Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
I'm interested in the first bit. Can you search a PB thread for a key word? How? That would be really useful.
I'm accessing PB via the vanilla forums. There it has a search section (although it takes a while to load).
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Yes, that wasn't a majority view on here.
I know, I didn't say it was. I'm still shocked that one person seriously said that, though.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
I'm interested in the first bit. Can you search a PB thread for a key word? How? That would be really useful.
I'm accessing PB via the vanilla forums. There it has a search section (although it takes a while to load).
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
London also has pre-existing infrastructure for companies like Google and Apple. That's probably the main decision to stay in London instead of shifting resources to Europe or some other part of the UK.
After Donald Trump’s election as president, Pamela Ramsey Taylor, director of the Clay County Development Corp., took to Facebook to comment on the upcoming shift from Obama to Melania Trump, reportedly writing: “It will be so refreshing to have a classy, beautiful, dignified First Lady back in the White House. I’m tired of seeing a Ape in heels.”
Even if it was not intended to be racially derogatory (which I doubt) it's still an awful comment to describe any woman as an "ape".
Absolutely. The fact that Michelle Obama is classy, beautiful and dignified really does not come into it. In this country I think this would be prosecutable. A sick, sick individual.
I wouldn't want it to be prosecutable, because it's good for people like Pamela Taylor to show themselves in their true colours. Such a comment says far more about her than anyone else could.
From what I could pick up, I thought Michelle Obama had done some good work for women's rights and education. Ad hominem or bitchy comments should be beneath opponents. Regrettably we are getting a lot from the Democrats because that is what they do and from the Republicans because it is payback time.
Calling a black woman an ape goes well beyond bitchy.
It is utterly revolting. And quite genuinely shocking. (And I'm not easily shocked.)
Michelle Obama has been the epitome of a classy, dignified and beautiful First Lady. As far as I know she appears not to have put a foot wrong. But even if she weren't any of those things, one simply does not talk about people in such a way.
Indeed. Even if she is a terrible terrible person, surely its so despicable to say such a thing im such a way.
@MaxPB Well yes, and the agglomeration economics probably help a lot too. But I'm not going to pass up an opportunity like that.
Inertia is one of the biggest reasons I think Brexit will have minimal overall impact. Its much harder to create something than to demolish it, rebuilding the exact conditions of London for finance, legal, tech and other services in some other part of Europe is, IMO, impossible. It's the rest of the country that the government will need to mitigate any economic impact from a looser relationship with Europe.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Evening all. I see the power of PB has dropped the price on H1 '17 to 1.6. There's got to be a good chance that the govt will try and force this through before the anniversary of the vote, my concern is if someone challenges the notice as it's done in the ECJ and we have to wait for years with the market suspended while the ECJ make up their minds.
Now a proper conspiracist would be citing this as evidence that the government wants to lose the case to trigger an election where Labour might well disintegrate.
Indeed. I still think that is not the case, but there's a surprising amount of hysteria at the idea the law might be stated to be such that it means more hoops to jump through. Oh, what a tragedy - if you're not prepare dot keep on fighting within the law, that's pretty weak. He also seems to have forgotten the government has acknowledged it is for the court to tell the politicians whether it has the power to trigger A50, and thus presumably what the law currently demands they would need or not.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Tbh, I'm beginning to wonder whether some people seriously sympathise with (or at least don't really oppose) the views the likes of Bannon have, and the 'winds up lefties' thing is a cover for that. I mean reading SeanT say that he thinks we should celebrate a white supremacist in the White House? Really? That was a bit jarring to read....
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Ref: Keynes's quote.
What facts have changed? The EU now admits that they want an army. The EU's arrogance and stupidity have if anything grown as has their determination to increase centralisation. The trade deals that the EU looked to deliver with the US look like a write off. The UK economy is growing faster than expected. We are continuing to attract way more than our share of inward investment. We no longer have a government committed to remain. None of project Fear has (yet) come to pass. Merkel has today suggested that freedom of movement does not equal freedom to claim benefits in the host country.
Only the last one might really make people pause and that is dependent on Germany being able to deliver it. Otherwise it looks like a more decisive out to me.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
Now a proper conspiracist would be citing this as evidence that the government wants to lose the case to trigger an election where Labour might well disintegrate.
Is there evidence that Duncan-Smith is clever enough to think of that?
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Ref: Keynes's quote.
That's fine in theory. But in practice it opens up the SNP scenario of arguing that the tide has gone out or it has started raining and so in view of those changed circumstances we need to vote again. And again. And again. Until the first time that we get it "right" and then it's done and dusted.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Tbh, I'm beginning to wonder whether some people seriously sympathise with (or at least don't really oppose) the views the likes of Bannon have, and the 'winds up lefties' thing is a cover for that. I mean reading SeanT say that he thinks we should celebrate a white supremacist in the White House? Really? That was a bit jarring to read....
