BBC debate tonight. Then tomorrow Beckham and James Bond featuring before the Jo Cox event in the afternoon. There could be a big 'cock up' tonight from either side and this event is important to both sides
It would be highly amusing if England and Wales voted narrowly Leave, Scotland voted Remain but not by enough to overturn the English and Welsh vote and we had to wait for NI to declare to get a result. NI declares and puts Remain ahead by 50.01% entirely due to UUP voters. So we Remain in the EU due to the Ulster Unionist Party!
It would be highly amusing if England and Wales voted narrowly Leave, Scotland voted Remain but not by enough to overturn the English and Welsh vote and we had to wait for NI to declare to get a result. NI declares and puts Remain ahead by 50.01% entirely due to UUP voters. So we Remain in the EU due to the Ulster Unionist Party!
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
I'd say it prospered between 1460 and 1509 before being frittered away on monarchical grandstanding and religious bigotry during the following half century.
During the War of the Roses?!?
Edward IV was a very progressive king IIRC and Towton in 1461 was the decisive battle.
I'll give you Edward IV (at least in his early years), but post 1483 I really struggle.
Don't forget the question was "relatively" not absolutely.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
Guess you shouldnt have suppressed it for 15 years then.
@SuzanneEvans1: In the arena & this audience doesn't feel balanced at all. Overheard remainers bragging about coming in on #VoteLeave tickets. #EUDebate
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
I'd say it prospered between 1460 and 1509 before being frittered away on monarchical grandstanding and religious bigotry during the following half century.
During the War of the Roses?!?
Edward IV was a very progressive king IIRC and Towton in 1461 was the decisive battle.
I'll give you Edward IV (at least in his early years), but post 1483 I really struggle.
Don't forget the question was "relatively" not absolutely.
Post-1485 was a very effective austerity government.
Richard III could well have made a good king had he been given the chance. He was an excellent administrator under his brother. Alternatively, he might have been a good number two who wasn't up to the top job: we never had the opportunity to find out.
It would be highly amusing if England and Wales voted narrowly Leave, Scotland voted Remain but not by enough to overturn the English and Welsh vote and we had to wait for NI to declare to get a result. NI declares and puts Remain ahead by 50.01% entirely due to UUP voters. So we Remain in the EU due to the Ulster Unionist Party!
I doubt every single UUP voter will be REMAIN!
No but it is the fact the UUP has come out for Remain which avoids the Referendum being split entirely down sectarian lines and gives Remain a larger lead in NI than it would otherwise have had
Many thanks to the fellow who dropped by my prize from the PB London Mayor NoJam. The combination of maps and politics in book form has been squirrelled away from my partner who would not approve. Some 5 years ago I came Joint top in the Eastleigh by election NoJam, though my GE and Sindy entrances were less good.
PBers of a delicate constitution may need to take heed; my NoJam Brexit was:
Leave on 41.57, turnout 67.34%
It is Foxys little pungent dropping rather than a product of Jacks ARSE4EU, but nevertheless...
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
And who's fault do you think that it is?
This debate should have happened properly a long time ago, without accusations of racism and sneering condescendence. Instead, Cameron gambled with these fears in his manifesto at the last election and is now paying for it.
I have consistently said that I expected Remain to win and frankly expected them to win fairly easily given all the advantages that they had.
Now, at the end of days (according to Alastair at least) I have changed my mind. I think Leave are going to win. Just. Or Remain. Not sure. Yeah, Leave. 52:48.
Gulp.
PS how do you think BREXIT would play out in Scotland?
I think Sturgeon is bluffing. She won' her next referendum, too.
But I have called Scottish politics wrong, in the recent past. And she would be under severe pressure from frothier Nats to stage another plebiscite.
Fear working in a second Indyref becomes very unlikely.
That's not good for the Establishment. Hope the economy tanks or accept Scotland goes her own way. A poorer Britain or a broken Britain, if you will.
Yep, that sounds about right to me. Though if things really tank post-Brexit, Scots may well conclude that they have very little left to lose anyway. If English voters can vote against their economic self-interest, why not Scots?
