Hilarious to see the reaction to Southam's rather valid point and the attempts at deflection, and the bizarre excuses made by some as to why they hold one standard for the left and totally different standard for the right. Maybe because it gets to core of their own world view and how they see people who are 'different'?
Nah, what is hilarious is the self-importance of the bien-pensant left giving the POTUS-elect a dressing down for being a Very Naughty Boy. I expect Trump will feel very small. It's just like all those letters about not re-electing Bush the Guardian orchestrated in 2004.
Nothing to do with the 'self-importance of the bien-pensant left', especially given that Conservatives have spoken out about these kinds of remarks made by Trump and his associates. If people don't speak out against this sort of thing, then there's danger that such attitudes eventually become normalised like they used to be.
The mistake you are making is thinking that Trump and his supporters are susceptible to, or capable of, rational political discourse; when in fact he is as mad as a clockwork orange, and also POTUS-elect. To get any guidance as to what he might be capable of, we must look to examples like Ivan the Terrible, the loopier Roman Emperors, or the "Big Man" tyrants of modern Africa. If you think that casual (and despicable, I fully agree) sexism and racism even register in comparison with his real faults, you are not as frightened by him as you should be.
I do wonder what the next setting of the Doomsday clock will be.
Your post has just reminded me of an episode of the Daily Show where Trevor Noah actually alluded to Trump having parallels with African dictators. His remarks 'let there be an arms race' are scary as hell. I'm hoping that establishment Republicans can 'contain' him somewhat. While I don't agree with them on much, I don't actually fear them in the way I do Trump and his associates.
MaxPB: interesting. Although I can't see what the point of the paywall is in that case.
Google pay them per click.
Google pay them? Seriously?
Yes, the WSJ as well.
Do you have a source for that?
I have never heard of Google paying to provide links to sites. I thought that the news sites allowed links from Google to drive traffic (so they let one article be read for free). As not allowing links from Google is rather fatal to any site's promotion strategy.
The WSJ and FT took themselves off Google's index. I think the deal was done in 2014 but I'm far too drunk to drink.
German polling continuing to show little movement after the Berlin attacks, which some here expected to show a sharp reaction. INSA (which usually reports the highest AfD levels) does show a +2.5 bounce for them, but two other institutes don't; one shows a CDU bounce instead. I'm not sure that single atrocities do produce much reaction, as people think "that's awful" and move on - the AfD rise followed not a single incident but a period of weeks in which the refugee issue sat in the headlines every day.
MaxPB: interesting. Although I can't see what the point of the paywall is in that case.
Google pay them per click.
Google pay them? Seriously?
Yes, the WSJ as well.
Do you have a source for that?
I have never heard of Google paying to provide links to sites. I thought that the news sites allowed links from Google to drive traffic (so they let one article be read for free). As not allowing links from Google is rather fatal to any site's promotion strategy.
The WSJ and FT took themselves off Google's index. I think the deal was done in 2014 but I'm far too drunk to drink.
"The poll – the biggest online news questionnaire this paper has carried out – saw nearly 10,000 people respond to five questions on what readers thought of Brexit since the historic vote."
Pretendy voodoo poll. The management will shortly strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger for posting.
No, not at all. It reminded me I used to read Redwood's blog quite regularly, and probably should do again. He writes very clearly and cogently on economic matters - though it has to be said he doesn't begin or end his blogs very well, they seem to just stop rather than conclude.
RCS dismissed his statements on WTO rules, but either didn't see or didn't wish to answer my follow up question about what Redwood actually said that was wrong, so as far as I am concerned Redwood's comments still stand.
As for it being a plan, it isn't a plan. It is an argument that Britain's negotiating position is strong, which as a net loser both in trade and in funding arrangements currently, should be obvious.
It is a great pity that Redwood isn't in the Government. It's one of the signs that her conversion to Brexit may be a facade in my opinion. Of the Brexiteers she has on board, I only really have time for Davis. Liam Fox is on his last chance and will never make serious waves. Boris' views flap about like a windsock and he depends on May entirely to keep him as Foreign Sec.
Hello: briefly, as I need to pick my daughter up.
WTO rules merely means that countries cannot discriminate, it does not mean - as he suggests in the article - that there are certain maximum tariffs set by the WTO.