Oh, there are undoubtedly one or two. We all know who they are. SeanT is not among them. He is a member of the wind-up a lefty club, nothing more. But I can understand why you would find it jarring. The KKK's backing of Trump is very worrying.
It is utterly revolting. And quite genuinely shocking. (And I'm not easily shocked.)
Michelle Obama has been the epitome of a classy, dignified and beautiful First Lady. As far as I know she appears not to have put a foot wrong. But even if she weren't any of those things, one simply does not talk about people in such a way.
One of the fringe conspiracy theories out there is that Obama is gay and Michelle Obama is a man. The Obama children are, of course, kidnapped.
I say fringe but it's been pedalled by Alex Jones so I suppose that's now main stream orthodox on the right.
Now a proper conspiracist would be citing this as evidence that the government wants to lose the case to trigger an election where Labour might well disintegrate.
Is there evidence that Duncan-Smith is clever enough to think of that?
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principle.
The idea once there is a vote you are committed down a path no matter what, even if there was unambiguous proof that it would be a disaster and also proof people were not happy to accept the price of that disaster for what they feel they would gain, is actually pretty silly. It is quite reasonable, in theory, to suggest that if the facts change sufficiently you can change your mind. In theory, for example, if a brand new, superior deal was offered by the EU, I'd be prepared to look at it.
Now, I've also said all along though that the chances of something occurring to change the facts as already existed significantly seems unlikely, the chances of the EU offering a fresh deal very remote, the chances of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
Of course the Google investment has to be in London. While we've a political culture that blames all our problems on the EU we'll never take the action needed to make our other cities investible for Google.
And no Google's investment in London doesn't justify Brexit. The pattern of the Leave vote was a protest against an economy where we rely on the Googles of the world invest Billions in London.
To put it crudely and to slightly oversimplify Google is investing in London because it's full of Remain demographics. Doncaster voted leave because it hates the reasons Google invested in London.
So Leavers are curiously making the same alleged mistake of Remoaners. Seeing all Good news through the prism of Brexit but not the Leave vote.
It is utterly revolting. And quite genuinely shocking. (And I'm not easily shocked.)
Michelle Obama has been the epitome of a classy, dignified and beautiful First Lady. As far as I know she appears not to have put a foot wrong. But even if she weren't any of those things, one simply does not talk about people in such a way.
One of the fringe conspiracy theories out there is that Obama is gay and Michelle Obama is a man. The Obama children are, of course, kidnapped.
I say fringe but it's been pedalled by Alex Jones so I suppose that's now main stream orthodox on the right.
That's quite .... novel ... as a theory. I'm not quite sure how to put it into a search engine and verify it exists or ifyou just made it up without potentially unintended consequences side-effects.
I'm not sure if that in itself should raise eyebrows, or the fact that someone, somewhere is willing to pay £120,000 an hour for him to pontificate!
It's a ridiculous amount, but if people are willing to pay that much, there's nothing wrong with that I suppose. People will scoff at Blair making money, but its the alleged advice to unsavory governments that makes the general money grubbing worse, rather than taking money for speechyfying.
The Baldwin de nos jours. and he'll be hiding behind high walls like his predecessor if/when this kills a few hundred sailors.
Ah, that one.
You see, BAe kept on touting ludicrously expensive "solutions" to Harpoon replacement. Government procurement policy is to buy LRASM when it actually enters service. And buy it off the shelf, with no special modifications that make it not work.... It is just finishing testing now.
The new maritime patrol aircraft - the P-8 - was only purchased after it had actually entered service in the US and been proved to actually work.
We are buying F35s of f the production line - avoiding the pre-production aircraft that have to be expensively modified to get them up to standard.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Paul Joseph Watson Turns out threatening to kill the next president isn't great business PR. https://t.co/LViQIZbkng
PacketSled's Matt Harrigan posted multiple threats against Trump on Facebook, which later went viral on Reddit, according to a report in The Daily Beast.
“I’m going to kill the president. Elect,” Harrigan wrote in one post. “Bring it secret service.”
The cybersecurity company said in a statement Tuesday that it accepted Harrigan's resignation, "effective immediately."
"We want to be very clear, PacketSled does not condone the comments made by Mr. Harrigan, which do not reflect the views or opinions of the company, its employees, investors or partners," the statement read.
