No problem with Europe No problem with the people of Europe No problem with trade between us No problem with free movement ( suitably vetted people) that is not " Merkel's mercenaries."
Have a big fucking problem with having to put a blue flag and yellow stars on my Reg Plate ***
*** yes I know if I don't go out of UK not needed but it's just that type of example of that type of interference from an unelected body that I can't vote out that really is the death knell for the EU as far as I am concerned.
The question was loaded towards telling the Brits to FO. There is no suggestion that deals work both ways.
Fuck Europe, anyroad. We're out. And we will move further away as the years pass. They will make it hard for us. So did Napoleon. We won.
I agree up to a point. The Remaindered seem very reluctant to get on side with the referendum result. The sky hasn't fallen in l prediction(s). Personally I'd like to see those shits fuck off before Europe.
Remainers are perfectly willing to get onside with the referendum result. We have voted to leave and most people will be imperceptibly worse off. Not the end of the world, and fewa diminution per capita).
Fine.
We nevertheless are intrigued by the motives for the Leave vote. @Richard_Tyndall and a few other PB Leavers aside, I'm not sure the majority of Leave voters knew why they were voting Leave. Apart from immigration of course.
So we are equally intrigued by what solution we arrive at and how that tallies with expectations, such as they were.
We are still allowed to be interested in that, aren't we?
Every voter knew why he or her was voting for whatever they voted for. It is typical Remaindered rhetoric to content that Remaindered voters knew better than Brexiters why they voted how they did, being far better educated don't you know.
As for Remaindereds being "interested", that is self evidently true of anyone expressing an opinion. It's the starting point in formulating that opinion that I am referencing.
I don't think many people on either side of the argument understood the issues in play or the realities of their vote.
Even enlightened PBers have selective memories. @Richard_Tyndall for example pointed out a concrete lack of sovereignty in the VAT on home energy issue. It was also used in the Leave campaign.
Are we now expecting the government to zero rate VAT on home energy supplies?
That sort of thing.
Are we now expecting the government to zero rate VAT on home energy supplies?
We can't. We haven't left yet.
But in the future any political party can put zero-rating of energy VAT in their manifestos.
i agree again.
My point is that in reality the claim that was made very probably won't happen.
Someone stacking shelves at Tesco could theoretically buy a Bentley Mulsanne Turbo. In reality they can't.
No problem with Europe No problem with the people of Europe No problem with trade between us No problem with free movement ( suitably vetted people) that is not " Merkel's mercenaries."
Have a big fucking problem with having to put a blue flag and yellow stars on my Reg Plate ***
*** yes I know if I don't go out of UK not needed but it's just that type of example of that type of interference from an unelected body that I can't vote out that really is the death knell for the EU as far as I am concerned.
With passports, numberplates, weights and measures and much much more the EU used the hook of the SEA and the single market to harmonise a European identity on people.
Surprise, suprise a lot of people (particularly in the UK) didn't and don't like it.
Instant use as undercarriage aircraft tyre treads for those people that walk "round and round" and talk loudly on a phone call in a business lounge at airports so everyone else knows how important they really would like to be.
Off topic, watching the pound creep a bit higher today.
Bloomberg has been running stories of BIG shorts in sterling ahead of this week's rate decision. Tomorrow's services data might be interesting.
I am expecting the BoI to pass on making a cut, hence I would expect (and am positioned for) a short-lived upward move in £/$ and probably a correspond fall back in the FTSE.
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Indeed, what are you talking about, Mr. 43?
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU. 2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
Mr. Topping, judging by Labour Party campaigning, I suspect some people vote Labour because they think the Conservatives will destroy the NHS. Some Remain voters will have done so for silly reasons too. That's not a unique factor in Leave's success.
The EU does not have a veto over the WTO. It generally works by consensus. The existing WTO rules are already agreed and we and the EU are part of them. The EU does not get to say, if the UK walks with no deal under Article 50, that the WTO rules don't apply. They do and will.
@prospect_uk: Britain is currently only a member of the WTO via the EU. When we try to re-join, 162 members must agree the terms https://t.co/gcK9EUcF2V
By Charles Grant, passionate Federalist, a man whose entire life has been dedicated to the EU.
Also not true. The members of the EU are members in their own right and are represented by the EU, which is also a member in its own right. By leaving, our status remains the same except the EU no longer represents us.
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Indeed, what are you talking about, Mr. 43?
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU. 2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
The WTO isn't going to treat the UK as if it's South Sudan just because it's voted to Leave the EU.
Not really relevant. The WTO has rules, as they exist now, we can play by those rules or not if the countries in the EU decide otherwise. Given we run a massive trade deficit with the EU's most important countries, and they do have WTO obligations, what do you think the likely outcome will be.
Honestly, some people on here seem never to have negotiated anything in their lives. In my working days I would love to have come up against them across the table, I would have secured a fantastic deal for my side.
What do I think the outcome will be? I expect the talks to drag on and ultimately end in a fudge, or possibly, get stuck in the mud. I don't expect to see a lot of brinkmanship or quick fire deals, because we are dealing with politics and serving special interests.
To take the WTO negotiations as an example. A stumbling block is the level of agricultural subsidy and quotas in the EU. Other non-EU countries dislike them intensely and as the UK membership is coming up for reappraisal they have some clout. The UK could clear the barnacles by agreeing to no subsidies or quotas on beef cattle, say. Our WTO membership is reaffirmed but in the process our beef industry is decimated. Is Theresa May prepared to look herself in the mirror and say, I'm OK with that? Or will she think, maybe we need to think of a different way of doing this? And that's just one special interest. Our negotiations will cross hundreds of them
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Qualification for membership of WTO is to have Most Favoured Nation arrangements with any other member who wants one, I believe. The important point is that the UK is a member of the WTO in its own right but its qualification for membership comes from the trade arrangements set up by the EU with other WTO members. As those treaties will lapse, the UK needs to requalify for membership under its own set of treaties. Other WTO members probably won't hold up reconfirmation on the UK adopting the same tariffs as the EU, although they can do. But subsidies and quotas are controversial and the other WTO counties, which after all, are already in the system and don't need a quid pro quo on membership from the UK, won't be cut us any slack.
The EU does not have a veto over the WTO. It generally works by consensus. The existing WTO rules are already agreed and we and the EU are part of them. The EU does not get to say, if the UK walks with no deal under Article 50, that the WTO rules don't apply. They do and will.
