Again it was always stated that some of the £350m would go to the NHS and some elsewhere. I've quoted the exact text to you repeatedly so can't be arsed doing it again.
Posters simplify policies into memorable catchphrases. The policy at the time of that poster as was well publicised was that SOME of that money was going to the NHS. If you claim you didn't know that at the time you're a liar. Want me to find a post by you were you knew that to be the case at the time?
EV Is one of the first sites I check every morning in election season. And in the interests of balance, the guy who runs EV recommends http://www.electionprojecrion.com/ which leans strongly Republican. Both sites try to be scrupulous with their methodology.
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
Again it was always stated that some of the £350m would go to the NHS and some elsewhere. I've quoted the exact text to you repeatedly so can't be arsed doing it again.
Posters simplify policies into memorable catchphrases. The policy at the time of that poster as was well publicised was that SOME of that money was going to the NHS. If you claim you didn't know that at the time you're a liar. Want me to find a post by you were you knew that to be the case at the time?
The fact that this was widely known to be a lie at the time hardly makes it true!
I read the shit Plato posts which is why I keep getting so angry that it is always overblown nonsense at best or libelous easily disprovable lies at worst.
Just as devil's advocate, isn't the point, however, that this sort of stuff is influencing US voters? The leave campaign was full of overblown nonsense (like that film suggesting that the UK no longer building as many ships as before World War One is down to the EU, or the peace and calm of queue-free post-Brexit A&E) - but nevertheless is relevant as a perspective on the campaign.
To be fair, if I understood the Remain campaign correctly, we would all be eaten by cannibals covered in woad by now.
The whole thing reminded me of 18th Cent elections, frankly. Sadly this did not reach the stage of ... "all kinds of tactics, including Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, touring the streets and, according to the opposition, kissing many voters to induce them to vote for Fox."
I suppose today that role would fall to Adam Werritty.
Ha!
Sadly an age has past. The days when John Wilkes replied "That depends, my lord, on whether I embrace your lordship's principles or your mistress." are long gone. Sadly.
I am rather tempted to setup the Illiberal Party... policies -
i) The abolition of the Commons. It has become fearfully common. ii) The replacement of the House of Lords by a chamber of 300. To be the closest illegitimate descendants of a previous Sovereign. Service would be obligatory, disbarment only for grossly *decent* behaviour in a public place - lunatics and criminals being especially welcome. iii) The Duke of Wellington will be appointed the Master of the Hats. He will judge the head gear of all in public life. Those guilty of wearing a bad hat will be sent to (mis) govern New South Wales, or other suitable places. iv) Port will be the national drink - under heavy penalty for abstaining.
Will the new Royal Gout Hospital be built under PFI?
No - upon a Subscription Of The Publick...
All those involved in PFI will be tried by the refounded Star Chamber and sentenced to The Pillory and a fine of 10,000 pounds(*). Payable in gold. A witty plea or remark in the court may get this reduced to service in the House of Lords.
* The current Pound will be replaced by the Olde Pound at a conversion rate of 1000 to 1. So a gentleman may once more live upon an annual income of £100.
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
The demographic assumptions could be torn asunder come Wednesday.
As it was when the LA Times tracker was showing 20% AA support, if that is what Trump is polling with Hispanics then he most certainly has won and every other polling outfit in the USA needs to close down.
The fact that this was widely known to be a lie at the time hardly makes it true!
Seems the new line from the Brexiteers is that while standing in front of a poster that says "Let's give our NHS the £350 million the EU takes every week" Boris was saying "We will not give the NHS £350m a week"
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
The policy at the time of that poster as was well publicised was that SOME of that money was going to the NHS.
Why would the public be expected to believe a policy explicitly contradicted by the poster.
If you are claiming the public were not supposed to believe the £350m a week would go to the NHS, you are a liar.
I believe the poster was used once and in error. With the exception of the one poster at the start of the campaign Vote Leave consistently argued that SOME money will go towards the NHS.
You can bang on and on about a single poster. However, the biggest lie ever told was by Europhiles such as yourself who have for decades tried to argue that the EU is not a political project committed to the creation of a United States of Europe.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
The demographic assumptions could be torn asunder come Wednesday.
Is the sample size known for that graph?