On topic May will take a huge hit if she delays past her own deadline of end of March. It seems inconceivable she'd get away with not invoking A50 by the referendum anniversary. We'd need an external shock bigger than anything we've had yet to justify that sort of delay. We have to remember Corbyn's has been unambiguous in accept A50 invocation as well. So I think Betfair prices are sentiment driven.
Which isn't to say Brexit isn't slowly but steadily unravelling before our eyes. It clearly is. No wonder so many of our Leaver posters are ratty and unpleasant at the moment. However something going wrong and something not happening are different things.
The Baldwin de nos jours. and he'll be hiding behind high walls like his predecessor if/when this kills a few hundred sailors.
Ah, that one.
You see, BAe kept on touting ludicrously expensive "solutions" to Harpoon replacement. Government procurement policy is to buy LRASM when it actually enters service. And buy it off the shelf, with no special modifications that make it not work.... It is just finishing testing now.
The new maritime patrol aircraft - the P-8 - was only purchased after it had actually entered service in the US and been proved to actually work.
We are buying F35s of f the production line - avoiding the pre-production aircraft that have to be expensively modified to get them up to standard.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
If you look at the details of Nimrod Procurement and more importantly, the independent report into the mid-air explosion of a Nimrod over Afghanistan you would never (a) go for a BAE solution; (b) believe anything that senior military says.
Yet the Telegraph and its readership continue to lap up lies and deliberate omissions and misrepresentations.
On topic May will take a huge hit if she delays past her own deadline of end of March. It seems inconceivable she'd get away with not invoking A50 by the referendum anniversary. We'd need an external shock bigger than anything we've had yet to justify that sort of delay. We have to remember Corbyn's has been unambiguous in accept A50 invocation as well. So I think Betfair prices are sentiment driven.
Which isn't to say Brexit isn't slowly but steadily unravelling before our eyes. It clearly is. No wonder so many of our Leaver posters are ratty and unpleasant at the moment. However something going wrong and something not happening are different things.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
London also has pre-existing infrastructure for companies like Google and Apple. That's probably the main decision to stay in London instead of shifting resources to Europe or some other part of the UK.
It is utterly revolting. And quite genuinely shocking. (And I'm not easily shocked.)
Michelle Obama has been the epitome of a classy, dignified and beautiful First Lady. As far as I know she appears not to have put a foot wrong. But even if she weren't any of those things, one simply does not talk about people in such a way.
One of the fringe conspiracy theories out there is that Obama is gay and Michelle Obama is a man. The Obama children are, of course, kidnapped.
I say fringe but it's been pedalled by Alex Jones so I suppose that's now main stream orthodox on the right.
That's quite .... novel ... as a theory. I'm not quite sure how to put it into a search engine and verify it exists or ifyou just made it up without potentially unintended consequences side-effects.
You type in "Michelle Obama is a man" into Google. You get thr Joan Rivers bit but you also get the wackos who have done a whole thing including indepth YouTube video series about it.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Is it just me, or my first thought is - when was the last time that Mr Meeks visited Sheffield?
I always visit a place first, before insulting it and the inhabitants. I find that this ensures accuracy if nothing else.
For example, the secret police in Rabat are excellent fellows, thought their taste in tailor made suits is atrocious.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principle.
The idea once there is a vote you are committed down a path no matter what, even if there was unambiguous proof that it would be a disaster and also proof people were not happy to accept the price of that disaster for what they feel they would gain, is actually pretty silly. It is quite reasonable, in theory, to suggest that if the facts change sufficiently you can change your mind. In theory, for example, if a brand new, superior deal was offered by the EU, I'd be prepared to look at it.
Now, I've also said all along though that the chances of something occurring to change the facts as already existed significantly seems unlikely, the chances of the EU offering a fresh deal very remote, the chances of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
Long overdue. We've been scammed for decades by the British defence industry.
On topic May will take a huge hit if she delays past her own deadline of end of March. It seems inconceivable she'd get away with not invoking A50 by the referendum anniversary. We'd need an external shock bigger than anything we've had yet to justify that sort of delay.
Agreed. It'd be embarrassing enough, having given an explicit deadline, for her to be pushed past it, even assuming she could blame it in on the enemy within. But to get to a year on and not having formally triggered? With both parties committed to exiting, in some form, and nothing on the horizon likely to change those positions, how could they hold off that long? I cannot see it.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Is it just me, or my first thought is - when was the last time that Mr Meeks visited Sheffield?
I always visit a place first, before insulting it and the inhabitants. I find that this ensures accuracy if nothing else.
For example, the secret police in Rabat are excellent fellows, thought their taste in tailor made suits is atrocious.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Yes, that wasn't a majority view on here.