@prospect_uk: Britain is currently only a member of the WTO via the EU. When we try to re-join, 162 members must agree the terms https://t.co/gcK9EUcF2V
He is simply wrong. See this from the WTO's own web site:
Is there any evidence of a big difference between voting intentions for Trump and Hillary through the generations? Could it be enough to let Trump sneak through?
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Indeed, what are you talking about, Mr. 43?
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU. 2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
The WTO isn't going to treat the UK as if it's South Sudan just because it's voted to Leave the EU.
If the merely thought of Brexit sent shivers around the global economy, imagine what kicking the UK out of WTO and telling it to reapply would do. These people are living in a fantasy hate-the-UK world which simply doesn't exist outside of some Eurocrats with their noses out of joint.
Mr. Topping, judging by Labour Party campaigning, I suspect some people vote Labour because they think the Conservatives will destroy the NHS. Some Remain voters will have done so for silly reasons too. That's not a unique factor in Leave's success.
Some leading Remainers still claim that all racists voted Leave.
Instant use as undercarriage aircraft tyre treads for those people that walk "round and round" and talk loudly on a phone call in a business lounge at airports so everyone else knows how important they really would like to be.
Grrrr...
I have no idea why but people who talk on their phones with their elbows stuck out at right angles irritate the f8ck out of me.
The EU does not have a veto over the WTO. It generally works by consensus. The existing WTO rules are already agreed and we and the EU are part of them. The EU does not get to say, if the UK walks with no deal under Article 50, that the WTO rules don't apply. They do and will.
@prospect_uk: Britain is currently only a member of the WTO via the EU. When we try to re-join, 162 members must agree the terms https://t.co/gcK9EUcF2V
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
The EU does not have a veto over the WTO. It generally works by consensus. The existing WTO rules are already agreed and we and the EU are part of them. The EU does not get to say, if the UK walks with no deal under Article 50, that the WTO rules don't apply. They do and will.
@prospect_uk: Britain is currently only a member of the WTO via the EU. When we try to re-join, 162 members must agree the terms https://t.co/gcK9EUcF2V
Not really relevant. The WTO has rules, as they exist now, we can play by those rules or not if the countries in the EU decide otherwise. Given we run a massive trade deficit with the EU's most important countries, and they do have WTO obligations, what do you think the likely outcome will be.
Honestly, some people on here seem never to have negotiated anything in their lives. In my working days I would love to have come up against them across the table, I would have secured a fantastic deal for my side.
What do I think the outcome will be? I expect the talks to drag on and ultimately end in a fudge, or possibly, get stuck in the mud. I don't expect to see a lot of brinkmanship or quick fire deals, because we are dealing with politics and serving special interests.
To take the WTO negotiations as an example. A stumbling block is the level of agricultural subsidy and quotas in the EU. Other non-EU countries dislike them intensely and as the UK membership is coming up for reappraisal they have some clout. The UK could clear the barnacles by agreeing to no subsidies or quotas on beef cattle, say. Our WTO membership is reaffirmed but in the process our beef industry is decimated. Is Theresa May prepared to look herself in the mirror and say, I'm OK with that? Or will she think, maybe we need to think of a different way of doing this? And that's just one special interest. Our negotiations will cross hundreds of them
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Qualification for membership of WTO is to have Most Favoured Nation arrangements with any other member who wants one, I believe. The important point is that the UK is a member of the WTO in its own right but its qualification for membership comes from the trade arrangements set up by the EU with other WTO members. As those treaties will lapse, the UK needs to requalify for membership under its own set of treaties. Other WTO members probably won't hold up reconfirmation on the UK adopting the same tariffs as the EU, although they can do. But subsidies and quotas are controversial and the other WTO counties, which after all, are already in the system and don't need a quid pro quo on membership from the UK, won't be cut us any slack.
I really do think you are getting hold of the wrong end of the stick and pointing me back to the same article written by the same journalist is not helping me to understand your point of view. Herself is calling me to eat and then I have to do the ironing, so with regret I think I'll have to leave this here.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Indeed, what are you talking about, Mr. 43?
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU. 2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
The WTO isn't going to treat the UK as if it's South Sudan just because it's voted to Leave the EU.
If the merely thought of Brexit sent shivers around the global economy, imagine what kicking the UK out of WTO and telling it to reapply would do. These people are living in a fantasy hate-the-UK world which simply doesn't exist outside of some Eurocrats with their noses out of joint.
You can add FF43 and, sadly, TOPPING to that list. They've turned into bitter europhile federalists who seem to actively want this country to fail just to prove that the EU is great. Sad to see ordinarily rational people become so unhinged.
Instant use as undercarriage aircraft tyre treads for those people that walk "round and round" and talk loudly on a phone call in a business lounge at airports so everyone else knows how important they really would like to be.
Grrrr...
I have no idea why but people who talk on their phones with their elbows stuck out at right angles irritate the f8ck out of me.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
The UK is a member of the WTO and qualifies for membership through its MFN arrangements with other WTO members. Those MFN arrangements are currently held between the EU and other WTO states. As they will lapse for the UK on leaving the EU, the UK will need to substitute a new set of agreements that are negotiated directly between the UK and other WTO states, which will now include the EU.
I have no idea what you are on about? What WTO negotiations?
Indeed, what are you talking about, Mr. 43?
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU. 2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
The WTO isn't going to treat the UK as if it's South Sudan just because it's voted to Leave the EU.
If the merely thought of Brexit sent shivers around the global economy, imagine what kicking the UK out of WTO and telling it to reapply would do. These people are living in a fantasy hate-the-UK world which simply doesn't exist outside of some Eurocrats with their noses out of joint.
You can add FF43 and, sadly, TOPPING to that list. They've turned into bitter europhile federalists who seem to actively want this country to fail just to prove that the EU is great. Sad to see ordinarily rational people become so unhinged.
Trump could be crashing and burning. Insulting the parents of a fallen soldier, or of any other lost son or daughter, in relation to how they express how they feel about their loss, is close to sociopathic. Donald Trump's close confidant and advisor Roger Stone has tweeted that Mr Khan is a "Muslim Brotherhood agent helping Hillary". His tweet contains an image of Mr Khan juxtaposed with an image of crossed swords by a Koran.
