I'm curious as to why you'd expect any of this to change anyone's opinion on Brexit. Can you tell us anything that has happened that's actually based on fundamentals, rather than the subjective opinions of the same Remain supporting organisations and individuals that utterly compromised themselves during the campaign?
There was previously a fundamental misunderstanding of the British constitution and a frivolous insouciance about how such a breaking change would be pushed through. Now the reality is dawning and nobody in their right mind can expect there to be anything 'clean' about Brexit.
Months have already passed since people like rcs were demanding a head of terms to be agreed immediately to give confidence to business. That didn't happen and won't happen, yet still those that side of the fence refuse to concede the obvious: they were wrong.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
Wow! So who are Arab and Muslim citizens of France supposed to vote for in the second round, if it's Fillon versus Le Pen?
It is possible to be so stinky that even if you hand out clothespegs people won't vote for you.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
France has never been multicultural, always being explicitly assimilationalist. Indeed this is why it does not collect data on ethnic background and religions of its people. They are simply French.
Arguably this has not worked out very well.
Many aren't seen as "French" even officially. About half of the Muslim residents in France aren't French citizens. (Source.)
One of the reasons I think Fillon is too short is I think a lot of Left Wing voters will hold their noses and vote Macron in the first round to avoid Fillon vs Le Pen.
Agree that Fillon is definitely too short now. He is rightfully odds on favourite, but if you assume he wins on sunday and the 10% share of the market that Juppe currently occupied is discounted from his current price and other prices remain unmoved, his price will not fall all that much, assuming all other prices remain constant. Not much of an upside for Fillon backers at current prices, with a risk, albeit a small risk, of Juppe causing a huge loss.
If the EU knows there's a second vote then that's a huge incentive for them to give us the worst possible terms not because they'll be ever implemented but because they'll deter us from leaving.
Doesn't the whole 'worst possible terms' discussion expose the hole at the centre of the leave argument? If you want hard Brexit then their worst possible terms are your best possible terms and if you think otherwise then you don't really believe your own rhetoric.
No - the best possible terms is a free trade agreement on goods (which can be agreed by QMV) and an agreement on financial services (which will be UV).
Next down the list would be EEA interim while arranging the latter.
worst would be full WTO Brexit without MRA/Customs process harmonisation.
There will be shades of grey inbetween, as there is a need for UK funding into certain projects and a desire for us to be part of them from both sides, single European Sky for example.
So we go from the EU a la carte to Brexit a la carte. Which question was an in/out referendum supposed to resolve again?
Our we members of the political union that is the EU or not. Answer: not.
Now we decide what we are.
A more honest question would have been:
- Remain a full member of the political union that is the EU - Become a satellite of the political union that is the EU
F1: second practice is in just over a quarter of an hour. Got to be off now for some chores, but I shall return. Not unlike Dracula. Or Spike in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Jon Howarth #BREAKING: #Turkey President Erdogan threatens to open borders to migrants after EU Parliament vote. More to come...
I can foresee turkey becoming more and.more a problem. Dictator in charge, opposition "powers" led by an exiled Islamic extremist. 100,000s been purges from their jobs. It is the classic recipe for disaster.
And they are just about to join the EU!
LOL. One of the more egregious of the exaggerations of the campaign, in fairness.
I found the Turkey claim probably the most offensive part of our campaign, because - unlike with the 350m - it was a lie. There was, and is, absolutely no chance that Turkey will join the EU given: (a) the Turks don't want to; (b) the Turkish government would have to change beyond all recognition; and (c) EU countries would have to unanimously agree - and that includes Cyprus and Greece which would rather leave the EU than see the Turkey join.
That being said, the EU made the rod for their own back by acceding to US demands that Turkey be put on the theoretical membership track.
I don't see how the claim "We send £350m per week to the EU" could be regarded as anything other than a lie, given that we don't actually send £350m per week to the EU. As you well know, this figure includes the rebate, which never leaves our shores and is spent by us on other things.
But it doesn't include other items, such as remittances from the aid budget directly into EU commission coffers.
So? How does that make it any less of a lie?
I hold no brief for 'Vote Leave' - I thought they were an incompetent shower from day dot, and said so. However, objectively it obviously makes it significantly less of a 'lie'.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
Wow! So who are Arab and Muslim citizens of France supposed to vote for in the second round, if it's Fillon versus Le Pen?
It is possible to be so stinky that even if you hand out clothespegs people won't vote for you.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
France has never been multicultural, always being explicitly assimilationalist. Indeed this is why it does not collect data on ethnic background and religions of its people. They are simply French.