As the EU's CET schedule is well known, we know exactly what the tariffs we would face in the event of uber-hard Brexit would be. So, cars is the number one British export at 9.7% of the total, and there would be 10% tariffs imposed on them. At the very least there would be a price elasticity of demand effect, and the price increase would reduce the number sold. It is also entirely possible that - were we to leave the Europan medicines agency - you would need to see drugs made in Britain (our second biggest export, once we exclude commodities) recertified for sales in the EU. And this - of course - in addition to the costs of hard Brexit on our financial services industry.
For this reason, his breezy "2.7%" is grossly inaccurate, because it does not reflect exactly what the UK exports.
Now, can we get through all that, and do fine as a country in a WTO scenario. In the medium term, of course we can. But the short term consequences on our biggest export industries - autos, drugs, and finance - would be extremely severe.
Redwood mentions 10% tariffs on cars, but as a point in our favour, because the EU exports more cars to us than we do to them. I can't see where in the article he mentions 2.7%, he mentions an average of 3.5%.
So whilst I'm sure your knowledge trumps his knowledge, I can't see how it undermines his main point - that they have a good deal more to lose from reciprocal tariff rises than we do.
Scraping the barrel now. As Blair noted, Remainers 'are the insurgents now' - just as Kippers were voting in these 'polls' before, now it is the europhiles.
Only poll that mattered was on June 23rd, and despite the combined might of the government and big business, Remainers lost.
Your post has just reminded me of an episode of the Daily Show where Trevor Noah actually alluded to Trump having parallels with African dictators. His remarks 'let there be an arms race' are scary as hell. I'm hoping that establishment Republicans can 'contain' him somewhat. While I don't agree with them on much, I don't actually fear them in the way I do Trump and his associates.
I very much fear I am an establishment stooge, as despite Brexit (which need not be as all encompassingly revolutionary as some of the more fearfully intense people would like), I tend to like my politicians to be bland, or at least in the predictably boring categories. Some may be crap, but they are generally crap within understandable and acceptable parameters.
But then I have long felt we the public are responsible for many of the traits we criticise in our political classes. The professional, identikit party automatons who bland their way around inoffensively and without genuine substance, they emerged because it was what worked, we liked but punished the more maverick, except generally in less high profile circumstances. Honestly, we needed a bit more fire, passion and the rough hewn amateurish offerings of the truly genuine, it was inevitable there would be a reaction at some point, but I do hope we don't go too far in that direction merely as a reaction against the party robots we created previously.
P.S I liked that bit from Trevor Noah. I haven't watched in awhile, but it was one of the times it felt less like he was reading a script than some other early offerings, that his personality was informing it - I am certain he is a great fit, politically, with what the writers are saying, and he adds his own take, but when focusing solely on US politics, sometimes it just didn't feel as from the heart as it would from Stewart. John Oliver has generally nailed that sense I feel, as with all the episodes focusing on technical and institutional issues, you immediately got a sense of his personality behind everything.
Does anyone know how Santa got from a sled with skis, pulled by reindeer in the ordinary terrestrial fashion, to a magic flying sled with magic flying (wingless) reindeer?
No, not at all. It reminded me I used to read Redwood's blog quite regularly, and probably should do again. He writes very clearly and cogently on economic matters - though it has to be said he doesn't begin or end his blogs very well, they seem to just stop rather than conclude.
As for it being a plan, it isn't a plan. It is an argument that Britain's negotiating position is strong, which as a net loser both in trade and in funding arrangements currently, should be obvious.
It is a great pity that Redwood isn't in the Government. It's one of the signs that her conversion to Brexit may be a facade in my opinion. Of the Brexiteers she has on board, I only really have time for Davis. Liam Fox is on his last chance and will never make serious waves. Boris' views flap about like a windsock and he depends on May entirely to keep him as Foreign Sec.
Hello: briefly, as I need to pick my daughter up.
WTO rules merely means that countries cannot discriminate, it does not mean - as he suggests in the article - that there are certain maximum tariffs set by the WTO.