Stone's tweet also links to this disgusting article by Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat which states that Mr Khan "Is A Muslim Brotherhood Agent Who Wants To Advance Sharia Law" and that he "instructs Muslims to submit to Sharia". The authors continue: "In regards to (Mr Khan's) son and his sacrifice, on the other side of the coin, many were the ‘Muslim martyrs’ who joined the US military. Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, for example, enlisted in the Special Forces of the US Army; he was a double agent for Al-Qaeda. How about Hasan K. Akbar, a Muslim American soldier who murdered and injured fifteen soldiers." The implied proposition about Mr Khan's son might make sense if a reader believes that all Muslims are responsible for what all other Muslims do, which view is very similar to the Islamic terrorist view towards western civilians. The authors continue in the same vein. We are told that "Muslims in general wanted a war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan where Islamists clearly participated in such wars with U.S. aid since the time of Ronald Reagan." Towards the end they write that "CHRISTIANS ARE BEING KILLED AND RAPED EVERY SINGLE DAY, PLEASE CLICK HERE TO MAKE A DONATION TO OUR RESCUE TEAM THAT WILL SAVE THE LIVES OF CHRISTIANS FROM PERSECUTION."
A Trump withdrawal is increasingly likely. I am very pleased with my investments in Kasich, Cruz, and for good measure also in Pence, Rubio and Bush, in some cases at odds of close to 1000\1.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
We became members of the WTO on the basis of our being one of the 23 founding members of GATT in 1948.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
Instant use as undercarriage aircraft tyre treads for those people that walk "round and round" and talk loudly on a phone call in a business lounge at airports so everyone else knows how important they really would like to be.
Grrrr...
I have no idea why but people who talk on their phones with their elbows stuck out at right angles irritate the f8ck out of me.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
I would hate to be a member of the MPC tonight. Talk about tough decisions. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
I would hate to be a member of the MPC tonight. Talk about tough decisions. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
They've made their bed over the last four years; I have no sympathy I am afraid.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
I would hate to be a member of the MPC tonight. Talk about tough decisions. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
They've made their bed over the last four years; I have no sympathy I am afraid.
I think they should keep the rate as it is, on the basis that it looks as if (hah!) the Fed is gearing itself up for a rate rise before the end of the year.
Mr. Quidder, that may be what precipitates global nuclear war.
And the end to free bus passes for pensioners. Although as every potential destination will have been flattened by ICBMs and every bus driver will be an irradiated corpse, the impact will be blunted somewhat.
Edited extra bit: just demanglified it.
Edited extra bit 2: mildly amused at humans. As Dr. Prasannan said, Cannae took place today (when Hannibal brilliantly managed to surround an army that was twice as big as his). He also led an army of men, horses and elephants across the Alps, in winter, in the teeth of hostile tribes.
Men can do such things, yet also tremble at the prospect of leaving the EU.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
No it doesn't.
Finally!
An acclaimed legal expert specialising in treaty-based international contractual law arrives to clear things up.
No problem with Europe No problem with the people of Europe No problem with trade between us No problem with free movement ( suitably vetted people) that is not " Merkel's mercenaries."
Have a big fucking problem with having to put a blue flag and yellow stars on my Reg Plate ***
*** yes I know if I don't go out of UK not needed but it's just that type of example of that type of interference from an unelected body that I can't vote out that really is the death knell for the EU as far as I am concerned.
I thought if you went outside of Britain to elsewhere in the EU, a "GB" sticker is fine and no EU flag is required.
An interesting hour on PB. We've learnt that the Remoaners' latest scaremongering is that we're going to get kicked out of the WTO.
C'mon, man.
As I have posted more on this subject than others, or than I intended, I should point that I didn't claim we're going to be thrown out of the WTO. It's yet another thing that has to be dealt with. Hence we're not likely to attempt a "Fuck off, EU, we're sticking with the WTO" approach to negotiations.
Charles Grant has a remarkable record in setting up an organisation dedicated to reforming Europe and in the 20 years of its existence he has achieved no meaningful reforms... But he has managed to attract the funding for one of the most europhile organisations in the UK.
With the Brexit role his whole life's work (well 20 years) will have gone down the tubes.
We can rely on Pasty Scott to post Grant's nonsense on here as usual REMOANING guff.
I would be very surprised and not a little concerned if there is a cut in the bank rate tomorrow. It would reek of panic and there is no obvious need for it. Similarly, revisiting QE would be a mistake. It should be steady as she goes from the Bank at this stage, indeed until the Autumn Statement gives us some sort of framework in which decisions can be considered.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
No it doesn't.
Finally!
An acclaimed legal expert specialising in international relations arrives to clear things up.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
This implies the Uk is a member of the WTO because it is a member state of the EU.
The UK is a member of the WTO and qualifies for membership through its MFN arrangements with other WTO members. Those MFN arrangements are currently held between the EU and other WTO states. As they will lapse for the UK on leaving the EU, the UK will need to substitute a new set of agreements that are negotiated directly between the UK and other WTO states, which will now include the EU.
I am only an instant expert on all this, but I do think you have got it as badly round your neck as you possibly could. The WTO is about the absence of MFN agreements (or their universality, which comes to the same thing); the "MFN arrangements" consist, simply, of being a member of the WTO, and we are a member in our own right. We therefore have existing MFN arrangements with each and every other WTO member, simply by virtue of our membership. See https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact2_e.htm esp the bit headed "Why ‘most-favoured’?", bottom right.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Wasn't it the Garden Bridge discussion?
I walk along from Waterloo station to Blackfriars regularly and there are quite a few " No to garden Bridge" posters up. Mostly In the council flats along the riverside. Cost?
Building works impacting the Coin Street Collective I guess.
Benefits are more for the Northbank than the Southbank
Have been since 1.1.95 apparently. And in GATT since 1948.
The EU has been a member in its own right since 2009. Another soupcon of sovereignty for that institution. But all EU members continue to be members themselves.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
I have no idea how practical it is, but it does sound lovely. It's uplifting to see a project that's more concerned with aesthetics. In Monmouth, we have a superb example of a gated bridge:
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
Have been since 1.1.95 apparently. And in GATT since 1948.
The EU has been a member in its own right since 2009. Another soupcon of sovereignty for that institution. But all EU members continue to be members themselves.
No, no. The eurofederalists are all saying the EU will have a veto on our continued membership and that leaving is going to lead to pestilence and death. Please, understand they have no agenda, they really do want the best for this country.
Seems like we are moving on from khan-gate, today's trump outrage is baby-gate.
The media are making the same mistakes as they do with farage. They need to rip apart the fact trumps "solutions" to make the random guy in the street better off are nonsense.
Have been since 1.1.95 apparently. And in GATT since 1948.
The EU has been a member in its own right since 2009. Another soupcon of sovereignty for that institution. But all EU members continue to be members themselves.
No, no. The eurofederalists are all saying the EU will have a veto on our continued membership and that leaving is going to lead to pestilence and death. Please, understand they have no agenda, they really do want the best for this country.