Arguably this has not worked out very well.
Many aren't seen as "French" even officially. About half of the Muslim residents in France aren't French citizens. (Source.)
One of the reasons I think Fillon is too short is I think a lot of Left Wing voters will hold their noses and vote Macron in the first round to avoid Fillon vs Le Pen.
If it is Macron vs Le Pen though then that would be a fillip to Le Pen who might see Republicans voting for her over Macron.
Fillon vs Le Pen and I don't think Le Pen has a chance. Then again, didn't think Trump had one.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
If the EU knows there's a second vote then that's a huge incentive for them to give us the worst possible terms not because they'll be ever implemented but because they'll deter us from leaving.
Doesn't the whole 'worst possible terms' discussion expose the hole at the centre of the leave argument? If you want hard Brexit then their worst possible terms are your best possible terms and if you think otherwise then you don't really believe your own rhetoric.
No - the best possible terms is a free trade agreement on goods (which can be agreed by QMV) and an agreement on financial services (which will be UV).
Next down the list would be EEA interim while arranging the latter.
worst would be full WTO Brexit without MRA/Customs process harmonisation.
There will be shades of grey inbetween, as there is a need for UK funding into certain projects and a desire for us to be part of them from both sides, single European Sky for example.
So we go from the EU a la carte to Brexit a la carte. Which question was an in/out referendum supposed to resolve again?
Our we members of the political union that is the EU or not. Answer: not.
Now we decide what we are.
A more honest question would have been:
- Remain a full member of the political union that is the EU - Become a satellite of the political union that is the EU
In order to be a full member we'd have to join the Euro and Schengen etc
We already were a satellite though. The Eurozone could already decide on a position that suited themselves in the regular Eurozone ministers meetings and then force that upon the rest of us by QMV.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
Wow! So who are Arab and Muslim citizens of France supposed to vote for in the second round, if it's Fillon versus Le Pen?
It is possible to be so stinky that even if you hand out clothespegs people won't vote for you.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
France has never been multicultural, always being explicitly assimilationalist. Indeed this is why it does not collect data on ethnic background and religions of its people. They are simply French.
Arguably this has not worked out very well.
Many aren't seen as "French" even officially. About half of the Muslim residents in France aren't French citizens. (Source.)
One of the reasons I think Fillon is too short is I think a lot of Left Wing voters will hold their noses and vote Macron in the first round to avoid Fillon vs Le Pen.
If it is Macron vs Le Pen though then that would be a fillip to Le Pen who might see Republicans voting for her over Macron.
Fillon vs Le Pen and I don't think Le Pen has a chance. Then again, didn't think Trump had one.
Macron vs Le Pen would be a rerun of Hillary vs Trump (genders reversed). Fillon vs Le Pen would be more like Bill Clinton vs Trump.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
Indeed the assumption was at first that there'd be an immediate post-vote slowdown. When that didn't happen, it became there would be a slowdown next year. If that doesn't happen it wouldn't surprise me if they continue to say there's a slowdown in 2018 on the cards still due to Brexit, then 2019, until we're either actually out or the slowdown actually hits (which may by that point just be cyclical and not Brexit related).
If there isn't a slowdown next year then by the Autumn Budget the figures could look very different.
If the EU knows there's a second vote then that's a huge incentive for them to give us the worst possible terms not because they'll be ever implemented but because they'll deter us from leaving.
I do not think that there will be a further referendum, and do not want one. The last one demonstrated why referenda are worse than our proper democratic processes.
As you know of course, this referendum was advisory, and Parliament is the final arbiter. So what's with the loathsome Mail? I wonder what would have happened if there had been no referendum and Parliament had decided to choose between Remain & Leave. Even worse aggro I expect.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
There seems an element of bias to OBR/IFS reports. As if they predicted something bad to happen on Leave, then they are subconsciously still expecting it to. Human nature, I guess. Don't want to be shown to be wrong.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
Wow! So who are Arab and Muslim citizens of France supposed to vote for in the second round, if it's Fillon versus Le Pen?
It is possible to be so stinky that even if you hand out clothespegs people won't vote for you.
Robert Kimbell Words and electioneering. Fillon: “France isn’t a multicultural nation. When you come to someone’s house, by courtesy, you don’t take over.” https://t.co/I7QjQxCy2K
France has never been multicultural, always being explicitly assimilationalist. Indeed this is why it does not collect data on ethnic background and religions of its people. They are simply French.
Arguably this has not worked out very well.