I know, I didn't say it was. I'm still shocked that one person seriously said that, though.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principle.
The idea once there is a vote you are committed down a path no matter what, even if there was unambiguous proof that it would be a disaster and also proof people were not happy to accept the price of that disaster for what they feel they would gain, is actually pretty silly. It is quite reasonable, in theory, to suggest that if the facts change sufficiently you can change your mind. In theory, for example, if a brand new, superior deal was offered by the EU, I'd be prepared to look at it.
Now, I've also said all along though that the chances of something occurring to change the facts as already existed significantly seems unlikely, the chances of the EU offering a fresh deal very remote, the chances of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return.
Oh, absolutely. Brexit may not live up to our expectations or it may exceed them, but that will be impossible to assess properly for years, so droves will not change their minds quickly, and that would be needed to be proven to, in order for politicians to be willing to change tack.
The Baldwin de nos jours. and he'll be hiding behind high walls like his predecessor if/when this kills a few hundred sailors.
Ah, that one.
You see, BAe kept on touting ludicrously expensive "solutions" to Harpoon replacement. Government procurement policy is to buy LRASM when it actually enters service. And buy it off the shelf, with no special modifications that make it not work.... It is just finishing testing now.
The new maritime patrol aircraft - the P-8 - was only purchased after it had actually entered service in the US and been proved to actually work.
We are buying F35s of f the production line - avoiding the pre-production aircraft that have to be expensively modified to get them up to standard.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
If you look at the details of Nimrod Procurement and more importantly, the independent report into the mid-air explosion of a Nimrod over Afghanistan you would never (a) go for a BAE solution; (b) believe anything that senior military says.
Yet the Telegraph and its readership continue to lap up lies and deliberate omissions and misrepresentations.
My favourite bit from the Nimrod disaster was that senior officers said that the changes afterwards put them in an impossible position.
The issue was, that previously, when faced with an un-airworthy aircraft they would simply order that the aircraft would enter service. There was finding(!) that disobeying an order to falsify the airworthiness of an aircraft type would be insubordination and a court martial offense.
The changes after the Nirmrod cash didn't reverse that - it is still insubordination to declare an un-airworthy aircraft un-airworthy against orders. No. It is just that, legally, the giver of the order would be guilty of a criminal offense (negligence) in the event of an accident.
Senior people being actually accountable for their actions? Now that is an impossible position.
The Telegraph defense desk is a wholly owned subsidiary of the UK defense industry.
Bit like the TES is the mouthpiece of the UK education industry.
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Ref: Keynes's quote.
Isn't the situation always changing?
The EU's inability to react to change is one of the greatest arguments against it.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principlees of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
Why plough on? There's nothing wrong with going into a holding pattern until the wind changes. When Europe starts intercepting boats in the Med and sending them back, making it easier to restrict access to the welfare state to newcomers, and the PIGS are accepted to be doing ok, the people will have a different view.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Tbh, I'm beginning to wonder whether some people seriously sympathise with (or at least don't really oppose) the views the likes of Bannon have, and the 'winds up lefties' thing is a cover for that. I mean reading SeanT say that he thinks we should celebrate a white supremacist in the White House? Really? That was a bit jarring to read....
Oh, there are undoubtedly one or two. We all know who they are. SeanT is not among them. He is a member of the wind-up a lefty club, nothing more. But I can understand why you would find it jarring. The KKK's backing of Trump is very worrying.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principlees of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
Why plough on? There's nothing wrong with going into a holding pattern until the wind changes. When Europe starts intercepting boats in the Med and sending them back, making it easier to restrict access to the welfare state to newcomers, and the PIGS are accepted to be doing ok, the people will have a different view.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It w But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
Why plough on? There's nothing wrong with going into a holding pattern until the wind changes. When Europe starts intercepting boats in the Med and sending them back, making it easier to restrict access to the welfare state to newcomers, and the PIGS are accepted to be doing ok, the people will have a different view.
I think the crucial point is that by the time there are enough incontestable negative consequences (and assuming there are not positive consequences that outweigh them, which is of course what we all hope to be the case) that sufficient numbers are convinced, we will already have left - at which point the only options would be to make the best of it or go back on our hands and knees to the EU to take us back. And if that ever happens, fat chance of them admitting us back in, even if we promises to abide by all the rules, since it would only happen if we were suffering and they were doing fine, so there'd be no incentive for them to let back the troublemaker, no matter how penitent.
It is utterly revolting. And quite genuinely shocking. (And I'm not easily shocked.)
Michelle Obama has been the epitome of a classy, dignified and beautiful First Lady. As far as I know she appears not to have put a foot wrong. But even if she weren't any of those things, one simply does not talk about people in such a way.