To answer my own question, they sample one seventh of their panel of 3000, so if around 20% of voters are Latino, the subsample will be less than 100, and the margin of error will be perhaps 20%. And indeed, the graph shows both curves teetering along the edges of the region shaded grey to indicate the margin of error.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
EDIT: Apparently a 10% price hike is not "massive" in the new world of Brexit
That would be 10% of the wholesale price to the supermarkets I assume, not 10% of the retail price, so should come through as less than 10% to the customer - unless the supeermarkets decide to pass on more than the increase in costs.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
The demographic assumptions could be torn asunder come Wednesday.
Depends on whether Latinos hate corruption more than sexual agression. (Note the large increase in the under $35K vote as well - reflecting similar changes.
Is this Trump reaching out to the weak, to the poor, to the destitute of all complexions?
No wonder all those wedding and yoga emails were deleted
Peter Petrovcic Doug Band says Chelsea paid to campaign, used Foundation money for wedding & whole life #PodestaEmails32 #wikileaks https://t.co/SpBvGcNsfD
I know that's what this site is about, but I shouldn't have started looking at the state-by-state odds - tempted to put my savings in - better returns than in the savings account... For example Dems at 1.2 for Virginia shouts "free money".
The most accurate US pollster in recent elections just published their poll and it has Trump up by 1%. Given what's happening in the battlegrounds that's not good news for Clinton.
The demographic assumptions could be torn asunder come Wednesday.
Depends on whether Latinos hate corruption more than sexual agression. (Note the large increase in the under $35K vote as well - reflecting similar changes.
Is this Trump reaching out to the weak, to the poor, to the destitute of all complexions?
Highly correlated changes in the subsamples are an artifact of there extreme number of weighted demographic groups.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
Comparing with the figures in his article yesterday, his estimate for the Democrat lead is about 300,000, with about 1,200,000 still to vote.
Again it was always stated that some of the £350m would go to the NHS and some elsewhere. I've quoted the exact text to you repeatedly so can't be arsed doing it again.
Posters simplify policies into memorable catchphrases. The policy at the time of that poster as was well publicised was that SOME of that money was going to the NHS. If you claim you didn't know that at the time you're a liar. Want me to find a post by you were you knew that to be the case at the time?
So the Leave campaign thought that the concept of 'some' of that money was too complicated and thought they'd keep things memorably simple for for the electorate? How helpful of them.
'You remember that money that's coming back to the NHS if we leave, Eth? Was it the whole £350m a week or just some of it?'
'No Ron, the poster definitely said 'Let's give our NHS the £350 million the EU take every week'. That nice Mr Johnson was in front of it so it must be true.'
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
70% white looks like narrow Trump win to me.
Dunno - look at male/female divide.
Well looks like there's a typo since not adding to 100%.
No wonder all those wedding and yoga emails were deleted
Peter Petrovcic Doug Band says Chelsea paid to campaign, used Foundation money for wedding & whole life #PodestaEmails32 #wikileaks https://t.co/SpBvGcNsfD
Just so other people are aware this does actually look like an important, damaging email and not the usual lies and overblown bullshit.
EDIT: Apparently a 10% price hike is not "massive" in the new world of Brexit
That would be 10% of the wholesale price to the supermarkets I assume, not 10% of the retail price, so should come through as less than 10% to the customer - unless the supeermarkets decide to pass on more than the increase in costs.
IIRC Unilever owned the Birds Eye brand for many years. 'Twas never thus in Clarence Frank Birdseye II's days.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
That doesn't narrow it down much - nearly everyone in Britain benefits from globalization and the use of cheap labour. I don't know what device you typed that post on but I imagine you did as well.
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
Internationalist is one of those words that is meant to imply good, but really means nothing of the sort, as the word alone has no moral value. It is a bit like the word progressive.
The policy at the time of that poster as was well publicised was that SOME of that money was going to the NHS.
Why would the public be expected to believe a policy explicitly contradicted by the poster.
If you are claiming the public were not supposed to believe the £350m a week would go to the NHS, you are a liar.
Some of the money would absolutely.
Just like the mansion tax last time funding umpteen different policies. The difference is that the Leave campaign repeatedly said that approximately £100mn a week (out of the £350mn) would go to the NHS.
So the Leave campaign thought that the concept of 'some' of that money was too complicated and thought they'd keep things memorably simple for for the electorate? How helpful of them.
'You remember that money that's coming back to the NHS if we leave, Eth? Was it the whole £350m a week or just some of it?'