I don't think many people on either side of the argument understood the issues in play or the realities of their vote.
Even enlightened PBers have selective memories. @Richard_Tyndall for example pointed out a concrete lack of sovereignty in the VAT on home energy issue. It was also used in the Leave campaign.
Are we now expecting the government to zero rate VAT on home energy supplies?
That sort of thing.
Personally I'd rather they eliminate some green taxes as the incremental administrative burden is relatively low for VAT. But they should reduce the cost of energy
I like the fact that out elected representatives can choose to make that decision
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
At a truly massive cost.
Your reply sort of details my point: it is trying to be a jack of all trades, whilst being master of none. It won't be a particularly expansive park (and a linear one at that). It'll be a tourist attraction when it's not closed for special events, and a pedestrianised area where there are already some pedestrianised areas. On top of all of this, it doesn't really work in practical terms as a bridge either.
And the cost. Oh, the cost.
Compare and contrast with London's first Green Bridge - the one at Mile End. It had a purpose: connecting the southern and northern parts of the Mile End Park across Mile End road. It can be used by cyclists and walkers. And it is a truly clever design that has helped revitalise a slightly down-at-heel area between the Uni and tube.
I would be very surprised and not a little concerned if there is a cut in the bank rate tomorrow. It would reek of panic and there is no obvious need for it. Similarly, revisiting QE would be a mistake. It should be steady as she goes from the Bank at this stage, indeed until the Autumn Statement gives us some sort of framework in which decisions can be considered.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
Carnie needs to back up his line of Brexit = a disaster, but he had forecast rate rises after Brexit to address the chaos. For Carnie to cut rates would be a 180 degree turn. It would be funny if the impact on livelihoods of this political joker were not serious.
Trump could be crashing and burning. Insulting the parents of a fallen soldier, or of any other lost son or daughter, in relation to how they express how they feel about their loss, is close to sociopathic. Donald Trump's close confidant and advisor Roger Stone has tweeted that Mr Khan is a "Muslim Brotherhood agent helping Hillary". His tweet contains an image of Mr Khan juxtaposed with an image of crossed swords by a Koran.
Stone's tweet also links to this disgusting article by Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat which states that Mr Khan "Is A Muslim Brotherhood Agent Who Wants To Advance Sharia Law" and that he "instructs Muslims to submit to Sharia". The authors continue: "In regards to (Mr Khan's) son and his sacrifice, on the other side of the coin, many were the ‘Muslim martyrs’ who joined the US military. Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, for example, enlisted in the Special Forces of the US Army; he was a double agent for Al-Qaeda. How about Hasan K. Akbar, a Muslim American soldier who murdered and injured fifteen soldiers." The implied proposition about Mr Khan's son might make sense if a reader believes that all Muslims are responsible for what all other Muslims do, which view is very similar to the Islamic terrorist view towards western civilians. The authors continue in the same vein. We are told that "Muslims in general wanted a war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan where Islamists clearly participated in such wars with U.S. aid since the time of Ronald Reagan." Towards the end they write that "CHRISTIANS ARE BEING KILLED AND RAPED EVERY SINGLE DAY, PLEASE CLICK HERE TO MAKE A DONATION TO OUR RESCUE TEAM THAT WILL SAVE THE LIVES OF CHRISTIANS FROM PERSECUTION."
A Trump withdrawal is increasingly likely. I am very pleased with my investments in Kasich, Cruz, and for good measure also in Pence, Rubio and Bush, in some cases at odds of close to 1000\1.
Why would Trump withdraw? Unless there is some sort of mechanism allowing the GOP to remove him as their candidate (anyone?), I just can't see it happening. Past behaviour strongly suggests he wouldn't step aside of his own volition.
I would be very surprised and not a little concerned if there is a cut in the bank rate tomorrow. It would reek of panic and there is no obvious need for it. Similarly, revisiting QE would be a mistake. It should be steady as she goes from the Bank at this stage, indeed until the Autumn Statement gives us some sort of framework in which decisions can be considered.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
So would I given they announce the interest rate decision on Thursdays...
Charles Grant has a remarkable record in setting up an organisation dedicated to reforming Europe and in the 20 years of its existence he has achieved no meaningful reforms... But he has managed to attract the funding for one of the most europhile organisations in the UK.
With the Brexit role his whole life's work (well 20 years) will have gone down the tubes.
We can rely on Pasty Scott to post Grant's nonsense on here as usual REMOANING guff.
If everyone is Most Favoured, nobody is! Pedants against the WTO, unit!
You are either missing, or precisely identifying, the point. What the WTO expressly says is: everybody is a MFN, therefore nobody is. These MFN "arrangements" we are being told we will have to rearrange were therefore never actual things in the first place. They are simply another way of saying "WTO membership".
Charles Grant has a remarkable record in setting up an organisation dedicated to reforming Europe and in the 20 years of its existence he has achieved no meaningful reforms... But he has managed to attract the funding for one of the most europhile organisations in the UK.
With the Brexit role his whole life's work (well 20 years) will have gone down the tubes.
We can rely on Pasty Scott to post Grant's nonsense on here as usual REMOANING guff.
What did he get in Cammo's honours legacy?
No idea but he should be a prize turkey in Cammo's loser list.
I would be very surprised and not a little concerned if there is a cut in the bank rate tomorrow. It would reek of panic and there is no obvious need for it. Similarly, revisiting QE would be a mistake. It should be steady as she goes from the Bank at this stage, indeed until the Autumn Statement gives us some sort of framework in which decisions can be considered.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
Carnie needs to back up his line of Brexit = a disaster, but he had forecast rate rises after Brexit to address the chaos. For Carnie to cut rates would be a 180 degree turn. It would be funny if the impact on livelihoods of this political joker were not serious.
Not really. He could claim that a cut in rates is required to forestall the disaster that he foresaw and to keep the economy moving. I just don't see any need for it and it would plant the seed that things are actually worse than they appear which would not be helpful.
Of course Australia cutting its base rate was no doubt a consequence of Brexit too.
The world economy remains in a very bad place, overloaded with debt, surplus capacity, deflationary pressures and poor investment opportunities. We are unfortunately no different but if we are to have new policies to address this it will need a combination of fiscal and monetary policy in a coordinated response. That means the Autumn Statement for me.
It's peak Brexit really - the initial rout of sterling and purchasing orders has been forgotten, and the consequences of actually leaving are ignored while the UK has not actually left. Of course, there's always free trade with Pakistan, Zimbabwe and Swaziland to look forward to.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Wasn't it the Garden Bridge discussion?
