Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
We can't afford left wing....who said? People with assets have accumulated wealth since the 2008 recession. I've easily more than doubled the my net wealth through minimal effort. That is not fair...it is not just, and it cannot continue.
I think Carney understands this. We are unleashing populism and heading full on for a crisis whilst a good minority of folk have become much wealthier for doing very little.
Have they officially changed their party name? I thought the official party name had to be on the ballot paper.
It is one of their alternative names registered with the Electoral Commission .
Hm, seems a bit dishonest to use another name like that. I wonder why that is even an option.
A few years ago in Worthing ( 2008 IIRC ) the Conservatives highjacked an all party campaign against local hospital cuts and registered a name such as Conservatives Fighting For Your Local Hospitals with the E C . It added around 150-200 votes in each ward to their total and gained them a couple of seats .
Is it correct that Susan Kramer, the former LibDem incumbent in Richmond, lost her seat when she was alleged to have claimed that a local hospital was going to be shut down but it turned out not to be true?
If you recall there was a Lib Dem lacky on a train caught plotting to make up rubbish about Kingston Hospital being in Jeopardy and then doing the normal Lib Dem thing of having saved it when there wasn't an issue in the first place. That is their normal modus operandi..
Why are people so keen on saving buildings when they should be seeking an improved health service - which can mean merging some services at central facilities?
I can speak from personal experience about what a dump Kingston Hospital is. Staffed by horrible, useless people.
I do agree that they have done the best to date but I cannot get past the Supreme Court judgement as being the defining moment in Brexit. They said in their closing statement their judgement will not be about stopping the process and when they say how, resistance will become almost politically impossible to that process
Yes, resistance to starting the process is more or less impossible already. But then, in aftermath of the vote, that was always highly likely. The question now will be how it ends.
And that will not be clear for many years. I do believe everyone needs to agree to let the government get on with it on the following principles
Access to the single market Control of immigration Exit from ECJ Ability to do trade deals worldwide Existing EU citizens here and UK citizens abroad guaranteed their status
Suits me. Now will the Eurocrats agree to it?
The art of negotiating. See reports today that David Davis has told the City he will deploy his ace card and tell the EU that UK tax rates will be so much lower than any EU member, red tape greatly reduced, and an outward facing government will trump (no not that trump) anything the EU refuses to deal on.
Mr. Tyson, you're right that the Conservatives haven't got to grips with immigration. Neither did the Coalition or Labour.
The only way to get to grips with immigration is for people to accept that they will have to pay a lot more money for a lot of products and services.
The only way to deal with immigration is to stop the full factors....making Britain poorer through the exchange rate helps. Ultimately, though we have to help those countries that are impoverished, corrupt, war torn and ravaged by global warming....
I agree that May hasn't done too badly so far with what is potentially a very bad hand, although I think you need to factor in also the government's need to buy some time to work out what and how it exactly intends to do; the wheels of government turn slowly and aren't made for precipitate actions.
It also remains the case that the only hope of stopping Brexit, for those that so wish, is to buy enough time for the potential negative consequences to become sufficiently clear to enough people that there is a clear change of mood in the country. Whether or not you agree with either the tactics or the outcome, those involved would, like May, appear to me to, so far, be making the best of a bad hand.
Right now the British are negotiating with each other about Brexit, and not with the EU, who will actually decide the deal. The issue is that the UK doesn't know what it wants from Europe and never has done. Brexit is forcing the issue for those voted Remain as well as those that voted Leave. Ironically, it's the sprawling Babylon of the EU that is relatively coherent on Brexit, while the supposedly nimble Britain is thrashing around.
It is not the EU who will decide the deal any more than it is the UK. Both sides between them will come up with the deal and if either side is not happy with it it will not happen. This idea that we are negotiating from an inherent position of weakness is rubbish. Both sides want certain things out of the deal and the EU position is no stronger than the UK's on that. Indeed in a number of crucial ways it is weaker as the UK's fall back position of no immediate deal is not inherently unattractive.
I do agree that they have done the best to date but I cannot get past the Supreme Court judgement as being the defining moment in Brexit. They said in their closing statement their judgement will not be about stopping the process and when they say how, resistance will become almost politically impossible to that process
Yes, resistance to starting the process is more or less impossible already. But then, in aftermath of the vote, that was always highly likely. The question now will be how it ends.
How it all ends....not at all well I'm afraid......
I feel like a history student stuck in a parallel world....you understand where it's all going wrong, you can see where it's heading, and yet you are living right in the middle of it and can do sweet FA about the outcome. V Populism is a terrible thing, and history seems to repeat itself in cycles.
What you can be certain of is that it will all be someone else's fault.
History does go in cycles. And the right is currently in the ascendant. When it fails, as it will, the left will take over.
An observer in the 17th century might have speculated about the future balance of power between puritans and Presbyterians and Catholics. But extrapolation from trends would not have helped him. The terms of the debate changed.
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
Mr. Urquhart, but what does Miliband say of the rail strikes? Are they wrong at a time when negotiation is still ongoing? Should all sides get around the negotiating table? Has the Government acted in a reckless and provocative manner?
Sky news becoming Fox news would be one of the funniest things in broadcast news for ages. Apart from the left going into a collective meltdown Sky News staff would join them.
Mr. Tyson, you're right that the Conservatives haven't got to grips with immigration. Neither did the Coalition or Labour.