'No Ron, the poster definitely said 'Let's give our NHS the £350 million the EU take every week'. That nice Mr Johnson was in front of it so it must be true.'
Afternoon Divvie
While you are at this moment agreeing with me and supporting my argument (first time for everything) I am obliged to ask whether the recent revelations that Brian Souter has abandoned his NAT buddies, and the secret Chinese trade deal he was linked to has crashed and burned, are related?
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
That doesn't narrow it down much - nearly everyone in Britain benefits from globalization and the use of cheap labour. I don't know what device you typed that post on but I imagine you did as well.
I'm hardly operating a business to do it, and nor am I regularly advocating a perspective saying how grim and unfair the UK is.
Internationalist is one of those words that is meant to imply good, but really means nothing of the sort, as the word alone has no moral value. It is a bit like the word progressive.
The alternative is Nationalist, which is universally bad
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
Internationalist is one of those words that is meant to imply good, but really means nothing of the sort, as the word alone has no moral value. It is a bit like the word progressive.
They tend to be Euronationalists... Just take a few, subtle, soundings of what they hate....
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
EDIT: Apparently a 10% price hike is not "massive" in the new world of Brexit
That would be 10% of the wholesale price to the supermarkets I assume, not 10% of the retail price, so should come through as less than 10% to the customer - unless the supeermarkets decide to pass on more than the increase in costs.
Listen........ To the sound of clutching at straws.
No wonder all those wedding and yoga emails were deleted
Peter Petrovcic Doug Band says Chelsea paid to campaign, used Foundation money for wedding & whole life #PodestaEmails32 #wikileaks https://t.co/SpBvGcNsfD
Just so other people are aware this does actually look like an important, damaging email and not the usual lies and overblown bullshit.
I couldn't see the context because the wikileaks site wasn't responding but the sentence shown in the tweet says foundation "resources", not money. More likely Band is claiming foundation employees spent time on helping with the wedding, I'd imagine.
I know that's what this site is about, but I shouldn't have started looking at the state-by-state odds - tempted to put my savings in - better returns than in the savings account... For example Dems at 1.2 for Virginia shouts "free money".
Nate has it at 82% chance of a Clinton win - which would equate to 1.17 I think. But if Trump wins Virginia he'll be home free. He would need the average poll to be something like 2.5% out. DYOR.
I suspect a lot of bettors are using 538 to estimate chances - there seems to be a good correlation between betfair implied probabilities and Nate's.
Not sure how this works - New Hampshire is 1.57 for Democrats - I would have thought that would be better than 1.28 on Clinton since NH would be the first of her firewall to go. DYOR
Do you think its possible for the UK to run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
I voted to reduce it.
See if you can reconcile that with anything else
Repeating a line which is meaningless makes you sound like someone with something to hide.
Now why don't you want to say whether you think the UK can run a £100bn current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
Because if you say it can then you sound like an economic illiterate and if you say it can't you are accepting that sterling needs to fall in value and all your project fear pasting is invalidated.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
70% white looks like narrow Trump win to me.
Dunno - look at male/female divide.
Well looks like there's a typo since not adding to 100%.
Or is it that the official data don't specify gender? I see online analyses of earlier elections in which the male/female figures don't add up to 100%, though they get closer. Presumably it means gender is guessed from given names.
Of course, the male/female turnout imbalance can be close to that in 2012 and still have a different effect, if the gender imbalance in voting intention in different.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
70% white looks like narrow Trump win to me.
Dunno - look at male/female divide.
Well looks like there's a typo since not adding to 100%.
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
Estonia isn't quite doing nationality yet, but the Estonian "e-Residency" thing seems to be positioning itself to let you do a lot of the administrative tasks that are traditionally managed by your local nation state.
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
So the Leave campaign thought that the concept of 'some' of that money was too complicated and thought they'd keep things memorably simple for for the electorate? How helpful of them.
'You remember that money that's coming back to the NHS if we leave, Eth? Was it the whole £350m a week or just some of it?'
'No Ron, the poster definitely said 'Let's give our NHS the £350 million the EU take every week'. That nice Mr Johnson was in front of it so it must be true.'
Afternoon Divvie
While you are at this moment agreeing with me and supporting my argument (first time for everything) I am obliged to ask whether the recent revelations that Brian Souter has abandoned his NAT buddies, and the secret Chinese trade deal he was linked to has crashed and burned, are related?