I walk along from Waterloo station to Blackfriars regularly and there are quite a few " No to garden Bridge" posters up. Mostly In the council flats along the riverside. Cost?
Building works impacting the Coin Street Collective I guess.
Benefits are more for the Northbank than the Southbank
Which perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with it. A proper bridge benefits both ends exactly equally, unless it's really a pier. Form follows function.
I would be very surprised and not a little concerned if there is a cut in the bank rate tomorrow. It would reek of panic and there is no obvious need for it. Similarly, revisiting QE would be a mistake. It should be steady as she goes from the Bank at this stage, indeed until the Autumn Statement gives us some sort of framework in which decisions can be considered.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
So would I given they announce the interest rate decision on Thursdays...
The question was loaded towards telling the Brits to FO. There is no suggestion that deals work both ways.
Fuck Europe, anyroad. We're out. And we will move further away as the years pass. They will make it hard for us. So did Napoleon. We won.
Quite so, Mr. T.. The UK has to go into the negotiations prepared to say, "Fair enough, WTO rules it shall be and walk out". Anyone who goes to negotiate who is not prepared to walk away from the table will not be negotiating they will be begging".
Exactly so. The deal will be shoddy unless the EU do think we are prepared to walk away
Difference between May and Cameron is that I think the former could quite possibly threaten to do so, whereas the latter never would.
PM May winning GE2015 would probably have got a better deal and we'd probably have just narrowly voted to Remain.
Cameron's honours for REMAINERS has laid the capstone on his reputation.
No it hasn't. There was nothing egregious in his honours suggestions compared to how honours have been portrayed as long as I have been alive. His reputation will be defined by Brexit, and either tempered or worsened by how one feels about the coalition years, the rest is nonsense.
I must have missed all the Conservative senior people that have come out to defend Cameron. Apart that is from "mad" Desmond in the New Forest who is as mad as a box of ferrets in real life.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
I have no idea how practical it is, but it does sound lovely. It's uplifting to see a project that's more concerned with aesthetics. In Monmouth, we have a superb example of a gated bridge:
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
I hosted a dinner which had the sole purpose of persuading 1 guest to write a big cheque (it worked - although that was down to Mervyn Davies not me). A side benefit was getting to hear the architect talk through his vision.
The question was loaded towards telling the Brits to FO. There is no suggestion that deals work both ways.
Fuck Europe, anyroad. We're out. And we will move further away as the years pass. They will make it hard for us. So did Napoleon. We won.
Quite so, Mr. T.. The UK has to go into the negotiations prepared to say, "Fair enough, WTO rules it shall be and walk out". Anyone who goes to negotiate who is not prepared to walk away from the table will not be negotiating they will be begging".
Exactly so. The deal will be shoddy unless the EU do think we are prepared to walk away
Difference between May and Cameron is that I think the former could quite possibly threaten to do so, whereas the latter never would.
PM May winning GE2015 would probably have got a better deal and we'd probably have just narrowly voted to Remain.
Cameron's honours for REMAINERS has laid the capstone on his reputation.
No it hasn't. There was nothing egregious in his honours suggestions compared to how honours have been portrayed as long as I have been alive. His reputation will be defined by Brexit, and either tempered or worsened by how one feels about the coalition years, the rest is nonsense.
I must have missed all the Conservative senior people that have come out to defend Cameron. Apart that is from "mad" Desmond in the New Forest who is as mad as a box of ferrets in real life.
I don't see what your post has to do with my post - was it meant to be in reply to something else? Cameron's reputation will be what it is, due to his being on the losing side of Brexit whether it is a success or failure his reputation will probably not be that kind, but we cannot be sure how unkind right now, and his honours suggestions will certainly not feature as significant or indicative of his premiership.
It's peak Brexit really - the initial rout of sterling and purchasing orders has been forgotten, and the consequences of actually leaving are ignored while the UK has not actually left. Of course, there's always free trade with Pakistan, Zimbabwe and Swaziland to look forward to.
That's a market of 213 million people growing twice as fast as the EU
Seems like we are moving on from khan-gate, today's trump outrage is baby-gate.
The media are making the same mistakes as they do with farage. They need to rip apart the fact trumps "solutions" to make the random guy in the street better off are nonsense.
In the end Farage got 13% and one seat if he lead the Leave campaign he would not have got anywhere near 52%.
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
At a truly massive cost.
Your reply sort of details my point: it is trying to be a jack of all trades, whilst being master of none. It won't be a particularly expansive park (and a linear one at that). It'll be a tourist attraction when it's not closed for special events, and a pedestrianised area where there are already some pedestrianised areas. On top of all of this, it doesn't really work in practical terms as a bridge either.
And the cost. Oh, the cost.
Compare and contrast with London's first Green Bridge - the one at Mile End. It had a purpose: connecting the southern and northern parts of the Mile End Park across Mile End road. It can be used by cyclists and walkers. And it is a truly clever design that has helped revitalise a slightly down-at-heel area between the Uni and tube.
Cost funded largely by private donations. HMG contribution is VAT relief (so foregpne income not cash out) and money that had been earmarked to redevelop Temple Tube. There's a marginal extra cost from strengthening the roof but it's really not significant
Park/tourist attraction are the same thing - this is a green space for walking and meditating. If you want to play a ball game or need more non linear space there are other parks (try the Archbishop's park by Lambeth Palace or St James' Park).
On cyclists they can go up to Blackfriars - not far away - and use the cycle superhighway of they are in a hurry. But having cycle lanes through the middle of the Garden Bridge would frustrate the primary purpose of being a tranquil space for pedestrians.
The question was loaded towards telling the Brits to FO. There is no suggestion that deals work both ways.
Fuck Europe, anyroad. We're out. And we will move further away as the years pass. They will make it hard for us. So did Napoleon. We won.
Quite so, Mr. T.. The UK has to go into the negotiations prepared to say, "Fair enough, WTO rules it shall be and walk out". Anyone who goes to negotiate who is not prepared to walk away from the table will not be negotiating they will be begging".
Exactly so. The deal will be shoddy unless the EU do think we are prepared to walk away
Difference between May and Cameron is that I think the former could quite possibly threaten to do so, whereas the latter never would.
PM May winning GE2015 would probably have got a better deal and we'd probably have just narrowly voted to Remain.
Cameron's honours for REMAINERS has laid the capstone on his reputation.
No it hasn't. There was nothing egregious in his honours suggestions compared to how honours have been portrayed as long as I have been alive. His reputation will be defined by Brexit, and either tempered or worsened by how one feels about the coalition years, the rest is nonsense.