One of the fringe conspiracy theories out there is that Obama is gay and Michelle Obama is a man. The Obama children are, of course, kidnapped.
I say fringe but it's been pedalled by Alex Jones so I suppose that's now main stream orthodox on the right.
That's quite .... novel ... as a theory. I'm not quite sure how to put it into a search engine and verify it exists or ifyou just made it up without potentially unintended consequences side-effects.
You type in "Michelle Obama is a man" into Google. You get thr Joan Rivers bit but you also get the wackos who have done a whole thing including indepth YouTube video series about it.
Wow. Ummmm. Thanks Alistair. I genuinely mean that, too. Cheers muchly. You've opened my eyes on a whole new vista of nuttiness.
Of course the Google investment has to be in London. While we've a political culture that blames all our problems on the EU we'll never take the action needed to make our other cities investible for Google.
And no Google's investment in London doesn't justify Brexit. The pattern of the Leave vote was a protest against an economy where we rely on the Googles of the world invest Billions in London.
To put it crudely and to slightly oversimplify Google is investing in London because it's full of Remain demographics. Doncaster voted leave because it hates the reasons Google invested in London.
So Leavers are curiously making the same alleged mistake of Remoaners. Seeing all Good news through the prism of Brexit but not the Leave vote.
Time to up the periscope and see what's going on above the water line.
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Ref: Keynes's quote.
Isn't the situation always changing?
The EU's inability to react to change is one of the greatest arguments against it.
Oh, it reacts. In the moment, with words. It just has no lasting, significant reaction which results in change. Although perhaps they will now, since we are on the way out.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Sheffield has some of the finest housing anywhere in the country, for a fraction of London's prices, as well as a fine university.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Sheffield has some of the finest housing anywhere in the country, for a fraction of London's prices, as well as a fine university.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Tbh, I'm beginning to wonder whether some people seriously sympathise with (or at least don't really oppose) the views the likes of Bannon have, and the 'winds up lefties' thing is a cover for that. I mean reading SeanT say that he thinks we should celebrate a white supremacist in the White House? Really? That was a bit jarring to read....
Oh, there are undoubtedly one or two. We all know who they are. SeanT is not among them. He is a member of the wind-up a lefty club, nothing more. But I can understand why you would find it jarring. The KKK's backing of Trump is very worrying.
I am pretty sure they also endorsed Reagan.
And yet for most of their history they've been a Democrat dominated organisation.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Sheffield has some of the finest housing anywhere in the country, for a fraction of London's prices, as well as a fine university.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
Long overdue. We've been scammed for decades by the British defence industry.
You can't blame industry - the MOD is a very big boy although a bit lacking upstairs
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It won't enrage absolutely everyone. I've even seen arch-over reacter SeanT make a similar point, though he may feel differently now. I said the other day I was surprised 'unconditional' support for Brexit was as high as it was, since I'd assume far fewer than the stated figure would back anything unconditionally, no matter how much they support it in principlees of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
Why plough on? There's nothing wrong with going into a holding pattern until the wind changes. When Europe starts intercepting boats in the Med and sending them back, making it easier to restrict access to the welfare state to newcomers, and the PIGS are accepted to be doing ok, the people will have a different view.
Yes, I'm sure the uncertainty will do wonders.
We'd have the certainty that we wouldn't accept a and deal. We'll stay as long as it takes to get what we want.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
Long overdue. We've been scammed for decades by the British defence industry.
You can't blame industry - the MOD is a very big boy although a bit lacking upstairs
The question who did commission the Deloitte report is obvious and glaring. No doubt we will find out in due course.
Sounds like it was commissioned by themselves. Who else would commission a report that was intended for internal Deloite consumption?
Who leaked it then to the press and presented as if it was a civil service paper?
I got the impression last night that the Deloite paper was a Whitehall one.
Someone from Deloite or the Times has been sloppy.
I don't think "sloppy" quite does it
The Managing Partner of Deloitte was signatory to a Remain letter in June. They clearly have an interest in Brexit failing.
Very few people have an interest in Brexit failing. If it goes wrong we all end up suffering - even the managing partner of Deloitte.
There are a huge number of people who want Brexit to fail - in the sense of it being blocked/stopped/people scared into recanting etc.
At the risk of enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of asking people whether they've changed their minds?
Ref: Keynes's quote.
What facts have changed? The EU now admits that they want an army. The EU's arrogance and stupidity have if anything grown as has their determination to increase centralisation. The trade deals that the EU looked to deliver with the US look like a write off. The UK economy is growing faster than expected. We are continuing to attract way more than our share of inward investment. We no longer have a government committed to remain. None of project Fear has (yet) come to pass. Merkel has today suggested that freedom of movement does not equal freedom to claim benefits in the host country.