Yes, I think you are right. A Leave vote is the ideal scenario for Scottish Independence. If the economy doesn't tank, the warnings will fail next referendum, if it does tank, there is going to be no reason not to jettison the rest of the UK. Its a proper win/win.
Yep, that's how I see it. Experts can be safely ignored in our new post-truth world. I don't think it is a huge coincidence that every Unionist big hitter in Scotland is on the Remain side. They know what's coming when we Leave.
The problem is that "experts" have been soundly abused by the Remain camp. If a scientist talks to me about his or her area of expertise I'm fascinated and keen to learn more. If they talk to me about university finance I get a little bit skeptical about vested interests. If they talk to me about politics, I'll give their views as much time as I did give to the views of, say, Posh Spice.
What about respected organisations, whose business is to make economic forecasts?
BBC has a shortened evening news for the football tonight. And its being dominated by an interview with Jo Cox widower. The first 6 minutes of a 15 minute bulletin. Then they follow it up with Dave's pleading at the lectern.
If anything, I would suggest the BBC bias this week is worse than that in the Scottish referendum.
I found that interview deeply uncomfortable. That poor fella is clearly still in shock, and who wouldn't be. What I find despicable is Jo Cox's personal and political beliefs being wrapped up in the Remain campaign, and the implication that people who do not vote the way she would have are somehow bad people, or are racists, or bigots, or are unkind, or mean minded, or are little Englanders incapable of empathy. David Cameron has shamelessly exploited the murder of an MP to further his cause, and so have Labour.
I can handle a robust debate, but I cannot accept naked emotional blackmail and the attempt to make millions of decent people feel bad because of an isolated tragedy of an MP who was well known in her support for the EU.
Am I the only one thinking the turnout is being overblown a bit? As far as I see it I'm not sure turnout is going to be much higher than the GE, if that.
Scotland has lost 100K voters since the election? Weird. And a feather in the scales for Leave. Probably. Depending who has come off the register. Oh never mind.
EU Nationals come off, the EU vote isn't that interesting, so lots of people haven't been incentivised to go on. Its a good indicator for a sub 55% turnout in Scotland.
Down over 15% from the general election? It'll be low but not that low.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
And Remain hasn't done any of that? Global Brexit recession, WW3, Osborne's punishment budget ring any bells?
I have consistently said that I expected Remain to win and frankly expected them to win fairly easily given all the advantages that they had.
Now, at the end of days (according to Alastair at least) I have changed my mind. I think Leave are going to win. Just. Or Remain. Not sure. Yeah, Leave. 52:48.
Gulp.
PS how do you think BREXIT would play out in Scotland?
I think Sturgeon is bluffing. She won' her next referendum, too.
But I have called Scottish politics wrong, in the recent past. And she would be under severe pressure from frothier Nats to stage another plebiscite.
Fear working in a second Indyref becomes very unlikely.
That's not good for the Establishment. Hope the economy tanks or accept Scotland goes her own way. A poorer Britain or a broken Britain, if you will.
Yep, that sounds about right to me. Though if things really tank post-Brexit, Scots may well conclude that they have very little left to lose anyway. If English voters can vote against their economic self-interest, why not Scots?
Yes, I think you are right. A Leave vote is the ideal scenario for Scottish Independence. If the economy doesn't tank, the warnings will fail next referendum, if it does tank, there is going to be no reason not to jettison the rest of the UK. Its a proper win/win.
Yep, that's how I see it. Experts can be safely ignored in our new post-truth world. I don't think it is a huge coincidence that every Unionist big hitter in Scotland is on the Remain side. They know what's coming when we Leave.
The problem is that "experts" have been soundly abused by the Remain camp. If a scientist talks to me about his or her area of expertise I'm fascinated and keen to learn more. If they talk to me about university finance I get a little bit skeptical about vested interests. If they talk to me about politics, I'll give their views as much time as I did give to the views of, say, Posh Spice.
What about respected organisations, whose business is to make economic forecasts?
Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish has slammed the Premier League's claim that all 20 top-flight clubs want to stay in the European Union.