The only way to get to grips with immigration is for people to accept that they will have to pay a lot more money for a lot of products and services.
The only way to deal with immigration is to stop the full factors....making Britain poorer through the exchange rate helps. Ultimately, though we have to help those countries that are impoverished, corrupt, war torn and ravaged by global warming....
A wide ranging and generous benefits system is the main pull factor. And it is completely incompatible with large scale immigration.
I happen to be in a minority who thinks that the answer to that is not to limit migration but to drastically reduce the value and scope of the benefits system. It has the added appeal of facing up to the fact that countries can no longer afford generous benefits systems.
Mr. Tyndall, just adding a 16-18 year residency requirement would be fine [or some mix-and-match approach to contributions]. Adult Britons would automatically qualify, those coming over here would not, immediately.
I do agree that they have done the best to date but I cannot get past the Supreme Court judgement as being the defining moment in Brexit. They said in their closing statement their judgement will not be about stopping the process and when they say how, resistance will become almost politically impossible to that process
Yes, resistance to starting the process is more or less impossible already. But then, in aftermath of the vote, that was always highly likely. The question now will be how it ends.
How it all ends....not at all well I'm afraid......
I feel like a history student stuck in a parallel world....you understand where it's all going wrong, you can see where it's heading, and yet you are living right in the middle of it and can do sweet FA about the outcome. V Populism is a terrible thing, and history seems to repeat itself in cycles.
What you can be certain of is that it will all be someone else's fault.
History does go in cycles. And the right is currently in the ascendant. When it fails, as it will, the left will take over.
An observer in the 17th century might have speculated about the future balance of power between puritans and Presbyterians and Catholics. But extrapolation from trends would not have helped him. The terms of the debate changed.
Excellent post. I do wish you posted here more often these days!
(BTW, are you the same "Fat Steve" who commented over at Anna Raccoon's gaff?)
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
But wahey! anyway.
You should go for it. Walking around with the sea in view can't be significantly different now from now it was a few years ago.
Mr. Tyndall, just adding a 16-18 year residency requirement would be fine [or some mix-and-match approach to contributions]. Adult Britons would automatically qualify, those coming over here would not, immediately.
Whilst that would deal with the pull factor it would not deal with the basic and separate point that our current benefits system is unsustainable.
The problem for Labour is that there isn't even the blackest of black swan events that can help them. Even a calamitously handled Brexit wont do them any good.
Labour are drowning and the irony is that if Clegg hadn't made the decision he did in 2010 I'm certain the Lib Dems would now be at least the official opposition.
Roger, to be honest, Labour made themselves irrelevant when they elected Ed and refused to take on the deficit. David Miliband's winning speech that he never gave where he addressed the deficit head on was fundamental to the party re-gaining credibility. It was an epochal speech that would have been one of the most important in the party's history that sadly went the way of the waste paper basket.
Brexit of course marginalises the party further....not only have they absolutely nothing to say about the deficit, but now they haven't anything to say about Brexit...these are the two most defining issues of the day. And they have nothing to say about immigration- but this is linked to Brexit. And they have an incompetent, out of touch leader who would much rather talk about nuclear disarmament and Israel.
To be honest I am quite happy with the Tory Government at the minute. I know they brought alot of this on us and all that but could you imagine Labour in power, at this time, with these challenges? Better this ramshackle, Tory technocratic Government.
Hi tyson. I'm also happy that we have a Tory government at the moment in that it's important that they take the consequences of what they engineered.
But after two months of Theresa May I have only marginally more confidence in her than I have in Corbyn. She's an embarrassment. What kind of leader says she wants 'a Red White and Blue Brexit' before leading a trade mission to the world's last public beheaders? Has she employed Seamus Milne? These things are noticed by the those her government are going to have to negotiate with. And they're a hell of a lot smarter than those on our side.
Reflecting on Sleaford, UKIP's failure to make headway in a Tory Brexit seat is probably bad news for Labour. It will make it more likely that UKIP will target their efforts on Labour Brexit seats, especially where the Labour MP is an outspoken Remainer.
If UKIP had run the Tories close, they would have then divided their efforts going forward, but now, they are likely to forget about gains from the Tories.
Sky news becoming Fox news would be one of the funniest things in broadcast news for ages. Apart from the left going into a collective meltdown Sky News staff would join them.
TBH most of the decent presenters at Sky have left, Tim Marshall, Joey Jones, Jeff Randall, etc etc etc....instead left with Team ScottP.
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
F1: just seen Bottas now favourite to succeed Rosberg (1.61 to Wehrlein's evens). If so, 26 each way (top 3) for the title may look ok [Ladbrokes odds, incidentally].
Sky news becoming Fox news would be one of the funniest things in broadcast news for ages. Apart from the left going into a collective meltdown Sky News staff would join them.
TBH most of the decent presenters at Sky have left, Tim Marshall, Joey Jones, Jeff Randall, etc etc etc....instead left with Team ScottP.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
I do agree that they have done the best to date but I cannot get past the Supreme Court judgement as being the defining moment in Brexit. They said in their closing statement their judgement will not be about stopping the process and when they say how, resistance will become almost politically impossible to that process
Yes, resistance to starting the process is more or less impossible already. But then, in aftermath of the vote, that was always highly likely. The question now will be how it ends.
How it all ends....not at all well I'm afraid......