Many aren't seen as "French" even officially. About half of the Muslim residents in France aren't French citizens. (Source.)
One of the reasons I think Fillon is too short is I think a lot of Left Wing voters will hold their noses and vote Macron in the first round to avoid Fillon vs Le Pen.
If it is Macron vs Le Pen though then that would be a fillip to Le Pen who might see Republicans voting for her over Macron.
Fillon vs Le Pen and I don't think Le Pen has a chance. Then again, didn't think Trump had one.
Macron vs Le Pen would be a rerun of Hillary vs Trump (genders reversed). Fillon vs Le Pen would be more like Bill Clinton vs Trump.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
There seems an element of bias to OBR/IFS reports. As if they predicted something bad to happen on Leave, then they are subconsciously still expecting it to. Human nature, I guess. Don't want to be shown to be wrong.
A colleague of mine said they've cried wolf so many times now that no one really believes the OBR figures. I know we're working off our own forecast and most City institutions are doing the same.
How does an ex PM think that this is a fit and proper thing to be doing?
Under the law of the United Kingdom, high treason is the crime of disloyalty to the Crown. Offences constituting high treason include .... adhering to the sovereign's enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
If the EU knows there's a second vote then that's a huge incentive for them to give us the worst possible terms not because they'll be ever implemented but because they'll deter us from leaving.
I do not think that there will be a further referendum, and do not want one. The last one demonstrated why referenda are worse than our proper democratic processes.
As you know of course, this referendum was advisory, and Parliament is the final arbiter. So what's with the loathsome Mail? I wonder what would have happened if there had been no referendum and Parliament had decided to choose between Remain & Leave. Even worse aggro I expect.
The decision was handed to the people by Parliament. The government is now expected to enact it. Saying "Parliament is the final arbiter" is completely changing the contract of providing a referendum in the 1st place.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
Bill Clinton would never have lost PA, MI or WI and probably would have held OH and IA as well.
If my mother-in-law, 89 and living only on the state pension (which she does not spend all of, bless her), was suddenly handed £2 million I genuinely think the shock and then the worry of it might kill her. She would almost definitely give it all away to her children and grandchildren. You get to a certain age, I think, and you are so used to your established level of spending and way of living that additional money really does make no difference - even if it should.
I remember feeling grateful - if sad, on receiving a modest bequest from my grandmother - I wished she'd spent it on herself.....
I was translating an essay on a piece by Keynes on what the world might look like today - it makes an interesting read:
He correctly predicts a great increase in wealth, but arguably incorrectly speculates that this will make most people content with material wealth and turning their attention to other things - I don't unfortunately think your admirable mother-in-law is entirely typical in that. Incidentally, there's a passing remark which seems to be intended merely as a harmless quirky observation but would I think now be seen as anti-semitic - an example of the casual generalisations about Jews which were common bfore the war before the horrors of the Holocaust drove that sort of talk out of polite society..
It's a bit like all those Tomorrow World's back in the 70s which though we would all be people of lesiure as robots do all our jobs.
Well looks like robots will soon (and already are) doing that, but if anything our lives are getting too complicated.
Some humourous sections in that Keynes article, like
'What is the result? In spite of an enormous growth in the population of the world, which it has been necessary to equip with houses and machines, the average standard of life in Europe and the United States has been raised, I think, about fourfold. The growth of capital has been on a scale which is far beyond a hundredfold of what any previous age had known. And from now on we need not expect so great an increase of population. '
Yeah, that 'not expect so great an increase of population' didn't really happen did it.
There hasn't been that big an increase compared with the previous equivalent period (i.e. comparing 1850-1930 with 1930-2010).
Britain's population increased by more than twofold in the eighty years between 1851 and 1931, from 20.8m to 44.9m; but by only by a little under 40% in the eighty years from then to 2011 (62.4m)
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
Thanks and adds to your facts the other day about the improvement in recent months of revenue into HMRC which is not being fully reflected in these forecasts.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
The uncertainty was what was supposed to be kicking in to stop/slowdown investment decisions happening now. Seems to have been overblown - businesses taking the longer view that whatever Brexit looks like, the UK will still be a favourable business environment.
The only point of a second referendum is if people change their minds. That would only happen if they were facing undeniable disaster. This is unlikely for two reasons:
a. Brexit probably won't be a disaster. It's a chronic condition like diabetes rather than an acute condition like a heart attack. The point of chronic conditions is that you can live with them. In this case any downsides can be blamed on EU wilfulness or Remainer treachery, and are therefore deniable.
b. Any disaster that might happen will occur after we have already left and too late for a referendum.