As the EU's CET schedule is well known, we know exactly what the tariffs we would face in the event of uber-hard Brexit would be. So, cars is the number one British export at 9.7% of the total, and there would be 10% tariffs imposed on them. At the very least there would be a price elasticity of demand effect, and the price increase would reduce the number sold. It is also entirely possible that - were we to leave the Europan medicines agency - you would need to see drugs made in Britain (our second biggest export, once we exclude commodities) recertified for sales in the EU. And this - of course - in addition to the costs of hard Brexit on our financial services industry.
For this reason, his breezy "2.7%" is grossly inaccurate, because it does not reflect exactly what the UK exports.
Now, can we get through all that, and do fine as a country in a WTO scenario. But the short term consequences on our biggest export industries - autos, drugs, and finance - would be extremely severe.
Redwood mentions 10% tariffs on cars, but as a point in our favour, because the EU exports more cars to us than we do to them. I can't see where in the article he mentions 2.7%, he mentions an average of 3.5%.
So whilst I'm sure your knowledge trumps his knowledge, I can't see how it undermines his main point - that they have a good deal more to lose from reciprocal tariff rises than we do.
No, because the.proportion of car sales is much higher for the UK.
In any event, what matters most to the EU is the continued existence of the EU. They are very willing to make sure the UK gets a worse deal after leaving so as not to encourager les autres.
Does anyone know how Santa got from a sled with skis, pulled by reindeer in the ordinary terrestrial fashion, to a magic flying sled with magic flying (wingless) reindeer?
You can understand why the Brexiteers are scared stiff of the actual terms of leaving being put to the people.
Whether people are scared stiff of a reversal or confident of a repeat, such polls are not particularly helpful I would have thought. Polls putting Bregret at 100% would not sway politicians it was safe to discard the referendum result, even with another one organised; beyond a committed few, to take such extreme action they would surely need concrete proof, electoral proof. By the time that could happen it would be too late since both main parties say they will implement the referendum, and that would need to mean a party advocating Remaining winning, so neither will be keen for an election until the only thing remaining is the fat lady singing our way out officially.
Even could the process be halted - and anything is possible, of course, if the will is there - with a significant majority feeling betrayed and a continent pissed off we spent years in hostile and bitter negotiations before pulling the plug and staying, somehow, it doesn't sound a pleasant situation, does it?
'Does anyone know how Santa got from a sled with skis, pulled by reindeer in the ordinary terrestrial fashion, to a magic flying sled with magic flying (wingless) reindeer?'
Black project run out of Area 51. Resulted in loads of reported sightings of UFOs.
Does anyone know how Santa got from a sled with skis, pulled by reindeer in the ordinary terrestrial fashion, to a magic flying sled with magic flying (wingless) reindeer?
(Edited to add: good evening, everyone)
Globalisation innit?
Happy Christmas
I was just going to say the same thing.
Hopefully he can still get a visa into Brexit Britain
I wish you all a quiet night - unless you are partying, of course; that 'quiet night' wish comes from the Shipping Forecast I think, and I was thinking in particular of those who are working tonight. Whatever you're doing, thank you.
You can understand why the Brexiteers are scared stiff of the actual terms of leaving being put to the people.
I thought these sort of polls were not welcome here?
Terms vs stay in after all would be be a false choice, the decision to leave has been made. Happy for a referendum between the deal and hard Brexit though.
You can understand why the Brexiteers are scared stiff of the actual terms of leaving being put to the people.
I thought these sort of polls were not welcome here?
Terms vs stay in after all would be be a false choice, the decision to leave has been made. Happy for a referendum between the deal and hard Brexit though.
Maybe we could have a referendum on every trade deal the govt negotiates around the world?!
I have finally finished all my Christmas Eve chores. Another 48 hours and the whole thing will be over for another year. Deo Gratias.
I am off for a much needed, and somewhat bigger than usual, whisky. Merry Christmas to those of you enjoy it and a companionably Ba Humbug to those that don't.
I have finally finished all my Christmas Eve chores. Another 48 hours and the whole thing will be over for another year. Deo Gratias.
I am off for a much needed, and somewhat bigger than usual, whisky. Merry Christmas to those of you enjoy it and a companionably Ba Humbug to those that don't.
I think if my line of politics had scored across the board... I would be jovially offering bonhomie and so forth to all and sundry.
But we have had a huge lurch to the right, an extreme shift in politics to right wing populism that I have not known in my lifetime..so much so that I genuinely fear for the future; against the environment we are polluting, against the most vulnerable, against people fleeing war and persecution.