I think you'll find that I have my own arguments & views, and any agreement is entirely coincidental. Just like your view that enforced McBrexit is sufficient grounds for Nicola to hold an Indy 2 referendum coincides with mine.
No idea about Souter, but I'm heartily enjoying the sight of born again Brexiteer SCons like wee Murdo embracing Sir Brian. Like a black cab sniffing out a fair, they can turn on a sixpence and nary a touch on the indicators.
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
Estonia isn't quite doing nationality yet, but the Estonian "e-Residency" thing seems to be positioning itself to let you do a lot of the administrative tasks that are traditionally managed by your local nation state.
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
That's interesting, thank you. So - have I understood correctly - effectively, there are/will be no residence qualifications for Estonian citizenship?
Do you think its possible for the UK to run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
I voted to reduce it.
See if you can reconcile that with anything else
Repeating a line which is meaningless makes you sound like someone with something to hide.
Now why don't you want to say whether you think the UK can run a £100bn current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
Because if you say it can then you sound like an economic illiterate and if you say it can't you are accepting that sterling needs to fall in value and all your project fear pasting is invalidated.
I think that there may be some confusion here between budget deficit and current account deficit. Having said that the question is what meaningful steps a government can take to reduce the sort of deficit that you're referring to (particularly in the context of where interest rates lie).
I think the Brexiteer line is that they are "patriots" (sic)
The discussion line around decolonisation has always been to the effect of is it better to make one's own decisions and the consequences that entail. Think about it, please.
the biggest lie ever told was by Europhiles such as yourself
I am not a Europhile.
I am an Internationalist who despises petty Nationalism in any form, whether peddled by Nicola, Nigel, Adolf or Donald.
That way madness lies, as we are finding out.
You're no patriot, for sure.
Scott_Pasty "It is all very well to be "advanced" and "enlightened," to snigger at Colonel Blimp and proclaim your emancipation from all traditional loyalties, but a time comes when the sand of the desert is sodden red and what have I done for thee, England, my England? As I was brought up in this tradition myself I can recognise it under strange disguises, and also sympathise with it, for even at its stupidest and most sentimental it is a comelier thing than the shallow self-righteousness of the left-wing intelligentsia." Orwell.
The discussion line around decolonisation has always been to the effect of is it better to make one's own decisions and the consequences that entail. Think about it, please.
And if you want to claim that Mugabe is better than what came before, have at it
What is the logic in that? It isn't like a Labour supporter voting LibDem to keep the Tory out. The only way that McMullin could win it for Clinton is if he takes enough votes in Utah from Trump to stop Trump winning but without getting enough votes to win it himself, and meanwhile Clinton wins sufficient support to beat both McMullin and Trump, and that is NOT going to happen. It's more likely that McMullin will win Utah than Clinton will. If he does win, I will be very surprised if his electors vote for Clinton. If they don't vote for McMullin himself they will vote for Pence or Ryan or some other Republican. If there's no overall majority in the electoral college, Clinton's chances of winning the presidency will fall through the floor. There will be a GOTVITEC ("Get Out the Vote In the Electoral College") stage, but Clinton is unlikely to be a big player in it. The question will be will it be Trump who gets the Oval Office or will it be whatever right-winger has managed to come third in the electoral college vote.
The discussion line around decolonisation has always been to the effect of is it better to make one's own decisions and the consequences that entail. Think about it, please.
And if you want to claim that Mugabe is better than what came before, have at it
Depends whether you think apartheid was a good thing. Your opinion is obvious. EDIT: although I suspect accidental as you've clearly not thought through the consequences of your position.
It's surprising how few polls there are in the US just two days before the vote. During the final weekend before a British GE everyone and his dog are making their predictions and issuing polling figures.
FWIW, those clever folk at Sporting have Hillary 5 ECVs up compared with yesterday at a mid-spread of 315, whilst The Donald is down by the same extent on 222 ECVs. Spreadex are slightly more conservative as regards Hillary's prospects, going 303.5 with Trump's mid-spread being 231.5. Meanwhile, 538.com have it much closer wth Hillary on 292 and Trump just 46 ECVs behind on 246.
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
Estonia isn't quite doing nationality yet, but the Estonian "e-Residency" thing seems to be positioning itself to let you do a lot of the administrative tasks that are traditionally managed by your local nation state.