Brexit will need to roll and those of a constructive mind will need to make the best of it.
If the EU knows there's a second vote then that's a huge incentive for them to give us the worst possible terms not because they'll be ever implemented but because they'll deter us from leaving.
I do not think that there will be a further referendum, and do not want one. The last one demonstrated why referenda are worse than our proper democratic processes.
As you know of course, this referendum was advisory, and Parliament is the final arbiter. So what's with the loathsome Mail? I wonder what would have happened if there had been no referendum and Parliament had decided to choose between Remain & Leave. Even worse aggro I expect.
The decision was handed to the people by Parliament. The government is now expected to enact it. Saying "Parliament is the final arbiter" is completely changing the contract of providing a referendum in the 1st place.
But I believe the AV referendum was not advisory and so, by Parliament's ruling, had to be followed. Thus the word "advisory" is kinda critical. My question remains, but we'll never know the answer.
I think in another decade or so a more positive and engaged approach to Europe the UK may well be possible, but not yet.
FTFY
Same thing. It takes two to tango.
De Gaulle was right when he said "Non".
If Britain hadn't head its head up the US bum, De Gaulle would have said "Oui". The earlier option of Britain uniting with France was a great missed opportunity.
That might have been a bit drastic but arguably the failure of Britain and France to draw the same lesson from Suez has poisoned European politics ever since.
Edit - just seen that williamglenn has already made this point.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
There seems an element of bias to OBR/IFS reports. As if they predicted something bad to happen on Leave, then they are subconsciously still expecting it to. Human nature, I guess. Don't want to be shown to be wrong.
Yes, the IFS did endorse those Treasury project fear forecasts which were almost all completely wrong in short term. I think that the OBR kept out of it AFAIK.
Just wanted to point out that there hasn't really been any slowdown in business investment, Q3 investment grew at 0.9%, holding almost steady from 1% recorded in Q2. So far there is scant evidence of a referendum related slowdown, though as many point out, we're still in the EU.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
There seems an element of bias to OBR/IFS reports. As if they predicted something bad to happen on Leave, then they are subconsciously still expecting it to. Human nature, I guess. Don't want to be shown to be wrong.
Well to be fair to them there's a reason they projected something bad and they're still following the same reasons now. More a case of don't believe they're wrong yet. Hopefully they are.
http://order-order.com/2016/11/25/bad-al-dined-at-michelin-star-river-cafe-while-attacking-elitist-farage/ "Campbell was dining at the Michelin starred River Cafe restaurant in Hammersmith, attending an elitist establishment party of his own with fellow Remain campaign losers Peter Mandelson and Sir John Sawyers, the former boss of MI6, BSE chairman and tycoon Sir Stuart Rose as well as billionaire Remain donor Sir Charles Dunstone."
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
No, he beat everything the American political system chose to throw at him. The Democrats ran a primary with an awful hated candidate and a frigging geriatric socialist. A socialist in America for Pete's sake and he ran her close!
Had the Democrats gone for a semi-reasonable candidate then this could have been different. Unfortunately no reasonable candidates stood against Hillary so we'll never know.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
Bill Clinton would never have lost PA, MI or WI and probably would have held OH and IA as well.
It would have been a very different campaign. How do you think the Juanita Broaddrick allegation would have played out if Bill had been the candidate? Trump had to be careful about not giving Hillary a sympathy vote but if he was up against Bill he would have been utterly ruthless.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
No, he beat everything the American political system chose to throw at him. The Democrats ran a primary with an awful hated candidate and a frigging geriatric socialist. A socialist in America for Pete's sake and he ran her close!
Had the Democrats gone for a semi-reasonable candidate then this could have been different. Unfortunately no reasonable candidates stood against Hillary so we'll never know.
Agreed - and Bill Clinton vs Trump would have been a simple Bill victory.
We still seem to be years away from the point when people will stop underestimating Trump, if they ever will... He beat everything the American political system could throw at him and came out as President.
Well quite.
He's a billionaire and had a 14yr run as a reality TV star that he decided to end in order to run - but he's stupid according to armchair average cubicle job PBers.
Anyone saying Simon Cowell is stupid?
I find it most amusing - like sneering at Farage. Underestimating one's opponents seems to be at the core of Left/Liberal failures. They simply can't grasp that they lost and their ideology has been rejected by millions of people.
Jon Howarth #BREAKING: #Turkey President Erdogan threatens to open borders to migrants after EU Parliament vote. More to come...