Only the last one might really make people pause and that is dependent on Germany being able to deliver it. Otherwise it looks like a more decisive out to me.
I'm not saying that the facts have changed now. I was merely wondering aloud whether if facts changed in the future we might want to think again, particularly if Brexit has not actually happened.
For instance, if the US were to withdraw from NATO. Or if (and I appreciate that this may well be vanishingly unlikely) if the EU were to offer some form of associate membership or sufficient controls on free movement or even if companies started to close down in the UK in anticipation of Brexit.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Sheffield has some of the finest housing anywhere in the country, for a fraction of London's prices, as well as a fine university.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
At the risk o enraging absolutely everyone, if the facts change, shouldn't we at least be prepared to consider the possibility of askingpeople whether they've changedtheir minds?
It w But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
I have never thought Brexit was a particularly smart idea, but now the decision has been made we need to plough on regardless. If people changed their minds, then absolutely not a problem with cancelling it. But the thing is, people won't change their mind unless disaster is staring them in the face and by that point Brexit will already have happened and it will be past the point of no return. I don't really expect it to be a disaster, if Theresa May would only act with a bit more purpose and realism. Crap, yes, but not a disaster.
Why plough on? There's nothing wrong with going into a holding pattern until the wind changes. When Europe starts intercepting boats in the Med and sending them back, making it easier to restrict access to the welfare state to newcomers, and the PIGS are accepted to be doing ok, the people will have a different view.
I think the crucial point is that by the time there are enough incontestable negative consequences (and assuming there are not positive consequences that outweigh them, which is of course what we all hope to be the case) that sufficient numbers are convinced, we will already have left - at which point the only options would be to make the best of it or go back on our hands and knees to the EU to take us back. And if that ever happens, fat chance of them admitting us back in, even if we promises to abide by all the rules, since it would only happen if we were suffering and they were doing fine, so there'd be no incentive for them to let back the troublemaker, no matter how penitent.
One thing I am fairly sure of is that Brexit won't resolve anything. We'll leave and will still be arguing what to do about the EU. One part of the population will be seething about the iniquities of the EU, even though we are no longer members, while another part will be plotting to get projects and schemes off the ground that get us back in some form. The EU will remain the only show in town. It represents 8 of 10 of our ten most important trading partners and we're defined for the rest by our and their relationship with the EU. The only thing that will resolve the situation, I suspect, is the EU collapsing in a pile of dust. Not impossible, but less likely than not.
I'm not saying that the facts have changed now. I was merely wondering aloud whether if facts changed in the future we might want to think again, particularly if Brexit has not actually happened.
For instance, if the US were to withdraw from NATO. Or if (and I appreciate that this may well be vanishingly unlikely) if the EU were to offer some form of associate membership or sufficient controls on free movement or even if companies started to close down in the UK in anticipation of Brexit.
Just wondering out loud, that's all.......
I believe that it has become traditional to hold a referendum in the UK on EU/EEC/CM membership once every 41 years.
I'm not saying that the facts have changed now. I was merely wondering aloud whether if facts changed in the future we might want to think again, particularly if Brexit has not actually happened.
For instance, if the US were to withdraw from NATO. Or if (and I appreciate that this may well be vanishingly unlikely) if the EU were to offer some form of associate membership or sufficient controls on free movement or even if companies started to close down in the UK in anticipation of Brexit.
Just wondering out loud, that's all.......
I believe that it has become traditional to hold a referendum in the UK on EU/EEC/CM membership once every 41 years.
And it's always a referendum on Leave or Remain, so to keep up the tradition we'll have to postpone article 50 for a few decades.
Skimming further, Liam Fox offers the searing insight that the process of globalisation began when the inhabitants of Africa wandered off to find new lands.
His version of the Leadsomesque 'as a mother' is 'as a doctor'.
I'm not saying that the facts have changed now. I was merely wondering aloud whether if facts changed in the future we might want to think again, particularly if Brexit has not actually happened.
For instance, if the US were to withdraw from NATO. Or if (and I appreciate that this may well be vanishingly unlikely) if the EU were to offer some form of associate membership or sufficient controls on free movement or even if companies started to close down in the UK in anticipation of Brexit.
Just wondering out loud, that's all.......
I believe that it has become traditional to hold a referendum in the UK on EU/EEC/CM membership once every 41 years.
And it's always a referendum on Leave or Remain, so to keep up the tradition we'll have to postpone article 50 for a few decades.