I feel like a history student stuck in a parallel world....you understand where it's all going wrong, you can see where it's heading, and yet you are living right in the middle of it and can do sweet FA about the outcome. V Populism is a terrible thing, and history seems to repeat itself in cycles.
What you can be certain of is that it will all be someone else's fault.
History does go in cycles. And the right is currently in the ascendant. When it fails, as it will, the left will take over.
An observer in the 17th century might have speculated about the future balance of power between puritans and Presbyterians and Catholics. But extrapolation from trends would not have helped him. The terms of the debate changed.
Now that's a comparison I can get behind. None of this nerdy classical stuff.
Sky news becoming Fox news would be one of the funniest things in broadcast news for ages. Apart from the left going into a collective meltdown Sky News staff would join them.
TBH most of the decent presenters at Sky have left, Tim Marshall, Joey Jones, Jeff Randall, etc etc etc....instead left with Team ScottP.
Yet they managed to keep Kay "Sadness in His Eyes" Burley.
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
But wahey! anyway.
You should go for it. Walking around with the sea in view can't be significantly different now from now it was a few years ago.
Thanks.
On the east coast, if you follow the line I walked thirteen years ago you'll be well into the sea!
Things have actually changed a fair bit, with the Scottish and Welsh coastal paths opened, and the English one under development. But people still read and even use my site, which is nice, especially as the 'official' routes are, in places, not as coastal as they could be (i.e. no trespassing!)
In some ways I think writing the notes for the website each night after the walk was more insane than the walk itself! There was little 3G coverage back then, so I'd write them up on my PC or Psion 5, then run the scripts to make the site and zip up the changed files, and every week snailmail them to a friend who'd upload them. Now I'd send them by 3G/4G or just use Facebook.
Cue 100s of Guardian articles about how evil uncle Rupert shouldn't be allowed to do this.
I think Sky will sell for £11.20-11.40, the premium isn't large enough IMO.
Just be happy End Millband isn't LoTO and Corbyn is useless.
We make fun of Ed but he had some successes.
Yes he led Labour to a defeat.. highly successful...
In opposition he bought issues to the forefront like when he announced a freeze on energy prices the governent reacted, his opposition to pfizer buying Astrazeneca helped stop the aquisition and his opposition to bombing Syria meant Cameron lost the vote. important wins for him and pretty good for a opposition leader. Labour were doomed to lose again after they were precieved to be profligate, nothing he could do about that.
What is it with the BBC’s favourite in-house historians, the last if IIRC was Tristram Hunt...
Dan snow was one of the faces of pro AV campaign as well.
Snow also led the slightly laughable Let's Stay Together, the B-List celebrity wing of Better Together. As I recall he was quite popular round here at that point. How times change.
"Ruth Davidson, Scottish Conservative leader, said Mr Johnson was "absolutely right". "I agree with his analysis," she told Radio 4's Westminster Hour, in an interview to be broadcast on Sunday. "Now, that might not be the position of the UK government, but guess what? I am not in the UK government and I think he was right." "
Off Topic so apologies De-Lurking again after a couple of years – last time was when I had to deliver a baby of my girl friends daughter – not partner – girlfriend - as we do not play tennis or bridge! As I had pulled baby which was simple as I had worked as a shepherd in a former life I was banned from betting on the weight by assembled members of family who were fearing the worst. I enquired on PB as to the protocol of the banning and received some good suggestions – I still lost! Happily mother and daughter are still good Scoop I think In my area this afternoon Adrian Dearnley who is a Green County councillor has defected to Labour – no – Lib Dems – no – the wicked Tories. This take the council out of NOC if I am right and the Tories will have a majority of one. No doubt AndyJS will confirm or put me right. Also could anybody, Hurst Llama maybe, point me to the website where I can find the details of Clive Lewis's Army career. A worthwhile bet is riding on this. Thanks and best wishes to you all whatever political stripes you wear
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
Carney's speech understood the impact of globalisation.
We have to make SO's platform work. Brexit and Trump, and Grillo and Le Pen are grubby opportunists riding the wave of populism (well done Will Self). They think they can control it aiming their fire at immigrants....but don't think it will stay there. Populism will set it's sights on wealth, the true cause of inequality...we are a heart beat away from the likes of Mugabe using the populist ground swell to make major asset grabs....
There is nothing to say we cannot easily lose our liberal democracy and put our fates into the hands of demagogues. The antecedents are there...populism, hatred, division and fear of change. Who is to say that the regimes of the 21st century are not going to dwarf the terror of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century?
O/T but foreign/defense policy. The UK seems to be properly back East of Suez, or at least heading that way. The permanent base in Bahrain, the Typhoon deployment to SK and Japan inc overflying the South China Sea. And apparently the QE2's first voyage with an actual air wing in 2018 will also do a freedom of navigation transit of the SCS.
Not saying it is necessarily a bad thing but it does look like quite a big change in the UK's strategic posture. Any thoughts?
I do agree that they have done the best to date but I cannot get past the Supreme Court judgement as being the defining moment in Brexit. They said in their closing statement their judgement will not be about stopping the process and when they say how, resistance will become almost politically impossible to that process
Yes, resistance to starting the process is more or less impossible already. But then, in aftermath of the vote, that was always highly likely. The question now will be how it ends.