So you alt. right wing Brexit/Trump/Neo Fascist, Racist populists...please count me out of your festive cheer. We are in a battle for the how the world progresses, a battle between good and evil, a battle you will lose eventually...
The Clock strikes midnight here in Germany - happy Christmas to all peebies, even if you have an hour to wait up yet. Ironically, as its midnight here, NORAD Santa is off to Tunisia.
Will see if I can get a couple of the crossword clues in the morning. Night all.
P.s. On Copeland, with no local knowledge I'd guess that Labour have to turn Whitehaven out, but the Tories would have to drive votes in the Lakeland villages - sounds like the first would be easier in Feb?
A very merry Xmas to all, or as close to such as thee can muster.
To anybody working, I doff my hat.
On a paramount point of pedantry, does this act count as a partial strip tease? If so I shall depart before incurring the wrath of OGH - to whom my great thanks for keeping the PB bar of Punditry and Banter well-stocked as ever this year, and, for the heat of these times, keeping it surprisingly well-mannered.
All the best to everyone here for a successful, happy, healthy and profitable 2017.
You can understand why the Brexiteers are scared stiff of the actual terms of leaving being put to the people.
Whether people are scared stiff of a reversal or confident of a repeat, such polls are not particularly helpful I would have thought. Polls putting Bregret at 100% would not sway politicians it was safe to discard the referendum result, even with another one organised; beyond a committed few, to take such extreme action they would surely need concrete proof, electoral proof. By the time that could happen it would be too late since both main parties say they will implement the referendum, and that would need to mean a party advocating Remaining winning, so neither will be keen for an election until the only thing remaining is the fat lady singing our way out officially.
Even could the process be halted - and anything is possible, of course, if the will is there - with a significant majority feeling betrayed and a continent pissed off we spent years in hostile and bitter negotiations before pulling the plug and staying, somehow, it doesn't sound a pleasant situation, does it?
I think a second referendum is politically easier than it sounds. The problem for the Leave side is that if they keep talking like the whole thing is illegitimate and the game is rigged they risk depressing their own turnout. So once the PM has got their result through parliament, they're going to have to suck it up.
Then once it's happened, the process is moot: The result of the second referendum obviously trumps the first.
The problem for the Tories is that this a Remain result opens up their UKIP split again, but that may be unavoidable, since whatever actual agreement they come up with will obviously be considered a traitrous betrayal.
All that said, the British don't really like the EU, so I don't see the voters changing their minds.
Punters on Betfair certainly don't agree with Mr Meeks' claim that Labour represents the value bet in the Copeland by-election. In fact the movement over the past 12-18 hours on the BF market suggests precisely the opposite, with the odds against the Red Team having weakened significantly from a mid price of around 2.70 to around 2.92 (2.94 being the last price actually traded). That said, these odds are a long way from Ladbrokes' current quote of 1.833 (5/6) for the Tories and 2.25 (5/4) for Labour. This means that if one can [almost certainly] disregard the chances of both UKIP and the Lib Dems winning this seat, then there is an arbitrage opportunity of around 9.7% available, net of BF's commission, by backing both the major parties.
Comments
Whoever would have thought there was such a downside to mass immigration? Still, at least GDP is up
Too drunk to drink? LOL.
Pretendy voodoo poll. The management will shortly strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger for posting.
FPPT: Redwood mentions 10% tariffs on cars, but as a point in our favour, because the EU exports more cars to us than we do to them. I can't see where in the article he mentions 2.7%, he mentions an average of 3.5%.
So whilst I'm sure your knowledge trumps his knowledge, I can't see how it undermines his main point - that they have a good deal more to lose from reciprocal tariff rises than we do.
Only poll that mattered was on June 23rd, and despite the combined might of the government and big business, Remainers lost.
http://www.noradsanta.org/
I very much fear I am an establishment stooge, as despite Brexit (which need not be as all encompassingly revolutionary as some of the more fearfully intense people would like), I tend to like my politicians to be bland, or at least in the predictably boring categories. Some may be crap, but they are generally crap within understandable and acceptable parameters.