The whole thing will have collapsed long before then so there's no chance of a neat sequence of Remain/Leave/Rejoin to be had.
@Cookie London is glamorous and makes an effort to be welcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). Sheffield is unglamorous and apparently unwelcoming to outsiders (viz the referendum vote). And if you're trying to attract bright young things to work for you, it helps if you're based in what is perceived to be one of the world's most important cultural centres with beautiful people rather than a wasteland populated by orcs.
As a Londoner I think the best gloss on this is that it's extremely ungracious, the worst is that it's bigoted shit.
Sheffield has some of the finest housing anywhere in the country, for a fraction of London's prices, as well as a fine university.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
The Home Counties?
Not too close and not too far.
Ignoring the trollier bits of Alastair's offering* - where would you rather live: a tiny two bed in Rotherhithe or a big five-bed in Chorlton? A flat in Streatham or a big six-bedroomed Victorian villa overlooking Ecclesall Park? A bedsit in Hammersmith or a four-bedroomed Georgian flat in Clifton? London is all well and good for the infinitely wealthy or those who moved there 40 years ago, but for anyone starting out not-London offers a far more pleasant lifestyle.And not-London has much nicer countryside. In a forced choice, I would rather have a hill than a ballet.
*well mostly ignoring: I was very amused that the thing he leads on for London is the famous friendliness of the locals. (Although in actual fact I have generally found the Londoners-are-unfriendly stereotype not to be true.)
Typed in 'Bannon', just to see how PB has reacted to his appointment. Not surprised at all to see how his appointment went down here. I think Trump could appoint the grand duke wizard of the KKK to be his chief of staff, and the first thing some on this site would be thinking of is 'how much does this annoy the left/only the left will be upset by this'.
Also, I have to laugh at how calling Michelle Obama an 'ape' is considered only 'bitchy'. As if there isn't a racist history behind referring to Black people as apes/monkeys....
Agreed. The fact that a white supremacist will sit in the office next door to the next US president's is utterly appalling. But on here, for some it is hilarious because it winds up lefties. It's not what you would call a sophisticated world view.
Tbh, I'm beginning to wonder whether some people seriously sympathise with (or at least don't really oppose) the views the likes of Bannon have, and the 'winds up lefties' thing is a cover for that. I mean reading SeanT say that he thinks we should celebrate a white supremacist in the White House? Really? That was a bit jarring to read....
Oh, there are undoubtedly one or two. We all know who they are. SeanT is not among them. He is a member of the wind-up a lefty club, nothing more. But I can understand why you would find it jarring. The KKK's backing of Trump is very worrying.
I am pretty sure they also endorsed Reagan.
And yet for most of their history they've been a Democrat dominated organisation.
Comments
Navy has no antiship missiles from 2018
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/15/royal-navy-to-lose-anti-ship-missiles-and-be-left-only-with-guns/
The Baldwin de nos jours. and he'll be hiding behind high walls like his predecessor if/when this kills a few hundred sailors.
Ref: Keynes's quote.
The EU now admits that they want an army.
The EU's arrogance and stupidity have if anything grown as has their determination to increase centralisation.
The trade deals that the EU looked to deliver with the US look like a write off.
The UK economy is growing faster than expected.
We are continuing to attract way more than our share of inward investment.
We no longer have a government committed to remain.
None of project Fear has (yet) come to pass.
Merkel has today suggested that freedom of movement does not equal freedom to claim benefits in the host country.
Only the last one might really make people pause and that is dependent on Germany being able to deliver it. Otherwise it looks like a more decisive out to me.
LibDems to come 6th?
I say fringe but it's been pedalled by Alex Jones so I suppose that's now main stream orthodox on the right.
The idea once there is a vote you are committed down a path no matter what, even if there was unambiguous proof that it would be a disaster and also proof people were not happy to accept the price of that disaster for what they feel they would gain, is actually pretty silly. It is quite reasonable, in theory, to suggest that if the facts change sufficiently you can change your mind. In theory, for example, if a brand new, superior deal was offered by the EU, I'd be prepared to look at it.
Now, I've also said all along though that the chances of something occurring to change the facts as already existed significantly seems unlikely, the chances of the EU offering a fresh deal very remote, the chances of the public being convinced by any proposed new deal seems slight (and it seems improbable to say the least that a government would reverse its position on Brexit without democratic endorsement - not to mention May would be challenged and brought down if she dared suggest it), and the chances of any of that happening prior to us triggering A50 (or in the negotiation phase, assuming it is possible to fudge a stop to that process, which is a whole other question) seem vanishingly small.