And that will not be clear for many years. I do believe everyone needs to agree to let the government get on with it on the following principles
Access to the single market Control of immigration Exit from ECJ Ability to do trade deals worldwide Existing EU citizens here and UK citizens abroad guaranteed their status
Suits me. Now will the Eurocrats agree to it?
The art of negotiating. See reports today that David Davis has told the City he will deploy his ace card and tell the EU that UK tax rates will be so much lower than any EU member, red tape greatly reduced, and an outward facing government will trump (no not that trump) anything the EU refuses to deal on.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
Carney's speech understood the impact of globalisation.
We have to make SO's platform work. Brexit and Trump, and Grillo and Le Pen are grubby opportunists riding the wave of populism (well done Will Self). They think they can control it aiming their fire at immigrants....but don't think it will stay there. Populism will set it's sights on wealth, the true cause of inequality...we are a heart beat away from the likes of Mugabe using the populist ground swell to make major asset grabs....
There is nothing to say we cannot easily lose our liberal democracy and put our fates into the hands of demagogues. The antecedents are there...populism, hatred, division and fear of change. Who is to say that the regimes of the 21st century are not going to dwarf the terror of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century?
I said social, not liberal democracy, although I agree that the latter is also under threat, although for different reasons. But I doubt that we would agree about what the threats to liberal democracy are. Not Trump for a start.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
O/T but foreign/defense policy. The UK seems to be properly back East of Suez, or at least heading that way. The permanent base in Bahrain, the Typhoon deployment to SK and Japan inc overflying the South China Sea. And apparently the QE2's first voyage with an actual air wing in 2018 will also do a freedom of navigation transit of the SCS.
Not saying it is necessarily a bad thing but it does look like quite a big change in the UK's strategic posture. Any thoughts?
Cost ? Or, are we becoming the Gulf Mercenaries replacing Pakistan ?
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
Reflecting on Sleaford, UKIP's failure to make headway in a Tory Brexit seat is probably bad news for Labour. It will make it more likely that UKIP will target their efforts on Labour Brexit seats, especially where the Labour MP is an outspoken Remainer.
If UKIP had run the Tories close, they would have then divided their efforts going forward, but now, they are likely to forget about gains from the Tories.
It was not intentional. They cannot organise a piss-up..............
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
I completely disagree. Of course. It just means cooperation among nations. That will come. A system which allows living standards for many millions to stagnate or fall, and a significant minority not to have the most basic of life's necessities, is not sustainable.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
We can't afford left wing....who said? People with assets have accumulated wealth since the 2008 recession. I've easily more than doubled the my net wealth through minimal effort. That is not fair...it is not just, and it cannot continue.
I think Carney understands this. We are unleashing populism and heading full on for a crisis whilst a good minority of folk have become much wealthier for doing very little.
The sooner that spiv buggers off from whence he came the better.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
It sounds suspiciously good for everyone - those who want to opt in do, those who don't do not. I don't recall hearing much about it since the original article, and who knows if it is being seriously advanced as a possibility, but I'll be watching with interest as either there has to be a hidden problem, or it sounds ideal, and why would either party not want it?
The idea, say, a few nations could be classed as associate members, and citizens of those could opt in at their leisure for a price, or something in that ballpark of an idea, well, even if the price is a lot what would be the harm?
Assuming there is not a hidden flaw in it, I suppose the question is would hard brexiters object (I guess as some citizens would have more or fewer rights) or any Europeans not want to offer it (on the basis of it incentives leaving)?
Associate Status is the sort of thing I'd have been happy with in the first place, however, so naturally I'm biased. Though the articles makes it sound a bit of a pope dream nevertheless, requiring us to offer incentives and achieve treat change in a few years. If we were able to do that sort of thing we wouldn't have left.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens, unless the fee is massively high, or there is some trick I am missing.
I get the idea it gives the EU access to the UK's best and brightest, but that is surely gonna happen anyway. Smart people with money or a job offer will still move around Europe post-Brexit.
Odd. If this simply an olive branch from the EU then HMG should accept it, and it also solves a few issues re Ireland and Scotland.
It's rubbing the poor's nose in it. Voted Brexit (likely to be less well educated, economically less well off)? Stay Out. Rich Remainer? Come on in.
Just realised I will probably be dead by the next time Labour gets back into power. I like you Jeremy but for fucks sake do the decent thing. The Tories have made so many mistakes yet you are providing no opposition. Am beginning to think the unthinkable, that a pact with the Liberals and Greens may be the only way to save Labour. But, you have to go Jezza.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
I completely disagree. Of course. It just means cooperation among nations. That will come. A system which allows living standards for many millions to stagnate or fall, and a significant minority not to have the most basic of life's necessities, is not sustainable.
Our so called poorest on JSA or other benefits with access the the NHS are wealthier than billions of people globally. With access to education, health care and security that billions could never dream of.
The real poor in this world don't live in this country, that is a good thing but until people acknowledge that we are having two separate conversations.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens
Presumably why the articles talks about it being very hard to achieve in time, as treaty change to what EU citizenship means to better us would be a reward for leaving which seems like it would be less than popular, and its unclear what we would have to offer to encourage that.
Cue 100s of Guardian articles about how evil uncle Rupert shouldn't be allowed to do this.
I think Sky will sell for £11.20-11.40, the premium isn't large enough IMO.
Just be happy End Millband isn't LoTO and Corbyn is useless.
We make fun of Ed but he had some successes.
Yes he led Labour to a defeat.. highly successful...