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
That's interesting, thank you. So - have I understood correctly - effectively, there are/will be no residence qualifications for Estonian citizenship?
It's not actual citizenship - it's sort-of a globalized version of their administrative ID card system - but there are no residence qualifications for it. You send them a fee and ID documents and they send you a card, and the card contains a chip that allows you to digitally sign documents. You can then use it for a bunch of Estonian government services, like founding a company in Estonia (technically via an Estonia-based middleman) then administering it entirely online, authenticated by the card.
Since it's often useful to be able to verify your identity on the internet, this is being increasingly used for services that are nothing to do with Estonia.
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY NC early vote, near final tallies: 3.098m D 41.7, R 31.9 W 70.7, B 22.2 F 55.5, M 42.2 18-29: 13.1 65+ 27.6
70% white looks like narrow Trump win to me.
Dunno - look at male/female divide.
Well looks like there's a typo since not adding to 100%.
Of course, the male/female turnout imbalance can be close to that in 2012 and still have a different effect, if the gender imbalance in voting intention in different.
Of course that's entirely possible, but my point is the claims of a surging female vote doesn't stack up with the evidence.
Do you think its possible for the UK to run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
I voted to reduce it.
See if you can reconcile that with anything else
Repeating a line which is meaningless makes you sound like someone with something to hide.
Now why don't you want to say whether you think the UK can run a £100bn current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
Because if you say it can then you sound like an economic illiterate and if you say it can't you are accepting that sterling needs to fall in value and all your project fear pasting is invalidated.
I think that there may be some confusion here between budget deficit and current account deficit. Having said that the question is what meaningful steps a government can take to reduce the sort of deficit that you're referring to (particularly in the context of where interest rates lie).
The current account deficit I'm referring to is this:
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
Estonia isn't quite doing nationality yet, but the Estonian "e-Residency" thing seems to be positioning itself to let you do a lot of the administrative tasks that are traditionally managed by your local nation state.
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
That's interesting, thank you. So - have I understood correctly - effectively, there are/will be no residence qualifications for Estonian citizenship?
It's not actual citizenship - it's sort-of a globalized version of their administrative ID card system - but there are no residence qualifications for it. You send them a fee and ID documents and they send you a card, and the card contains a chip that allows you to digitally sign documents. You can then use it for a bunch of Estonian government services, like founding a company in Estonia (technically via an Estonia-based middleman) then administering it entirely online, authenticated by the card.
Since it's often useful to be able to verify your identity on the internet, this is being increasingly used for services that are nothing to do with Estonia.
Depends whether you think apartheid was a good thing.
No, the question was whether the resultant state is worse. Your opinion is obvious...
In any case, the debate around colonisation is not really applicable to the EU debate, unless the Brexiteers are really claiming the UK has been "colonised" by the EU.
The alternative is Nationalist, which is universally bad
So all Nationalist movements in colonial Africa were bad? What about the Nationalists in the Soviet bloc?
Weren't they independence movements?
There's a great deal of good scholarly writing around it (and the BDEEP series shows the views of CO/FCO very well) but in short it was a mixture of the two. Yes independence but also nationalism based on locality. When we attempted to tidy up our possessions into a number of federations (which made economic and geographic sense) they quickly pulled themselves apart. The only one that survived, and even that had Singapore fall out, was the Federated States of Malaya.
The alternative is Nationalist, which is universally bad
So all Nationalist movements in colonial Africa were bad? What about the Nationalists in the Soviet bloc?
Weren't they independence movements?
Ha Ha - hmm UKIP.....
Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies. General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war! Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies... General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
For more fun - are the Baltic states good/bad/evil for being not keen on the the large ethnic Russian populations that were moved there expressly to eliminate their culture by Russification?
I've recently encountered a few people who have taken to announcing themselves as 'internationalists'.
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
I've been wondering whether the EU project is sufficiently advanced now for EU leaders to be able to offer EU citizenship to UK nationals who feel a real European identity.
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
Estonia isn't quite doing nationality yet, but the Estonian "e-Residency" thing seems to be positioning itself to let you do a lot of the administrative tasks that are traditionally managed by your local nation state.
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
That's interesting, thank you. So - have I understood correctly - effectively, there are/will be no residence qualifications for Estonian citizenship?