But then I have long felt we the public are responsible for many of the traits we criticise in our political classes. The professional, identikit party automatons who bland their way around inoffensively and without genuine substance, they emerged because it was what worked, we liked but punished the more maverick, except generally in less high profile circumstances. Honestly, we needed a bit more fire, passion and the rough hewn amateurish offerings of the truly genuine, it was inevitable there would be a reaction at some point, but I do hope we don't go too far in that direction merely as a reaction against the party robots we created previously.
P.S I liked that bit from Trevor Noah. I haven't watched in awhile, but it was one of the times it felt less like he was reading a script than some other early offerings, that his personality was informing it - I am certain he is a great fit, politically, with what the writers are saying, and he adds his own take, but when focusing solely on US politics, sometimes it just didn't feel as from the heart as it would from Stewart. John Oliver has generally nailed that sense I feel, as with all the episodes focusing on technical and institutional issues, you immediately got a sense of his personality behind everything.
(Edited to add: good evening, everyone)
Walt Disney I should think.
You can understand why the Brexiteers are scared stiff of the actual terms of leaving being put to the people.
In any event, what matters most to the EU is the continued existence of the EU. They are very willing to make sure the UK gets a worse deal after leaving so as not to encourager les autres.
Happy Christmas
Whether people are scared stiff of a reversal or confident of a repeat, such polls are not particularly helpful I would have thought. Polls putting Bregret at 100% would not sway politicians it was safe to discard the referendum result, even with another one organised; beyond a committed few, to take such extreme action they would surely need concrete proof, electoral proof. By the time that could happen it would be too late since both main parties say they will implement the referendum, and that would need to mean a party advocating Remaining winning, so neither will be keen for an election until the only thing remaining is the fat lady singing our way out officially.
Even could the process be halted - and anything is possible, of course, if the will is there - with a significant majority feeling betrayed and a continent pissed off we spent years in hostile and bitter negotiations before pulling the plug and staying, somehow, it doesn't sound a pleasant situation, does it?
Black project run out of Area 51. Resulted in loads of reported sightings of UFOs.
Those alien bodies found at Roswell - Elves.
Hopefully he can still get a visa into Brexit Britain
I wish you all a quiet night - unless you are partying, of course; that 'quiet night' wish comes from the Shipping Forecast I think, and I was thinking in particular of those who are working tonight. Whatever you're doing, thank you.
Goodnight, and Happy Christmas.
Terms vs stay in after all would be be a false choice, the decision to leave has been made. Happy for a referendum between the deal and hard Brexit though.
I am off for a much needed, and somewhat bigger than usual, whisky. Merry Christmas to those of you enjoy it and a companionably Ba Humbug to those that don't.
And all through PB
Not a poster was sober
Except maybe me
Nighty night all.
But we have had a huge lurch to the right, an extreme shift in politics to right wing populism that I have not known in my lifetime..so much so that I genuinely fear for the future; against the environment we are polluting, against the most vulnerable, against people fleeing war and persecution.
So you alt. right wing Brexit/Trump/Neo Fascist, Racist populists...please count me out of your festive cheer. We are in a battle for the how the world progresses, a battle between good and evil, a battle you will lose eventually...
Facing competition from Amazon, he was forced to modernise - Franchising will be the next step.
Will see if I can get a couple of the crossword clues in the morning. Night all.
P.s. On Copeland, with no local knowledge I'd guess that Labour have to turn Whitehaven out, but the Tories would have to drive votes in the Lakeland villages - sounds like the first would be easier in Feb?
To anybody working, I doff my hat.
On a paramount point of pedantry, does this act count as a partial strip tease? If so I shall depart before incurring the wrath of OGH - to whom my great thanks for keeping the PB bar of Punditry and Banter well-stocked as ever this year, and, for the heat of these times, keeping it surprisingly well-mannered.
All the best to everyone here for a successful, happy, healthy and profitable 2017.
Then once it's happened, the process is moot: The result of the second referendum obviously trumps the first.
The problem for the Tories is that this a Remain result opens up their UKIP split again, but that may be unavoidable, since whatever actual agreement they come up with will obviously be considered a traitrous betrayal.
All that said, the British don't really like the EU, so I don't see the voters changing their minds.
This means that if one can [almost certainly] disregard the chances of both UKIP and the Lib Dems winning this seat, then there is an arbitrage opportunity of around 9.7% available, net of BF's commission, by backing both the major parties.