And the Eagles co-owner claimed celebrity endorsements from stars like David Beckham was “the politics of the playground”.
Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore claimed yesterday that the 20 clubs backed a Yes vote at the recent AGM because leaving would be “incongruous” to its commitment to “openness”. This was then re-tweeted by David Cameron.
But Parish told BBC Radio 5 Live: “We didn't have a vote. Every single position in the Premier League requires a vote. Unlike some of the things in the EU, the Premier League is a democracy and we get to vote for things. And we didn't vote for that. This club would like to distance itself from that statement. I don't think it is for Premier League clubs to decide how people vote.
"Unless I fell asleep in a meeting which I don't think I did, we didn't have a vote on whether we endorsed a view to stay in Europe.
“And for me, I don't think it is the position of a football club to tell anyone to vote in any election. It is extraordinary that David Cameron would tweet that as a fact and use our logo as if we are endorsing one view or another. We were never asked.
"We have probably got a split inside our ownership group, we haven't debated it internally and we would certainly like our supporters to vote with their conscience and based on the facts that they know and not because the football club is encouraging them to do anything.”
Parish added: “I think people are fed up. In the last two days, David Beckham has said we should stay in – it is the politics of the playground for me.
"Let's marshal as many people that we revere and respect on each side and try and get them to force people's view. I think people are fed up with the whole campaign and for me to put all 20 Premier League clubs in favour of remain in the hope that maybe football fans will vote for Remain because they see their club's logo - is that how we want to stay in the EU or leave? - it is very disappointing for me.”
Withdrawing from the EU could pose problems for European players gaining the automatic right to play here like now.
But the Palace boss, a successful businessman who sold his international design and production agency Tag Worldwide in 2011, said: “If we were to leave, we could give anyone we want a work permit from anywhere in the world. You are not honestly saying if we left the EU, the UK government would say we couldn't have German footballers here.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
Guess you should have suppressed it for 15 years then.
I'm presuming you mean shouldn't have.
No you're right, that'll serve us right. The general hysteria which I agree prevented a sensible discussion about immigration has now resulted in us lopping off our noses to show our faces just who is boss.
I note you start with "If the UK prospers". That is a big if.
Really??
I would suggest that history is overwhelmingly against you.
When, in the last 10 centuries of freedom and independence has England/Britain NOT prospered, relatively?
1189 - 1558?
An interesting choice of dates Mr. Charles, not that I would agree with them.
The fourteenth century in the run up to the Black Death saw a huge expansion of wealth and the wool trade (the foundation of England's wealth) really getting into its stride as feudalism was ditched. Post Black death the GDP per capita, as we would call it now, increased even more (OK, there were some hiccups along the way as the ruling class tried to turn the clock back).
I'd be prepared to argue that despite the Wars of the Roses the English economy was, with the usual business cycles, making the England more prosperous right up until Henry VIII. It then picked up again when Elizabeth I got control and really didn't stop for the next few hundred years. Even then it only became relatively poorer in the late 19th century as Germany and America, unburdened with the costs of Empire*, overtook us.
Now, how much of that was down to free-trade is a moot point. England possibly invented mercantilism, or perhaps it copied it from places like Venice, but it certainly made it work to its own advantage. Just as China (and Germany) is doing today.
* Sorry I know that the EIC etc is a tender point for you.
When all is said and done, when people feel they have nothing to lose by voting Leave, they will. Despite things being good in this country, a lot of people don't feel optimistic about the future and their children's future. There's no optimism about the remain campaign, it's purely fear, and if you are scared already, fear doesn't work.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
And who's fault do you think that it is?
This debate should have happened properly a long time ago, without accusations of racism and sneering condescendence. Instead, Cameron gambled with these fears in his manifesto at the last election and is now paying for it.
I don't disagree and if I were to be party political about it, I would say that of the two main parties, not only were Labour more culpable, but they actually as we know enacted policies designed to exacerbate the problem.
But we are where we are. My point is that we are now hugely over-reacting to the issue by torching our economy while the the issue of immigration, although challenging, is not wholly insoluble inside the EU.