It's not actual citizenship - it's sort-of a globalized version of their administrative ID card system - but there are no residence qualifications for it. You send them a fee and ID documents and they send you a card, and the card contains a chip that allows you to digitally sign documents. You can then use it for a bunch of Estonian government services, like founding a company in Estonia (technically via an Estonia-based middleman) then administering it entirely online, authenticated by the card.
Since it's often useful to be able to verify your identity on the internet, this is being increasingly used for services that are nothing to do with Estonia.
I know that's what this site is about, but I shouldn't have started looking at the state-by-state odds - tempted to put my savings in - better returns than in the savings account... For example Dems at 1.2 for Virginia shouts "free money".
Nate has it at 82% chance of a Clinton win - which would equate to 1.17 I think. But if Trump wins Virginia he'll be home free. He would need the average poll to be something like 2.5% out. DYOR.
I suspect a lot of bettors are using 538 to estimate chances - there seems to be a good correlation between betfair implied probabilities and Nate's.
Not sure how this works - New Hampshire is 1.57 for Democrats - I would have thought that would be better than 1.28 on Clinton since NH would be the first of her firewall to go. DYOR
An 82% probability gives a fair price of 1.220.
On the big national-level question, Nate's probabilities and Betfair's are way out of sync:
I reckon the explanation is that many people are staking money on Clinton shortly before voting day not because they've analysed indicators that have varying amounts of weight but simply because she is the strong favourite. Cf. Brexit.
Comments
If you are claiming the public were not supposed to believe the £350m a week would go to the NHS, you are a liar.
All those involved in PFI will be tried by the refounded Star Chamber and sentenced to The Pillory and a fine of 10,000 pounds(*). Payable in gold. A witty plea or remark in the court may get this reduced to service in the House of Lords.
* The current Pound will be replaced by the Olde Pound at a conversion rate of 1000 to 1. So a gentleman may once more live upon an annual income of £100.
https://twitter.com/lindayueh/status/795250963539955712
EDIT: Apparently a 10% price hike is not "massive" in the new world of Brexit
And if you believe that...
I've asked you this numerous times and yet you never answer.
Will you have the courage to give a reply this time ?
You can bang on and on about a single poster. However, the biggest lie ever told was by Europhiles such as yourself who have for decades tried to argue that the EU is not a political project committed to the creation of a United States of Europe.
I am an Internationalist who despises petty Nationalism in any form, whether peddled by Nicola, Nigel, Adolf or Donald.
That way madness lies, as we are finding out.
So I'll ask again.
Do you think its possible for the UK to run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
A simple yes or no will suffice if you have the courage.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/watch-vote-leaves-dom-cummings-is-grilled-by-andrew-tyrie-this-sounds-like-aladdins-cave-to-me/
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn 9m9 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
NC early vote, near final tallies:
3.098m
D 41.7, R 31.9
W 70.7, B 22.2
F 55.5, M 42.2
18-29: 13.1
65+ 27.6
There's more really odd references to pizza
So I'll ask again.
Do you think its possible for the UK to run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
A simple yes or no will suffice if you have the courage.
Are you a coward Scott ?
Are you too scared to say either:
"Yes, the UK can run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis."
or
"No, the UK cannot run a £100bn annual current account deficit on a permanent basis."
Is this Trump reaching out to the weak, to the poor, to the destitute of all complexions?
Peter Petrovcic
Doug Band says Chelsea paid to campaign, used Foundation money for wedding & whole life #PodestaEmails32 #wikileaks https://t.co/SpBvGcNsfD
They largely appear to be a beneficiaries of globalisation and the use of cheap labour though a little reticent to say so.
Most appear to be directly profiting from outsourcing work and supply to foreign destinations.
See if you can reconcile that with anything else
Brexiteers, November: NO NOT LIKE THAT
'You remember that money that's coming back to the NHS if we leave, Eth? Was it the whole £350m a week or just some of it?'
'No Ron, the poster definitely said 'Let's give our NHS the £350 million the EU take every week'. That nice Mr Johnson was in front of it so it must be true.'
But look at 2012, not much difference;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/29/where-early-voting-hints-at-good-news-for-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump/
Curious what people believe when it suits their agenda
Just like the mansion tax last time funding umpteen different policies. The difference is that the Leave campaign repeatedly said that approximately £100mn a week (out of the £350mn) would go to the NHS.