But the basis principle of being prepared to consider a change in mind is not unreasonable. Although the obvious retort would be that if we did change our minds, we might just do it again (another reason the EU will never, ever offer a new deal), and we will never end the question.
And no Google's investment in London doesn't justify Brexit. The pattern of the Leave vote was a protest against an economy where we rely on the Googles of the world invest Billions in London.
To put it crudely and to slightly oversimplify Google is investing in London because it's full of Remain demographics. Doncaster voted leave because it hates the reasons Google invested in London.
So Leavers are curiously making the same alleged mistake of Remoaners. Seeing all Good news through the prism of Brexit but not the Leave vote.
You see, BAe kept on touting ludicrously expensive "solutions" to Harpoon replacement. Government procurement policy is to buy LRASM when it actually enters service. And buy it off the shelf, with no special modifications that make it not work.... It is just finishing testing now.
Similarly the electronic recon planes were bought of the shelf - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_RC-135#RC-135W_Rivet_Joint_.28Project_Airseeker.29
The new maritime patrol aircraft - the P-8 - was only purchased after it had actually entered service in the US and been proved to actually work.
We are buying F35s of f the production line - avoiding the pre-production aircraft that have to be expensively modified to get them up to standard.
The screams of horror in the defense industry are deafening - with the P-8, Marconi proposed elevnty trillion to modify the Stingray torpedo to work with it. The MOD said they would buy American Mk54s unless the price for the modification came down.
No wonder there are angry articles in the Telegraph.
Turns out threatening to kill the next president isn't great business PR. https://t.co/LViQIZbkng
PacketSled's Matt Harrigan posted multiple threats against Trump on Facebook, which later went viral on Reddit, according to a report in The Daily Beast.
“I’m going to kill the president. Elect,” Harrigan wrote in one post. “Bring it secret service.”
The cybersecurity company said in a statement Tuesday that it accepted Harrigan's resignation, "effective immediately."
"We want to be very clear, PacketSled does not condone the comments made by Mr. Harrigan, which do not reflect the views or opinions of the company, its employees, investors or partners," the statement read.
Which isn't to say Brexit isn't slowly but steadily unravelling before our eyes. It clearly is. No wonder so many of our Leaver posters are ratty and unpleasant at the moment. However something going wrong and something not happening are different things.
Scott Adams
China says Trump was "diplomatically impeccable" on first contact. I guess no one got a nickname. https://t.co/3hd2A6i5Bn
Yet the Telegraph and its readership continue to lap up lies and deliberate omissions and misrepresentations.
I always visit a place first, before insulting it and the inhabitants. I find that this ensures accuracy if nothing else.
For example, the secret police in Rabat are excellent fellows, thought their taste in tailor made suits is atrocious.
Long overdue. We've been scammed for decades by the British defence industry.
"A 24-year-old man from Ohio has been charged in a federal court after tweeting a threat to assassinate President-elect Donald Trump on election night
Benson tweeted: 'My life goal is to assassinate Trump. Don't care if I serve infinite sentences. That man deserves to decease (sic) existing.'
Seconds earlier he tweeted: 'Diplomacy. F***ing fools. I hate you all. I want to bomb every one of your voting booths and your general areas.'
Benson was arrested a few hours later and interviewed by the Secret Service.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3937274/My-life-goal-assassinate-Trump-Ohio-man-charged-election-night-tweet.html
The issue was, that previously, when faced with an un-airworthy aircraft they would simply order that the aircraft would enter service. There was finding(!) that disobeying an order to falsify the airworthiness of an aircraft type would be insubordination and a court martial offense.
The changes after the Nirmrod cash didn't reverse that - it is still insubordination to declare an un-airworthy aircraft un-airworthy against orders. No. It is just that, legally, the giver of the order would be guilty of a criminal offense (negligence) in the event of an accident.
Senior people being actually accountable for their actions? Now that is an impossible position.
The Telegraph defense desk is a wholly owned subsidiary of the UK defense industry.
Bit like the TES is the mouthpiece of the UK education industry.
The EU's inability to react to change is one of the greatest arguments against it.
You've opened my eyes on a whole new vista of nuttiness.
Strange as it may seem to some, there's an interesting world outside Inner London.
For instance, if the US were to withdraw from NATO. Or if (and I appreciate that this may well be vanishingly unlikely) if the EU were to offer some form of associate membership or sufficient controls on free movement or even if companies started to close down in the UK in anticipation of Brexit.
Just wondering out loud, that's all.......
NEW THREAD
*well mostly ignoring: I was very amused that the thing he leads on for London is the famous friendliness of the locals. (Although in actual fact I have generally found the Londoners-are-unfriendly stereotype not to be true.)