In opposition he bought issues to the forefront like when he announced a freeze on energy prices the governent reacted, his opposition to pfizer buying Astrazeneca helped stop the aquisition and his opposition to bombing Syria meant Cameron lost the vote. important wins for him and pretty good for a opposition leader. Labour were doomed to lose again after they were precieved to be profligate, nothing he could do about that.
Yes. For all Ed's perceived weakness, he did the occasional good job of picking up on certain issues and running with them hard, keeping them in the news for a week or more. I don't recall a single issue where Corbyn has managed to do the same.
On a similar subject, why haven't the LDs been wall-to-wall on the "Snooper's Charter" for the past week - do they now care more about being Continuity Remain than about civil liberties?
Just realised I will probably be dead by the next time Labour gets back into power. I like you Jeremy but for fucks sake do the decent thing. The Tories have made so many mistakes yet you are providing no opposition. Am beginning to think the unthinkable, that a pact with the Liberals and Greens may be the only way to save Labour. But, you have to go Jezza.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
"Ruth Davidson, Scottish Conservative leader, said Mr Johnson was "absolutely right". "I agree with his analysis," she told Radio 4's Westminster Hour, in an interview to be broadcast on Sunday. "Now, that might not be the position of the UK government, but guess what? I am not in the UK government and I think he was right." "
He was right to think it, no one would dispute that, but as she states, she is not in the government. He is. Unless she supports changing our policy on pretending the situation is other than it is, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
I think there is a longstanding diplomatic convention about not panning your allies in public. I absolutely understand why the UK government had to come out and say what it said - but I don't think Boris was wrong
The stag politics took a turn for the worse. The uni group all began to talk about bailing and having a second stag, that was undesirable but accepted by the best man. The issue started when one of the school friends asked what we were planning (and we planned it today in a WhatsApp group). We're renting a massive house for two nights in London, one night out and a second day in with boardgames, a few PS4s with a few TVs, a home cooked dinner from a day chef and then drinking and card games in the evening (and possibly a stripper). Suddenly all these lot are interested in our event. No worries, we extend the invite to anyone who wants to come, in the end around half of that group decide they want to do the London stag rather than the Bath/Bristol one. Just a few minutes ago we get a message from the groom saying that they best man has thrown a massive wobbly and threatened to resign if we don't do what he wants.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
But wahey! anyway.
You should go for it. Walking around with the sea in view can't be significantly different now from now it was a few years ago.
Thanks.
On the east coast, if you follow the line I walked thirteen years ago you'll be well into the sea!
Things have actually changed a fair bit, with the Scottish and Welsh coastal paths opened, and the English one under development. But people still read and even use my site, which is nice, especially as the 'official' routes are, in places, not as coastal as they could be (i.e. no trespassing!)
In some ways I think writing the notes for the website each night after the walk was more insane than the walk itself! There was little 3G coverage back then, so I'd write them up on my PC or Psion 5, then run the scripts to make the site and zip up the changed files, and every week snailmail them to a friend who'd upload them. Now I'd send them by 3G/4G or just use Facebook.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens, unless the fee is massively high, or there is some trick I am missing.
I get the idea it gives the EU access to the UK's best and brightest, but that is surely gonna happen anyway. Smart people with money or a job offer will still move around Europe post-Brexit.
Odd. If this simply an olive branch from the EU then HMG should accept it, and it also solves a few issues re Ireland and Scotland.
It's rubbing the poor's nose in it. Voted Brexit (likely to be less well educated, economically less well off)? Stay Out. Rich Remainer? Come on in.
Whilst 'rubbing the poor's nose in it' is undoubtedly one of the EU's few talents, it's quite obvious that there will be a provision here that's unacceptable to HMG; forcing it to unpopularly block it. Targeting bucket shop holidays is rather a lame opening salvo I think. I find it quite comforting.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
I completely disagree. Of course. It just means cooperation among nations. That will come. A system which allows living standards for many millions to stagnate or fall, and a significant minority not to have the most basic of life's necessities, is not sustainable.
Our so called poorest on JSA or other benefits with access the the NHS are wealthier than billions of people globally. With access to education, health care and security that billions could never dream of.
The real poor in this world don't live in this country, that is a good thing but until people acknowledge that we are having two separate conversations.
The real poor don't live here, of course. But millions and millions of people - who have not experienced life-threatening poverty - feel totally left behind on low wages, with little hope of things getting better. There are alsonpeople who dongo hungry in this G8 country of ours and/or who live in sub-standard accommodation. Telling them to suck it up, they're not Ethiopians is not necessarily the right approach. For me, a degree of wealth redistribution is what we should be aiming for.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens, unless the fee is massively high, or there is some trick I am missing.
I get the idea it gives the EU access to the UK's best and brightest, but that is surely gonna happen anyway. Smart people with money or a job offer will still move around Europe post-Brexit.
Odd. If this simply an olive branch from the EU then HMG should accept it, and it also solves a few issues re Ireland and Scotland.
It's rubbing the poor's nose in it. Voted Brexit (likely to be less well educated, economically less well off)? Stay Out. Rich Remainer? Come on in.
Most Brexiter's presumably wouldn't be interested in opting in, what harm allowing those who want to to do so? So I guess it only really rubs poor Remainer's noses in it.