When all is said and done, when people feel they have nothing to lose by voting Leave, they will. Despite things being good in this country, a lot of people don't feel optimistic about the future and their children's future. There's no optimism about the remain campaign, it's purely fear, and if you are scared already, fear doesn't work.
When all is said and done, when people feel they have nothing to lose by voting Leave, they will. Despite things being good in this country, a lot of people don't feel optimistic about the future and their children's future. There's no optimism about the remain campaign, it's purely fear, and if you are scared already, fear doesn't work.
Well said. If the PM had run a positive campaign and stayed away from it himself, he would in all likelihood now be looking at a repeat of the 1975 result. Instead, he's looking at a very long night on Thursday, and it's entirely of his own making.
...Airplane wings are a very specialist skill and there are very few other locations for that expertise than the UK...
Depends on your definition of "very few". If you limit it to other manufacturers of Airbus components, then Spain could do it easily (they make the horizontal tailplanes, which are basically weeny wings). If you expand the circle to include the Eurofighter manufacturers, then Germany and Italy could do it because they make the wings for that.
If you expanded the circle further to include "people who build aircraft" then you're looking at USA, Sweden, Brazil, Russia, India, China...
It would be difficult to move wing manufacture outside the UK simply on grounds of cost-effectiveness, but the idea that the UK has a world monopoly on flexy thin loadbearing structures doesn't really, er, fly...
*Anecdote Alert* This anecdote is meaningless but I feel left out. I saw the first posters of the campaign today. One in the window of a house then two stakeboards on public verges. All for Leave. I imagine my Borough will have one of the highest Leave votes in the country. More seriously there have been far more Union flags and St George's Crosses here than I've ever seen for the Birthday/Football period. I suspect subconsciously this is about the Referendum.
@DavidL I don't think a Leave vote would be the end of days. It would be less important for the decision itself and more important for how the decision had been made.
It would be a terrible blow to the essential decency of this nation, a blow against openness to the outside world and a blow against any rational weighing of evidence. It would mean that xenophobic playing on public fears had been successful. It would mean that the confederacy of dunces tallied over 50% of the voting public. All that would be a terrible indictment of the British people.
I would be fearful for the future of the country, given the many entirely unnecessary risks that Britain would now be running, but more than that I would feel a deep sense of shame for the bad way in which my country had made a bad decision. I expect that one way or another Britain would make the best of a bad job if it voted to Leave, but it would be a bad job.
We vote the way we wish to. Do you really believe that it's somehow indecent to vote to Leave?
We are presumably allowed to have an opinion on the various options on offer, aren't we?
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
+1
Why anyone would want to put the country in the hands of a movement of which Boris, IDS and Gove are the moderate sensible wing is beyond me......
...Airplane wings are a very specialist skill and there are very few other locations for that expertise than the UK...
Depends on your definition of "very few". If you limit it to other manufacturers of Airbus components, then Spain could do it easily (they make the horizontal tailplanes, which are basically weeny wings). If you expand the circle to include the Eurofighter manufacturers, then Germany and Italy could do it because they make the wings for that.
If you expanded the circle further to include "people who build aircraft" then you're looking at USA, Sweden, Brazil, Russia, India, China...
It would be difficult to move wing manufacture outside the UK simply on grounds of cost-effectiveness, but the idea that the UK has a world monopoly on flexy thin loadbearing structures doesn't really, er, fly...
And if the pound were to devalue by 10%, as has been predicted, the British-made wings and RR engines would be considerably cheaper for Airbus than they are now.
Ditto all those nice cars which we export all over the world.
*Anecdote Alert* This anecdote is meaningless but I feel left out. I saw the first posters of the campaign today. One in the window of a house then two stakeboards on public verges. All for Leave. I imagine my Borough will have one of the highest Leave votes in the country. More seriously there have been far more Union flags and St George's Crosses here than I've ever seen for the Birthday/Football period. I suspect subconsciously this is about the Referendum.
I was in the Coventry suburbs at the weekend and saw a lot more flags than normal, as well as lots of 'leave' posters.