I can foresee turkey becoming more and.more a problem. Dictator in charge, opposition "powers" led by an exiled Islamic extremist. 100,000s been purges from their jobs. It is the classic recipe for disaster.
And they are just about to join the EU!
LOL. One of the more egregious of the exaggerations of the campaign, in fairness.
I found the Turkey claim probably the most offensive part of our campaign, because - unlike with the 350m - it was a lie. There was, and is, absolutely no chance that Turkey will join the EU given: (a) the Turks don't want to; (b) the Turkish government would have to change beyond all recognition; and (c) EU countries would have to unanimously agree - and that includes Cyprus and Greece which would rather leave the EU than see the Turkey join.
That being said, the EU made the rod for their own back by acceding to US demands that Turkey be put on the theoretical membership track.
I don't see how the claim "We send £350m per week to the EU" could be regarded as anything other than a lie, given that we don't actually send £350m per week to the EU. As you well know, this figure includes the rebate, which never leaves our shores and is spent by us on other things.
As has been explained many times, the full £350m does leave every week, but every week we receive £80m. The £350m claim is true in the most basic sense, but it takes no account of context.
No, the rebate is calculated and applied before any money leaves.
(a) a uniform rate shall be determined in relation to the assessment basis referred to in paragraph 1;
(b) as regards the rate to be applied to the United Kingdom, a deduction shall be made from the amount payable under the uniform rate by:
(i) calculating the difference, in the preceding budgetary year, between the percentage share of the United Kingdom in the value added tax which would have been paid in that year, including adjustments in respect of previous years, had the uniform rate been applied, and the percentage share of the United Kingdom in total allocated expenditure;
(ii) applying the difference thus obtained to total allocated expenditure;
(iii) multiplying the result by 0,66.
The reduced amount shall be divided by the assessment basis of the United Kingdom;"
On topic, the sooner we leave the better because delaying leaving now, delays our inevitable rejoining a few years later, replete with, inter alia, membership of the Euro, the EU army, and Schengen.
People keep saying that, but: Schengen - if the Common Travel Area with Ireland remains, Ireland will remain out of Schengen. If we rejoin, with the CTA preserved, and Ireland out of Schengen, we will not enter Schengen anyway. Will we?
Euro: I suppose we'll be as obligated to join the Euro as, for example, Sweden is?
And this relates to the concepts of fairness in British society.
It is vital that everyone has the opportunity to win, to prosper, to achieve.
But it is equally important that the possibility of failure and defeat exist - that nobody is guaranteed to get their own way permanently and at the expense of others.
What we are seeing from some parts of the establishment is a refusal to accept that, a refusal to accept that their wishes are not always paramount.
I struggle with terms like "establishment" or "liberal metropolitan elite" that are banded out by the Mail and by some on here.
Who are they ? I've never met any of them. If we define an "Establishment" as a group of people enjoying a monopoly of power in perpetuity, then the whole democratic exercise is a façade. Fair enough.
One could argue in 1997 after 18 years of single party rule, there was a democratic revolution which ousted one Establishment and brought in another and that is the nature of all revolutions - American, French, Russian even back to the Norman Conquest if you want - the replacement of one power bloc by another.
Those who claim they want to overthrow "the Establishment" often just want their turn at the top - it's the truth of most revolutions.
That's a fair point.
What we have now is a pro-EU power bloc dominate in Westminster, Whitehall, big business, high finance etc. They are challenged by an anti-EU power bloc and are unwilling to accept defeat.
Now we are seeing that some of that pro-EU power bloc is unwilling to accept democracy when it produces a decision which they oppose.
For these people democracy does serve as a façade which is useful in giving legitimation but can be dispensed with if it poses a fundamental threat to their interests.
It should not come as a surprise that some people within the establishment have that mentality - after all democracy and democratic decisions have been ignored by various establishment groupings around the world for generations.
Comments
- Remain a full member of the political union that is the EU
- Become a satellite of the political union that is the EU
Disturbing, as you imply.
F1: second practice is in just over a quarter of an hour. Got to be off now for some chores, but I shall return. Not unlike Dracula. Or Spike in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jP_brwVyvc
Fillon vs Le Pen and I don't think Le Pen has a chance. Then again, didn't think Trump had one.
One of the reasons I am so very sceptical of the OBR forecast is that they seem to have pencilled in aslowdown in H2, which will cause deficit reduction to slow, but the evidence so far has been to the contrary and shows an economy which is advancing rather than retreating.