I must have missed all the Conservative senior people that have come out to defend Cameron. Apart that is from "mad" Desmond in the New Forest who is as mad as a box of ferrets in real life.
I don't see what your post has to do with my post - was it meant to be in reply to something else? Cameron's reputation will be what it is, due to his being on the losing side of Brexit whether it is a success or failure his reputation will probably not be that kind, but we cannot be sure how unkind right now, and his honours suggestions will certainly not feature as significant or indicative of his premiership.
Possibly right in the long term, but for the immediate future Cammo's Losers List has a stench around it which few are coming forward to defend.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Wasn't it the Garden Bridge discussion?
I walk along from Waterloo station to Blackfriars regularly and there are quite a few " No to garden Bridge" posters up. Mostly In the council flats along the riverside. Cost?
Building works impacting the Coin Street Collective I guess.
Benefits are more for the Northbank than the Southbank
Which perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with it. A proper bridge benefits both ends exactly equally, unless it's really a pier. Form follows function.
Not really. Southbank is already well developed from a lot of investment. Northbank is marooned between Waterloo and Blackfriars bridges & the Strand & needs a way to drive regeneration. 6m tourists a year on the bridge will help
Good to see that much of the sporting world has been very critical of Lizzie Armistead. I was appalled by the way the athletics community protected Christine Ohuruogu when she missed three tests. Given what's been happening with Russia I don't think there's any appetite for defending Armistead.
A Trump withdrawal is increasingly likely. I am very pleased with my investments in Kasich, Cruz, and for good measure also in Pence, Rubio and Bush, in some cases at odds of close to 1000\1.
Why would Trump withdraw? Unless there is some sort of mechanism allowing the GOP to remove him as their candidate (anyone?), I just can't see it happening. Past behaviour strongly suggests he wouldn't step aside of his own volition.
As far as I know, there isn't a mechanism allowing the Republicans to remove a nomination, although there is one for the RNC to replace a candidate if he withdraws. (Rule 9).
Trump is not a politician and he is treating his whole campaign as if he were aiming to do a deal. In his book The Art of the Deal, he says that the person who wins in negotiations is the one most willing to withdraw. Why throw good money after bad?
What record does he have of banging against a brick wall when it's clear he won't get what he wants? He fought a brilliant campaign until recently.
In Oct 2015, albeit referring only to the race for the Republican nomination, in which he was by then the frontrunner, he said "If I fell behind badly, I would certainly get out." Admittedly he followed that by the contradictory "I'm in this for the long haul."
But prices of something like 1000 for each of Kasich and Cruz, the same as for Stein and Johnson, I think were very low. They have now risen to 260 and 410.
''Obama says Trump is unfit to be President and urges Republicans to withdraw their backing.''
If Hillary is doing so well, why is he making this intervention?
No harm in pressing a point.
Particularity when he has a +10 Approval Rating, Obama is a political asset whereas many outgoing Presidents are a drag on their party
Indeed only a select few second term presidents have been a net boost to their party's nominee since WW2, Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton and Obama. Of the earlier three one of their succesor's as nominee won, Bush Snr, one won the popular vote, Gore and one lost by less than 1%, Nixon
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
At a truly massive cost.
Your reply sort of details my point: it is trying to be a jack of all trades, whilst being master of none. It won't be a particularly expansive park (and a linear one at that). It'll be a tourist attraction when it's not closed for special events, and a pedestrianised area where there are already some pedestrianised areas. On top of all of this, it doesn't really work in practical terms as a bridge either.
And the cost. Oh, the cost.
Compare and contrast with London's first Green Bridge - the one at Mile End. It had a purpose: connecting the southern and northern parts of the Mile End Park across Mile End road. It can be used by cyclists and walkers. And it is a truly clever design that has helped revitalise a slightly down-at-heel area between the Uni and tube.
Cost funded largely by private donations. HMG contribution is VAT relief (so foregpne income not cash out) and money that had been earmarked to redevelop Temple Tube. There's a marginal extra cost from strengthening the roof but it's really not significant
Park/tourist attraction are the same thing - this is a green space for walking and meditating. If you want to play a ball game or need more non linear space there are other parks (try the Archbishop's park by Lambeth Palace or St James' Park).
On cyclists they can go up to Blackfriars - not far away - and use the cycle superhighway of they are in a hurry. But having cycle lanes through the middle of the Garden Bridge would frustrate the primary purpose of being a tranquil space for pedestrians.
Hmmm. "Cost funded largely by private donations."
Isn't the public purse paying for £60 million of it, plus tax relief? The fact that can be called 'largely by private donations' shows how expensive the whole project is. According to Wiki it's £30 mn from HMT and £30 mn from TfL. Then there are the ludicrous ongoing maintenance expenses - was it £3 million a year?
I'm sure Londoners on here can find better things to spend £60 million of public funds on. A bridge further downstream in East London perhaps? You know, where one is actually needed.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
Agreed. Who is going to wake up on Friday and say "that 0.25% cut is a real wowser, and I will make that investment I wasn't going to do on Tuesday when they were a ginormous 0.5%". Meanwhile pension deficits balloon and countless millions are poured down that black hole which is largely a construct created by extreme monetary policy and over zealous regulation.
We really really need some inflation to enable interest rates to rise. Time for helicopter money? A Grand for everyone on the electoral role??
Good to see that much of the sporting world has been very critical of Lizzie Armistead. I was appalled by the way the athletics community protected Christine Ohuruogu when she missed three tests. Given what's been happening with Russia I don't think there's any appetite for defending Armistead.
Same offence as Rio Ferdinand. Difficult to defend for any athlete unfortunately, it can't be easy to have to be constantly available at a moments notice for a visitor who has to be kept up to date with your whereabouts - but they all know the rules when they sign up for it.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
I have no idea how practical it is, but it does sound lovely. It's uplifting to see a project that's more concerned with aesthetics. In Monmouth, we have a superb example of a gated bridge:
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
I think I might have done that whilst walking Offa's Dyke. Would that be correct?
I was dog-tired and still had to get to the campsite at the end of the day.
Good to see that much of the sporting world has been very critical of Lizzie Armistead. I was appalled by the way the athletics community protected Christine Ohuruogu when she missed three tests. Given what's been happening with Russia I don't think there's any appetite for defending Armistead.
Same offence as Rio Ferdinand. Difficult to defend for any athlete unfortunately, it can't be easy to have to be constantly available at a moments notice for a visitor who has to be kept up to date with your whereabouts - but they all know the rules when they sign up for it.