Comments
Then again I'm probably wrong.
;-)
Mr Toad 52% Stoats and Weasels 48%
But it could be the other way round.
When I put their percentages in along the unionist/republican divide it's much more like 53-47 than 58-42.
6% lead is less than 50,000 votes based on last year's GE turnout.
I have no anecdotes.
Does that make me a failure in PB world or someone who spends too much time in the real world ?
Actually I do have a few utterly insignificant anecdotes but I'd have to multiply them by ten to make them seem worthwhile. Is that what you're meant to do ?
Looking at the state of the polls and their direction of travel, it seems extraordinary to me that 36 hours before the polling stations open it's still possible to back LEAVE at fully 3/1.
I can only assume that there is a firm belief that when it actually comes to entering the cross in the box the status quo/hold on to nurse factor, call it what you will, comes into play and will ultimately determine the outcome in favour of REMAIN.
That may well prove to be the case, but I for one wouldn't be prepared to bet on it at odds of 1/4.
Wonder is someone will smuggle a flare in.
Until the mid-twentieth century possibly the biggest medical advance in terms of lives saved was getting doctors to wash their hands before and after attending ladies in childbirth.
https://twitter.com/StrongerIn/status/745316210645016576
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/northern_ireland
If anything, I would suggest the BBC bias this week is worse than that in the Scottish referendum.
One of the many problems in using wealth as a measure of success is that it encourages resentment to others - if 'keeping up with the Joneses' is how you are judged, then taking from the Joneses becomes an inevitable goal.
I hope I'm wrong and that it was a prediction for London alone.
Agreed.
Quite how this man was given so much airtime utterly beggars belief. Quite disgraceful
So if you lop off the Northern Ireland result, GB is backing Remain by 3%
Personally, I'll probably be better off with a Remain vote (I have a sizeable share portfolio), but I still believe Leave is the way to go - even if I lose out in the short term.
NI 80% leave?
Don't forget the question was "relatively" not absolutely.
The Leave campaign has been based on lies (£350m, Turkey, etc) and fear (Breaking Point). And has allowed people to feel that disliking long, winding queues of refugees is ok, under the guise of wanting to leave the largest trading bloc on the planet, which consumes nearly half our exports.
There is certainly a debate to be had about immigration, but the country will have thrown the baby out with the bath water by voting to leave the EU under the guise of having that debate.
Darts Player
Jesus Wept next it'll be Basil Brush and Mrs Piggy
It's clear Remain have been very busy with the celeb endorsements. I expect Attenborough as well soon.
@SuzanneEvans1: In the arena & this audience doesn't feel balanced at all. Overheard remainers bragging about coming in on #VoteLeave tickets. #EUDebate
Richard III could well have made a good king had he been given the chance. He was an excellent administrator under his brother. Alternatively, he might have been a good number two who wasn't up to the top job: we never had the opportunity to find out.
This debate should have happened properly a long time ago, without accusations of racism and sneering condescendence. Instead, Cameron gambled with these fears in his manifesto at the last election and is now paying for it.
Rihanna?
"If its Brexit even the dead won't remain buried"
Believe in BRITAIN!
Be LEAVE!
I found that interview deeply uncomfortable. That poor fella is clearly still in shock, and who wouldn't be. What I find despicable is Jo Cox's personal and political beliefs being wrapped up in the Remain campaign, and the implication that people who do not vote the way she would have are somehow bad people, or are racists, or bigots, or are unkind, or mean minded, or are little Englanders incapable of empathy. David Cameron has shamelessly exploited the murder of an MP to further his cause, and so have Labour.
I can handle a robust debate, but I cannot accept naked emotional blackmail and the attempt to make millions of decent people feel bad because of an isolated tragedy of an MP who was well known in her support for the EU.
And the Eagles co-owner claimed celebrity endorsements from stars like David Beckham was “the politics of the playground”.
Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore claimed yesterday that the 20 clubs backed a Yes vote at the recent AGM because leaving would be “incongruous” to its commitment to “openness”. This was then re-tweeted by David Cameron.