A comment below the Dan Snow article: "I know it is the fashion here to describe the Brexiteers as ill informed and/or stupid but I was at a pre-Christmas party where assorted solicitors, a barrister and a few others with degrees all voted Leave. One said when she looked at a disparate group of people she knew that voted Remain all they had in common was a that they all owned a property in Europe."
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens, unless the fee is massively high, or there is some trick I am missing.
I get the idea it gives the EU access to the UK's best and brightest, but that is surely gonna happen anyway. Smart people with money or a job offer will still move around Europe post-Brexit.
Odd. If this simply an olive branch from the EU then HMG should accept it, and it also solves a few issues re Ireland and Scotland.
It's rubbing the poor's nose in it. Voted Brexit (likely to be less well educated, economically less well off)? Stay Out. Rich Remainer? Come on in.
Yep, takes all red tape away from getting talented, wealthy people (and their businesses) to relocate, while keeping out the bloodsuckers.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
There must be a catch. Sounds too good to be true.
Is the idea the beginnings of the concept of citizenship of the EU *as an entity in its own right*, rather than via citizenship of a member state?
This would represent a big push towards the Superstate from the EU side, but in a way that might be acceptable to the other member states, given that British living in the EU are mostly net contributors.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
There must be a catch. Sounds too good to be true.
Is the idea the beginnings of the concept of citizenship of the EU *as an entity in its own right*, rather than via citizenship of a member state?
This would represent a big push towards the Superstate from the EU side, but in a way that might be acceptable to the other member states, given that British living in the EU are mostly net contributors.
Yes, it is just a method the EU are using to push it's nation state agenda.
A comment below the Dan Snow article: "I know it is the fashion here to describe the Brexiteers as ill informed and/or stupid but I was at a pre-Christmas party where assorted solicitors, a barrister and a few others with degrees all voted Leave. One said when she looked at a disparate group of people she knew that voted Remain all they had in common was a that they all owned a property in Europe."
A member of the elite commenting on other members of the elite. Neither representative of Leave or Remain voters in general, only of those who led the respective campaigns.
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
But wahey! anyway.
You should go for it. Walking around with the sea in view can't be significantly different now from now it was a few years ago.
Thanks.
On the east coast, if you follow the line I walked thirteen years ago you'll be well into the sea!
Things have actually changed a fair bit, with the Scottish and Welsh coastal paths opened, and the English one under development. But people still read and even use my site, which is nice, especially as the 'official' routes are, in places, not as coastal as they could be (i.e. no trespassing!)
In some ways I think writing the notes for the website each night after the walk was more insane than the walk itself! There was little 3G coverage back then, so I'd write them up on my PC or Psion 5, then run the scripts to make the site and zip up the changed files, and every week snailmail them to a friend who'd upload them. Now I'd send them by 3G/4G or just use Facebook.
BBC2 8.30
Thanks - I'm recording them for binge watching later. Though I wasn't massively impressed with his Pennine Way series: the bu**er can actually walk the path if he's going to film it.
And preferably in winter, asI did, and walk around all the estuaries rather than take ferries.
Mr. Observer, yes and no. Some events mark the end of an era. Alas, poor Byzantium.
Byzantium was conquered. As long as there are democratic elections there will be electoral cycles.
I think you fail to consider the fact that state socialism requires taxpayer largesse. That's not happening again, ever. We can't afford left wing. We can't really afford Theresa's right wing.
The world has never been wealthier. We can afford to redistribute some of that wealth to ensure that everyone in this G8 economy of ours has a decent shot at a decent life and never ends up having to worry about finding a roof to live under, paying for heating to stay warm and having enough food to eat three square meals a day. Once you set people free from such worries they have the time and energy to do the things that deliver prosperity. That is not socialism.
No, but it is social democracy and the modern globalised economy means that that doesn't work anymore.
I completely disagree. Of course. It just means cooperation among nations. That will come. A system which allows living standards for many millions to stagnate or fall, and a significant minority not to have the most basic of life's necessities, is not sustainable.
Our so called poorest on JSA or other benefits with access the the NHS are wealthier than billions of people globally. With access to education, health care and security that billions could never dream of.
The real poor in this world don't live in this country, that is a good thing but until people acknowledge that we are having two separate conversations.
Very much so. Those of us who have travelled or lived abroad have seen poverty, and it isn't the 'relative' poverty much beloved of lefty campaigners and charities, which will by definition always exist even if we make millionaires of the unemployed.
People living two to a bedroom in a house, with free education, healthcare and cash benefits sufficient to provide food and heat are not poor by any global definition of the word.
Having to make do with an iPhone 6 while your neighbours all have iPhone 7s really doesn't make you poor.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
I'm puzzled by what place this has in any negotiations. It's entirely up to the EU whether they offer Associate Citizenship to individuals of non-EU nations, whether for free, 50p pa or £500 pa.
There's surely nothing the UK government can do to prevent it, and why should they want to?
It will be interesting to see the detail: e.g. is it possible a UK citizen with dual EU (associate) citizenship may be conferring rights on the EU to (say) collect their tax, rather than the UK where they are liviing?
As you say, it does sound a bit 'have cake/eat cake'; nothing to stop 100% UK citizens becoming associate citizens of the EU. Maybe the UK govt will provide a grant to cover the cost!
But associate membership describes fairly concisely what the UK wanted as a nation and was refused; so why would the EU open the door for the whole nation to join as associates individually?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Depends on the annual fee, I am certainly on. I want to keep my red passport.