The Ferdinand one was even worse. Tests are done at training - not sure what's difficult about the club administering that. What I think is really galling about the Armistead case is that she only appealed the first missed test after the second and third missed tests.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
I have no idea how practical it is, but it does sound lovely. It's uplifting to see a project that's more concerned with aesthetics. In Monmouth, we have a superb example of a gated bridge:
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
I think I might have done that whilst walking Offa's Dyke. Would that be correct?
I was dog-tired and still had to get to the campsite at the end of the day.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
Agreed. Who is going to wake up on Friday and say "that 0.25% cut is a real wowser, and I will make that investment I wasn't going to do on Tuesday when they were a ginormous 0.5%". Meanwhile pension deficits balloon and countless millions are poured down that black hole which is largely a construct created by extreme monetary policy and over zealous regulation.
We really really need some inflation to enable interest rates to rise. Time for helicopter money? A Grand for everyone on the electoral role??
The problem is we have had inflation - house price inflation.
Good to see that much of the sporting world has been very critical of Lizzie Armistead. I was appalled by the way the athletics community protected Christine Ohuruogu when she missed three tests. Given what's been happening with Russia I don't think there's any appetite for defending Armistead.
Same offence as Rio Ferdinand. Difficult to defend for any athlete unfortunately, it can't be easy to have to be constantly available at a moments notice for a visitor who has to be kept up to date with your whereabouts - but they all know the rules when they sign up for it.
These days there is no excuse. I remember Darren Campbell explaining that during his career there was a window of 1-2 years where things changed & he said that there wasn't 100% clarity of what was expected etc, but now every athlete has it rammed into them constantly in regards to not taking anything at all without it being properly checked out etc etc etc.
You shouldn't be missing any tests, but if you did miss one you would think you would be 110% to be constantly on top of this stuff. 3 tests is a lot to miss.
Not entirely, Comres had over 50% willing to accept controlled freedom of movement to get single market access, only 26% of British voters still insisted on an end to freedom of movement if it came at the cost of no access to the single market at all
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
Agreed. Who is going to wake up on Friday and say "that 0.25% cut is a real wowser, and I will make that investment I wasn't going to do on Tuesday when they were a ginormous 0.5%". Meanwhile pension deficits balloon and countless millions are poured down that black hole which is largely a construct created by extreme monetary policy and over zealous regulation.
We really really need some inflation to enable interest rates to rise. Time for helicopter money? A Grand for everyone on the electoral role??
Brexit will give us inflation. Estimates ~2.2% in 2017. Carney will be able to stop writing letters for a while.
And I think @Speedy has consistently called against Trump since ?North Carolina?
Charles, whilst you are on:
This is rather embarrassing, but I have a post-it note with a message to myself to apologise to you on it. Unfortunately I did not note, and cannot remember, what I'm meant to be apologising for. A quick browse through my last few posts has shown nothing apparently relevant.
So, I apologise for whatever it is I said (*) that may have caused you offence.
If you can remember, please let me know so I can apologise properly ...
(*) Perhaps multiple.
I have no idea!
Probably something to do with a bridge...
Could well be! Anyway, if I wrote the note then I obviously felt I stepped over the line, so I'm sorry for whatever it was.
Although I'm right about the Garden Bridge. I'l try to express my utter correctness in more moderate and respectful terms in the future.
No you're not
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
I have no idea how practical it is, but it does sound lovely. It's uplifting to see a project that's more concerned with aesthetics. In Monmouth, we have a superb example of a gated bridge:
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
I think I might have done that whilst walking Offa's Dyke. Would that be correct?
I was dog-tired and still had to get to the campsite at the end of the day.
I wonder if tonight's headlines about home ownership will cause some of the MPC to have second thoughts about cutting interest rates? As far as I'm concerned the decision to keep the base rate at 0.5% for over seven years has been incredibly pernicious and cutting it would be quite frankly disgraceful.
Agreed. Who is going to wake up on Friday and say "that 0.25% cut is a real wowser, and I will make that investment I wasn't going to do on Tuesday when they were a ginormous 0.5%". Meanwhile pension deficits balloon and countless millions are poured down that black hole which is largely a construct created by extreme monetary policy and over zealous regulation.
We really really need some inflation to enable interest rates to rise. Time for helicopter money? A Grand for everyone on the electoral role??
The problem is we have had inflation - house price inflation.
Cured by a rise in interest rates of course. Sure some will have negative equity but this fetish for QE and ultra low rates is creating bond and housing bubbles, screwing saving and pensions, depressing investment, and cutting corporate tax take. I think it's utterly fucking nuts and I hope Mark Carney is reading this!!!
Comments
No problem with the people of Europe
No problem with trade between us
No problem with free movement ( suitably vetted people) that is not " Merkel's mercenaries."
Have a big fucking problem with having to put a blue flag and yellow stars on my Reg Plate ***
*** yes I know if I don't go out of UK not needed but it's just that type of example of that type of interference from an unelected body that I can't vote out that really is the death knell for the EU as far as I am concerned.
My point is that in reality the claim that was made very probably won't happen.
Someone stacking shelves at Tesco could theoretically buy a Bentley Mulsanne Turbo. In reality they can't.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/amp/poll-clinton-support-spikes-following-democratic-convention-n621071?client=ms-android-oneplus
Surprise, suprise a lot of people (particularly in the UK) didn't and don't like it.
Instant use as undercarriage aircraft tyre treads for those people that walk "round and round" and talk loudly on a phone call in a business lounge at airports so everyone else knows how important they really would like to be.
Grrrr...
1. The UK membership is not coming up for reappraisal, we are already a member of the WTO (and have been part of its predecessor organizations since the first GATT rounds), separately from the EU.
2. The WTO negotiates as a whole in rounds of negotiations, not one on one. The current round, Doha, is at an impasse and so not much negotiating is going on right now.
Apologies. its actually 50:42 to Clinton :
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-clinton-support-spikes-following-democratic-convention-n621071
More here
He is simply wrong. See this from the WTO's own web site:
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm
In case you are having difficulty reading it, here is the important bit:
"The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right."
That won't have been true either.
Total load of bollocks.
From the WTO's page on the UK, which is but a click away:
"This page gathers information on the United Kingdom's participation in the WTO. The United Kingdom has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995 and a member of GATT since 1 January 1948. It is a member State of the European Union. All EU member States are WTO members, as is the EU (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) in its own right."
Play nicely all.