But Parish told BBC Radio 5 Live: “We didn't have a vote. Every single position in the Premier League requires a vote. Unlike some of the things in the EU, the Premier League is a democracy and we get to vote for things. And we didn't vote for that. This club would like to distance itself from that statement. I don't think it is for Premier League clubs to decide how people vote.
"Unless I fell asleep in a meeting which I don't think I did, we didn't have a vote on whether we endorsed a view to stay in Europe.
“And for me, I don't think it is the position of a football club to tell anyone to vote in any election. It is extraordinary that David Cameron would tweet that as a fact and use our logo as if we are endorsing one view or another. We were never asked.
"We have probably got a split inside our ownership group, we haven't debated it internally and we would certainly like our supporters to vote with their conscience and based on the facts that they know and not because the football club is encouraging them to do anything.”
Parish added: “I think people are fed up. In the last two days, David Beckham has said we should stay in – it is the politics of the playground for me.
"Let's marshal as many people that we revere and respect on each side and try and get them to force people's view. I think people are fed up with the whole campaign and for me to put all 20 Premier League clubs in favour of remain in the hope that maybe football fans will vote for Remain because they see their club's logo - is that how we want to stay in the EU or leave? - it is very disappointing for me.”
Withdrawing from the EU could pose problems for European players gaining the automatic right to play here like now.
But the Palace boss, a successful businessman who sold his international design and production agency Tag Worldwide in 2011, said: “If we were to leave, we could give anyone we want a work permit from anywhere in the world. You are not honestly saying if we left the EU, the UK government would say we couldn't have German footballers here.
I think most people think there are probably a lot more things in this debate rather than if a German footballer can come and play in England or not. I think it is far bigger and more important than that.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/crystal-palace-chairman-steve-parish-8245215?
No you're right, that'll serve us right. The general hysteria which I agree prevented a sensible discussion about immigration has now resulted in us lopping off our noses to show our faces just who is boss.
The fourteenth century in the run up to the Black Death saw a huge expansion of wealth and the wool trade (the foundation of England's wealth) really getting into its stride as feudalism was ditched. Post Black death the GDP per capita, as we would call it now, increased even more (OK, there were some hiccups along the way as the ruling class tried to turn the clock back).
I'd be prepared to argue that despite the Wars of the Roses the English economy was, with the usual business cycles, making the England more prosperous right up until Henry VIII. It then picked up again when Elizabeth I got control and really didn't stop for the next few hundred years. Even then it only became relatively poorer in the late 19th century as Germany and America, unburdened with the costs of Empire*, overtook us.
Now, how much of that was down to free-trade is a moot point. England possibly invented mercantilism, or perhaps it copied it from places like Venice, but it certainly made it work to its own advantage. Just as China (and Germany) is doing today.
* Sorry I know that the EIC etc is a tender point for you.
But we are where we are. My point is that we are now hugely over-reacting to the issue by torching our economy while the the issue of immigration, although challenging, is not wholly insoluble inside the EU.
“Give me THREE good reasons,” she has, apparently, been asking her dinner companions recently, “why Britain should be part of Europe?”
Disgraceful
Osborne's over-borrowing has now reached £194,000,000,000.
53% of those that turn up that is. So based on that yougov turnout table 47-48% of england and wales and NI except london electorate
Game Over
Enough...enough. Bobby George....the, the.... Bobby George. Who is this poster that dares to post such insults?
Next, they'll say who is Shirley Crabtree?
If you expanded the circle further to include "people who build aircraft" then you're looking at USA, Sweden, Brazil, Russia, India, China...
It would be difficult to move wing manufacture outside the UK simply on grounds of cost-effectiveness, but the idea that the UK has a world monopoly on flexy thin loadbearing structures doesn't really, er, fly...
Why anyone would want to put the country in the hands of a movement of which Boris, IDS and Gove are the moderate sensible wing is beyond me......
Why should I be surprised, I 'spose.
Ditto all those nice cars which we export all over the world.
None of that lager-beer stuff is housed in this Leave household.