We already were a satellite though. The Eurozone could already decide on a position that suited themselves in the regular Eurozone ministers meetings and then force that upon the rest of us by QMV.
Also why we have clearly unfirm 87 year olds still being part of our legislature.
If there isn't a slowdown next year then by the Autumn Budget the figures could look very different.
So what's with the loathsome Mail?
I wonder what would have happened if there had been no referendum and Parliament had decided to choose between Remain & Leave. Even worse aggro I expect.
There seems an element of bias to OBR/IFS reports. As if they predicted something bad to happen on Leave, then they are subconsciously still expecting it to. Human nature, I guess. Don't want to be shown to be wrong.
http://home.bt.com/news/news-extra/tony-blair-says-voters-should-have-the-chance-to-change-their-minds-on-brexit-11364108699699
How does an ex PM think that this is a fit and proper thing to be doing?
Under the law of the United Kingdom, high treason is the crime of disloyalty to the Crown. Offences constituting high treason include .... adhering to the sovereign's enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
The decision was handed to the people by Parliament. The government is now expected to enact it. Saying "Parliament is the final arbiter" is completely changing the contract of providing a referendum in the 1st place.
Britain's population increased by more than twofold in the eighty years between 1851 and 1931, from 20.8m to 44.9m; but by only by a little under 40% in the eighty years from then to 2011 (62.4m)
a. Brexit probably won't be a disaster. It's a chronic condition like diabetes rather than an acute condition like a heart attack. The point of chronic conditions is that you can live with them. In this case any downsides can be blamed on EU wilfulness or Remainer treachery, and are therefore deniable.
b. Any disaster that might happen will occur after we have already left and too late for a referendum.
Brexit will need to roll and those of a constructive mind will need to make the best of it.
Edit - just seen that williamglenn has already made this point.
NEW THREAD
http://order-order.com/2016/11/25/bad-al-dined-at-michelin-star-river-cafe-while-attacking-elitist-farage/
"Campbell was dining at the Michelin starred River Cafe restaurant in Hammersmith, attending an elitist establishment party of his own with fellow Remain campaign losers Peter Mandelson and Sir John Sawyers, the former boss of MI6, BSE chairman and tycoon Sir Stuart Rose as well as billionaire Remain donor Sir Charles Dunstone."
Had the Democrats gone for a semi-reasonable candidate then this could have been different. Unfortunately no reasonable candidates stood against Hillary so we'll never know.
He's a billionaire and had a 14yr run as a reality TV star that he decided to end in order to run - but he's stupid according to armchair average cubicle job PBers.
Anyone saying Simon Cowell is stupid?
I find it most amusing - like sneering at Farage. Underestimating one's opponents seems to be at the core of Left/Liberal failures. They simply can't grasp that they lost and their ideology has been rejected by millions of people.
And fortunately Leadsom hasn't got into the position to harm anyone (yet), because her own poisonous words killed her major ambition.
Reading the document in question (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:31985D0257 ) it doesn't seem to say we're liable for the whole amount.
"3. The rates shall be calculated as follows:
(a) a uniform rate shall be determined in relation to the assessment basis referred to in paragraph 1;
(b) as regards the rate to be applied to the United Kingdom, a deduction shall be made from the amount payable under the uniform rate by:
(i) calculating the difference, in the preceding budgetary year, between the percentage share of the United Kingdom in the value added tax which would have been paid in that year, including adjustments in respect of previous years, had the uniform rate been applied, and the percentage share of the United Kingdom in total allocated expenditure;
(ii) applying the difference thus obtained to total allocated expenditure;
(iii) multiplying the result by 0,66.
The reduced amount shall be divided by the assessment basis of the United Kingdom;"
Schengen - if the Common Travel Area with Ireland remains, Ireland will remain out of Schengen. If we rejoin, with the CTA preserved, and Ireland out of Schengen, we will not enter Schengen anyway. Will we?
Euro: I suppose we'll be as obligated to join the Euro as, for example, Sweden is?
What we have now is a pro-EU power bloc dominate in Westminster, Whitehall, big business, high finance etc. They are challenged by an anti-EU power bloc and are unwilling to accept defeat.
Now we are seeing that some of that pro-EU power bloc is unwilling to accept democracy when it produces a decision which they oppose.
For these people democracy does serve as a façade which is useful in giving legitimation but can be dispensed with if it poses a fundamental threat to their interests.
It should not come as a surprise that some people within the establishment have that mentality - after all democracy and democratic decisions have been ignored by various establishment groupings around the world for generations.