I find it hard to believe other EU countries, or EU citizens in the UK, would be so completely and blithely content with this. It seems VERY generous to British citizens, unless the fee is massively high, or there is some trick I am missing.
I get the idea it gives the EU access to the UK's best and brightest, but that is surely gonna happen anyway. Smart people with money or a job offer will still move around Europe post-Brexit.
Odd. If this simply an olive branch from the EU then HMG should accept it, and it also solves a few issues re Ireland and Scotland.
It's rubbing the poor's nose in it. Voted Brexit (likely to be less well educated, economically less well off)? Stay Out. Rich Remainer? Come on in.
Most Brexiter's presumably wouldn't be interested in opting in, what harm allowing those who want to to do so? So I guess it only really rubs poor Remainer's noses in it.
Not so sure about that last paragraph. Most Brexiters want the UK out of the EU. I do myself. But I don't wish the EU any harm - indeed, I hope they flourish and believe they have more chance of doing that without the UK.
It's easily conceivable that, if the offer's on the table and the strings don't turn out to be chains, I & people like me would be content to know that the UK is outside the EU's jurisdiction and be still be quite ready to accept personal associate citizenship of the EU.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
I'm puzzled by what place this has in any negotiations. It's entirely up to the EU whether they offer Associate Citizenship to individuals of non-EU nations, whether for free, 50p pa or £500 pa.
There's surely nothing the UK government can do to prevent it, and why should they want to?
It will be interesting to see the detail: e.g. is it possible a UK citizen with dual EU (associate) citizenship may be conferring rights on the EU to (say) collect their tax, rather than the UK where they are liviing?
As you say, it does sound a bit 'have cake/eat cake'; nothing to stop 100% UK citizens becoming associate citizens of the EU. Maybe the UK govt will provide a grant to cover the cost!
But associate membership describes fairly concisely what the UK wanted as a nation and was refused; so why would the EU open the door for the whole nation to join as associates individually?
*Scratches head*
Oh, and good evening, everybody.
As far as tax goes the answer is no. As a rule tax is paid in the country where you work and then that amount is deducted from the tax due where you live as long as the reciprocal arrangements are in place. Someone living and working in the UK would be liable for UK tax no matter what the EU wanted to offer in terms of citizenship. .
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Governments within the UK have already managed that.
For example do you consider yourself as an EU citizen, a British citizen, an English citizen, a London citizen ?
Different PBers will consider themselves different things and different combinations of things.
British citizens being EU citizens as well goes back to John Major and the Maastricht Treaty while Blair's devolutions encouraged the ideas of other national loyalties.
What does PB think of the new EU plan to give us post-Brexit Brits the right to opt in to EU citizenship?
I confess I am a little mystified. It seems like offering us the cake to have, and the cake to eat. We get all the rights, and none of the responsibilities, for £50 or whatever.
As a Brexiteer I'd happily pay the money.
Is the EU mischief-making, being absurdly generous and idealistic, or scheming up some deal down the line?
Comments
I actually have no idea about what (of the many things he has said) resulted in the court case.
I think Carney understands this. We are unleashing populism and heading full on for a crisis whilst a good minority of folk have become much wealthier for doing very little.
https://twitter.com/Ed_Miliband/status/807287463978930176
Rather out of the blue, I've been asked if my walking website blog can be shortlisted for an award. Aside from updating lists of coastal walkers, I haven't updated it for nearly four years, when I last did a trip.
It feels odd that a website that started at the very beginning of blogging - and was never intended to be a blog - is apparently now one! As far as I can tell it's genuine: the company's well known and done it for the last few years.
I'm also rather embarrassed as parts of it are slightly borken, and it doesn't show off my technical skills very well (it runs off an unholy mixture of string, sellotape, PHP, Perl, and Javascript, along with some ancient c-shell. So I shall probably reject the offer, with thanks.
But wahey! anyway.
I happen to be in a minority who thinks that the answer to that is not to limit migration but to drastically reduce the value and scope of the benefits system. It has the added appeal of facing up to the fact that countries can no longer afford generous benefits systems.
Mr. Tyndall, just adding a 16-18 year residency requirement would be fine [or some mix-and-match approach to contributions]. Adult Britons would automatically qualify, those coming over here would not, immediately.
(BTW, are you the same "Fat Steve" who commented over at Anna Raccoon's gaff?)
Edited extra bit: yeah, I was just responding to the immigration factor. Defusing that as a political issue is important.
But after two months of Theresa May I have only marginally more confidence in her than I have in Corbyn. She's an embarrassment. What kind of leader says she wants 'a Red White and Blue Brexit' before leading a trade mission to the world's last public beheaders? Has she employed Seamus Milne? These things are noticed by the those her government are going to have to negotiate with. And they're a hell of a lot smarter than those on our side.
If UKIP had run the Tories close, they would have then divided their efforts going forward, but now, they are likely to forget about gains from the Tories.
On the east coast, if you follow the line I walked thirteen years ago you'll be well into the sea!
Things have actually changed a fair bit, with the Scottish and Welsh coastal paths opened, and the English one under development. But people still read and even use my site, which is nice, especially as the 'official' routes are, in places, not as coastal as they could be (i.e. no trespassing!)