While you are at this moment agreeing with me and supporting my argument (first time for everything) I am obliged to ask whether the recent revelations that Brian Souter has abandoned his NAT buddies, and the secret Chinese trade deal he was linked to has crashed and burned, are related?
Presumably such people wouldn't want to transfer to another nationalist identity, but EU citizenship for EU supra-nationals is surely on the cards at some time, so why not now?
The only thing is, if they swapped their UK citizenship for a generalised EU citizenship, and then through whatever ill-fortune the EU did collapse, would they end up stateless?
(Good afternoon, everyone)
The box does not contain any cables to let me connect it to my Sonos Bridge or Amazon fire TV stick.
It's an OUTRAGE!
Oh, wait...
Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off.
I suspect a lot of bettors are using 538 to estimate chances - there seems to be a good correlation between betfair implied probabilities and Nate's.
Not sure how this works - New Hampshire is 1.57 for Democrats - I would have thought that would be better than 1.28 on Clinton since NH would be the first of her firewall to go. DYOR
Now why don't you want to say whether you think the UK can run a £100bn current account deficit on a permanent basis ?
Because if you say it can then you sound like an economic illiterate and if you say it can't you are accepting that sterling needs to fall in value and all your project fear pasting is invalidated.
Of course, the male/female turnout imbalance can be close to that in 2012 and still have a different effect, if the gender imbalance in voting intention in different.
Dem 47.60%
Rep 31.50%
None/Oth 20.90%
Age
18-29 13.20%
30-44 21.80%
45-59 29.50%
60+ 35.50%
Race
White 67.40%
Black 27.40%
Other 5.30%
Gender
Female 55.90%
Male 43.00%
Unk. 1.10%
(explains why it doesn't add to 100, they include unknown)
http://www.electproject.org/2012_early_vote
If you did get an EU nationality from somebody (more likely a forward-thinking member state than something top-down) the UK allows dual nationality, so you wouldn't need to swap.
No idea about Souter, but I'm heartily enjoying the sight of born again Brexiteer SCons like wee Murdo embracing Sir Brian. Like a black cab sniffing out a fair, they can turn on a sixpence and nary a touch on the indicators.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/06/labour-will-not-block-article-50-jeremy-corbyn-allies-confirm
The civil uprising will have to wait another day.
"It is all very well to be "advanced" and "enlightened," to snigger at Colonel Blimp and proclaim your emancipation from all traditional loyalties, but a time comes when the sand of the desert is sodden red and what have I done for thee, England, my England? As I was brought up in this tradition myself I can recognise it under strange disguises, and also sympathise with it, for even at its stupidest and most sentimental it is a comelier thing than the shallow self-righteousness of the left-wing intelligentsia."
Orwell.
FWIW, those clever folk at Sporting have Hillary 5 ECVs up compared with yesterday at a mid-spread of 315, whilst The Donald is down by the same extent on 222 ECVs.
Spreadex are slightly more conservative as regards Hillary's prospects, going 303.5 with Trump's mid-spread being 231.5.
Meanwhile, 538.com have it much closer wth Hillary on 292 and Trump just 46 ECVs behind on 246.
Since it's often useful to be able to verify your identity on the internet, this is being increasingly used for services that are nothing to do with Estonia.
https://e-estonia.com/e-residents/about/
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/hbop/pnbp
Now to reduce this there are various methods:
The UK can create more wealth
The UK can start living within its means
The UK can increase its savings rate
or the value of sterling can fall so that imports are priced out and exports are boosted.
In any case, the debate around colonisation is not really applicable to the EU debate, unless the Brexiteers are really claiming the UK has been "colonised" by the EU.
Seems some of them are
Captain Darling: So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies.
General Melchett: Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling: And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett: Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
For more fun - are the Baltic states good/bad/evil for being not keen on the the large ethnic Russian populations that were moved there expressly to eliminate their culture by Russification?
I'm merely pointing out the stupidity of Scott's internationalism = good and nationalism = bad thinking.
Anyone got the data?
Whenever you're ready...
On the big national-level question, Nate's probabilities and Betfair's are way out of sync:
Trump 34.5% (538); 21.1% (Betfair, midprice 4.75).
I reckon the explanation is that many people are staking money on Clinton shortly before voting day not because they've analysed indicators that have varying amounts of weight but simply because she is the strong favourite. Cf. Brexit.