Stone's tweet also links to this disgusting article by Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat which states that Mr Khan "Is A Muslim Brotherhood Agent Who Wants To Advance Sharia Law" and that he "instructs Muslims to submit to Sharia". The authors continue: "In regards to (Mr Khan's) son and his sacrifice, on the other side of the coin, many were the ‘Muslim martyrs’ who joined the US military. Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, for example, enlisted in the Special Forces of the US Army; he was a double agent for Al-Qaeda. How about Hasan K. Akbar, a Muslim American soldier who murdered and injured fifteen soldiers." The implied proposition about Mr Khan's son might make sense if a reader believes that all Muslims are responsible for what all other Muslims do, which view is very similar to the Islamic terrorist view towards western civilians. The authors continue in the same vein. We are told that "Muslims in general wanted a war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan where Islamists clearly participated in such wars with U.S. aid since the time of Ronald Reagan." Towards the end they write that "CHRISTIANS ARE BEING KILLED AND RAPED EVERY SINGLE DAY, PLEASE CLICK HERE TO MAKE A DONATION TO OUR RESCUE TEAM THAT WILL SAVE THE LIVES OF CHRISTIANS FROM PERSECUTION."
A Trump withdrawal is increasingly likely. I am very pleased with my investments in Kasich, Cruz, and for good measure also in Pence, Rubio and Bush, in some cases at odds of close to 1000\1.
C'mon, man.
And the end to free bus passes for pensioners. Although as every potential destination will have been flattened by ICBMs and every bus driver will be an irradiated corpse, the impact will be blunted somewhat.
Edited extra bit: just demanglified it.
Edited extra bit 2: mildly amused at humans. As Dr. Prasannan said, Cannae took place today (when Hannibal brilliantly managed to surround an army that was twice as big as his). He also led an army of men, horses and elephants across the Alps, in winter, in the teeth of hostile tribes.
Men can do such things, yet also tremble at the prospect of leaving the EU.
Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Burma, Canada, Ceylon, Chile, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, France, India, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Southern Rhodesia, Syria, South Africa, UK, USA.
An acclaimed legal expert specialising in treaty-based international contractual law arrives to clear things up.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-is-clintons-lead-a-bounce-or-a-new-equilibrium/
Talk later.
With the Brexit role his whole life's work (well 20 years) will have gone down the tubes.
We can rely on Pasty Scott to post Grant's nonsense on here as usual REMOANING guff.
My only concern is that AEP in the Telegraph was vaguely upbeat (for him) about the world economy today. Not a good sign.
You think about purely in practical terms - as a transport mechanism. That's only a side benefits this is primarily about creating a new park / tourist attraction / pedestrianised area
esp the bit headed "Why ‘most-favoured’?", bottom right.
Benefits are more for the Northbank than the Southbank
Have been since 1.1.95 apparently. And in GATT since 1948.
The EU has been a member in its own right since 2009. Another soupcon of sovereignty for that institution. But all EU members continue to be members themselves.
Which has now been replaced by what is essentially a concrete log dropped across the Monnow. Ugly as sin.
The media are making the same mistakes as they do with farage. They need to rip apart the fact trumps "solutions" to make the random guy in the street better off are nonsense.
Edited for accuracy (irony recognised).
I like the fact that out elected representatives can choose to make that decision
Your reply sort of details my point: it is trying to be a jack of all trades, whilst being master of none. It won't be a particularly expansive park (and a linear one at that). It'll be a tourist attraction when it's not closed for special events, and a pedestrianised area where there are already some pedestrianised areas. On top of all of this, it doesn't really work in practical terms as a bridge either.
And the cost. Oh, the cost.
Compare and contrast with London's first Green Bridge - the one at Mile End. It had a purpose: connecting the southern and northern parts of the Mile End Park across Mile End road. It can be used by cyclists and walkers. And it is a truly clever design that has helped revitalise a slightly down-at-heel area between the Uni and tube.
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact2_e.htm
again
ed for typo
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/02/britain-sent-millions-to-african-charity-controlled-by-cult-whos/
Of course Australia cutting its base rate was no doubt a consequence of Brexit too.
The world economy remains in a very bad place, overloaded with debt, surplus capacity, deflationary pressures and poor investment opportunities. We are unfortunately no different but if we are to have new policies to address this it will need a combination of fiscal and monetary policy in a coordinated response. That means the Autumn Statement for me.
"Most Favoured" just means you get the same terms as the "Most favoured" third party. It doesn't refer to you.
Park/tourist attraction are the same thing - this is a green space for walking and meditating. If you want to play a ball game or need more non linear space there are other parks (try the Archbishop's park by Lambeth Palace or St James' Park).
On cyclists they can go up to Blackfriars - not far away - and use the cycle superhighway of they are in a hurry. But having cycle lanes through the middle of the Garden Bridge would frustrate the primary purpose of being a tranquil space for pedestrians.
Trump is not a politician and he is treating his whole campaign as if he were aiming to do a deal. In his book The Art of the Deal, he says that the person who wins in negotiations is the one most willing to withdraw. Why throw good money after bad?
What record does he have of banging against a brick wall when it's clear he won't get what he wants? He fought a brilliant campaign until recently.
In Oct 2015, albeit referring only to the race for the Republican nomination, in which he was by then the frontrunner, he said "If I fell behind badly, I would certainly get out." Admittedly he followed that by the contradictory "I'm in this for the long haul."
But prices of something like 1000 for each of Kasich and Cruz, the same as for Stein and Johnson, I think were very low. They have now risen to 260 and 410.
Isn't the public purse paying for £60 million of it, plus tax relief? The fact that can be called 'largely by private donations' shows how expensive the whole project is. According to Wiki it's £30 mn from HMT and £30 mn from TfL. Then there are the ludicrous ongoing maintenance expenses - was it £3 million a year?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_Bridge_Project
I'm sure Londoners on here can find better things to spend £60 million of public funds on. A bridge further downstream in East London perhaps? You know, where one is actually needed.
We really really need some inflation to enable interest rates to rise. Time for helicopter money? A Grand for everyone on the electoral role??
I was dog-tired and still had to get to the campsite at the end of the day.
Gabriel Debenedetti
Don't be fooled by the slowish trickle of the changes: some seismic shifts @ the DNC lately: Chair, vice chair, CEO, CFO, comms...
You shouldn't be missing any tests, but if you did miss one you would think you would be 110% to be constantly on top of this stuff. 3 tests is a lot to miss.
In St Ives (Cambs) there is a 15th-C chapel on a bridge:
http://www.stives-town.info/album/images/st_ives_bridge.jpg