In some ways I think writing the notes for the website each night after the walk was more insane than the walk itself! There was little 3G coverage back then, so I'd write them up on my PC or Psion 5, then run the scripts to make the site and zip up the changed files, and every week snailmail them to a friend who'd upload them. Now I'd send them by 3G/4G or just use Facebook.
Anyway, I must be off.
As I recall he was quite popular round here at that point. How times change.
"Ruth Davidson, Scottish Conservative leader, said Mr Johnson was "absolutely right".
"I agree with his analysis," she told Radio 4's Westminster Hour, in an interview to be broadcast on Sunday.
"Now, that might not be the position of the UK government, but guess what? I am not in the UK government and I think he was right." "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38262836
De-Lurking again after a couple of years – last time was when I had to deliver a baby of my girl friends daughter – not partner – girlfriend - as we do not play tennis or bridge!
As I had pulled baby which was simple as I had worked as a shepherd in a former life I was banned from betting on the weight by assembled members of family who were fearing the worst. I enquired on PB as to the protocol of the banning and received some good suggestions – I still lost! Happily mother and daughter are still good
Scoop I think
In my area this afternoon Adrian Dearnley who is a Green County councillor has defected to Labour – no – Lib Dems – no – the wicked Tories. This take the council out of NOC if I am right and the Tories will have a majority of one. No doubt AndyJS will confirm or put me right.
Also could anybody, Hurst Llama maybe, point me to the website where I can find the details of Clive Lewis's Army career. A worthwhile bet is riding on this. Thanks and best wishes to you all whatever political stripes you wear
We have to make SO's platform work. Brexit and Trump, and Grillo and Le Pen are grubby opportunists riding the wave of populism (well done Will Self). They think they can control it aiming their fire at immigrants....but don't think it will stay there. Populism will set it's sights on wealth, the true cause of inequality...we are a heart beat away from the likes of Mugabe using the populist ground swell to make major asset grabs....
There is nothing to say we cannot easily lose our liberal democracy and put our fates into the hands of demagogues. The antecedents are there...populism, hatred, division and fear of change. Who is to say that the regimes of the 21st century are not going to dwarf the terror of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century?
Not saying it is necessarily a bad thing but it does look like quite a big change in the UK's strategic posture. Any thoughts?
They can't even keep a leader !
So is there any scope for price to go over £10.75? I guess shareholders could reject offer but is that likely?
The idea, say, a few nations could be classed as associate members, and citizens of those could opt in at their leisure for a price, or something in that ballpark of an idea, well, even if the price is a lot what would be the harm?
Assuming there is not a hidden flaw in it, I suppose the question is would hard brexiters object (I guess as some citizens would have more or fewer rights) or any Europeans not want to offer it (on the basis of it incentives leaving)?
Associate Status is the sort of thing I'd have been happy with in the first place, however, so naturally I'm biased. Though the articles makes it sound a bit of a pope dream nevertheless, requiring us to offer incentives and achieve treat change in a few years. If we were able to do that sort of thing we wouldn't have left.
I like you Jeremy but for fucks sake do the decent thing. The Tories have made so many mistakes yet you are providing no opposition. Am beginning to think the unthinkable, that a pact with the Liberals and Greens may be the only way to save Labour. But, you have to go Jezza.
The real poor in this world don't live in this country, that is a good thing but until people acknowledge that we are having two separate conversations.
On a similar subject, why haven't the LDs been wall-to-wall on the "Snooper's Charter" for the past week - do they now care more about being Continuity Remain than about civil liberties?
I think there is a longstanding diplomatic convention about not panning your allies in public. I absolutely understand why the UK government had to come out and say what it said - but I don't think Boris was wrong
How bloody selfish can you get.
This would represent a big push towards the Superstate from the EU side, but in a way that might be acceptable to the other member states, given that British living in the EU are mostly net contributors.
And preferably in winter, asI did, and walk around all the estuaries rather than take ferries.
People living two to a bedroom in a house, with free education, healthcare and cash benefits sufficient to provide food and heat are not poor by any global definition of the word.
Having to make do with an iPhone 6 while your neighbours all have iPhone 7s really doesn't make you poor.
NEW THREAD
It's 28th October 1982 on BBC with Top of the Pops. First track is Do It To The Music by Raw Silk:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/live/bbcfour
There's surely nothing the UK government can do to prevent it, and why should they want to?
It will be interesting to see the detail: e.g. is it possible a UK citizen with dual EU (associate) citizenship may be conferring rights on the EU to (say) collect their tax, rather than the UK where they are liviing?
As you say, it does sound a bit 'have cake/eat cake'; nothing to stop 100% UK citizens becoming associate citizens of the EU. Maybe the UK govt will provide a grant to cover the cost!
But associate membership describes fairly concisely what the UK wanted as a nation and was refused; so why would the EU open the door for the whole nation to join as associates individually?
*Scratches head*
Oh, and good evening, everybody.
It's easily conceivable that, if the offer's on the table and the strings don't turn out to be chains, I & people like me would be content to know that the UK is outside the EU's jurisdiction and be still be quite ready to accept personal associate citizenship of the EU.
For example do you consider yourself as an EU citizen, a British citizen, an English citizen, a London citizen ?
Different PBers will consider themselves different things and different combinations of things.
British citizens being EU citizens as well goes back to John Major and the Maastricht Treaty while Blair's devolutions encouraged the ideas of other national loyalties.
£10bn split between 16m remainers = £625 p.a.