The comments section in the Guardian reporting Corbyn's shift are just hilarious.
You are not kidding. Full scale meltdown.
Some priceless comments in there.
"alexander103 45m ago
What a fucking TURD.Showing his true colours now.We have no second choice in this country, we are truly shafted."
Judging by this reaction, Corbyn has just lost about 1m Guardianista-Remainer middle class voters, and made Brexit completely certain.
CHORTLE
He's also just given carte blanche to right-on Labour voters in affluent Tory seats to go for the Lib Dems en masse, creating a big electoral headache for May.
PS do you want a bet that we will have technically Brexited* by the end of 2019?
I believe we will have Brexited by then, and I'm willing to wager any amount of money under £10,000
*By this I mean legally no longer a part of the European Union, though we may be in some transitional arrangement with regard to the Single Market, ECJ jurisdiction, etc
OK you're on, for £10,000.
I think that is a courageous wager, but would probably be best with a tighter definition of what Brexit consists of.
Might I suggest that Brexit, for the purpose of the bet, mean 1. The UK government invoking Article 50, and 2. The exit date agreed in the withdrawal talks being reached (after any extensions to the talks) or, failing the EU and UK reaching agreement, the two year period expiring, or such longer period as might be agreed expiring if one or more extensions are agreed.
I think this is fair, my expectation of the timing of "Out" of the EU under normally held rules would be around April 2019. I think I'd rather be on Sean's side of the bet, stakes are well out of my league though Though negotiations often get drawn out, extended etc - so Glenn has a fair chance to win.
The comments section in the Guardian reporting Corbyn's shift are just hilarious.
You are not kidding. Full scale meltdown.
Some priceless comments in there.
"alexander103 45m ago
What a fucking TURD.Showing his true colours now.We have no second choice in this country, we are truly shafted."
Judging by this reaction, Corbyn has just lost about 1m Guardianista-Remainer middle class voters, and made Brexit completely certain.
CHORTLE
He's also just given carte blanche to right-on Labour voters in affluent Tory seats to go for the Lib Dems en masse, creating a big electoral headache for May.
PS do you want a bet that we will have technically Brexited* by the end of 2019?
I believe we will have Brexited by then, and I'm willing to wager any amount of money under £10,000
*By this I mean legally no longer a part of the European Union, though we may be in some transitional arrangement with regard to the Single Market, ECJ jurisdiction, etc
OK you're on, for £10,000.
I think that is a courageous wager, but would probably be best with a tighter definition of what Brexit consists of.
Let's ask TM
May need sometbing less tautological.
This might be an interesting test of PB-ers' skill, and also elucidate the issues.
Can someone draw up a definition of Brexit likely to satisfy williamglenn AND me, in the pursuit of our hefty wager?
The United Kingdom is removed from the Member Countries section of this web page by midnight on 31st December 2019.
The comments section in the Guardian reporting Corbyn's shift are just hilarious.
You are not kidding. Full scale meltdown.
Some priceless comments in there.
"alexander103 45m ago
What a fucking TURD.Showing his true colours now.We have no second choice in this country, we are truly shafted."
Judging by this reaction, Corbyn has just lost about 1m Guardianista-Remainer middle class voters, and made Brexit completely certain.
CHORTLE
He's also just given carte blanche to right-on Labour voters in affluent Tory seats to go for the Lib Dems en masse, creating a big electoral headache for May.
PS do you want a bet that we will have technically Brexited* by the end of 2019?
I believe we will have Brexited by then, and I'm willing to wager any amount of money under £10,000
*By this I mean legally no longer a part of the European Union, though we may be in some transitional arrangement with regard to the Single Market, ECJ jurisdiction, etc
OK you're on, for £10,000.
I think that is a courageous wager, but would probably be best with a tighter definition of what Brexit consists of.
Let's ask TM
May need sometbing less tautological.
This might be an interesting test of PB-ers' skill, and also elucidate the issues.
Can someone draw up a definition of Brexit likely to satisfy williamglenn AND me, in the pursuit of our hefty wager?
The United Kingdom is removed from the Member Countries section of this web page by midnight on 31st December 2019.
On McGuiness, I think he's quite right to throw his toys out the pram regarding the RHI - what an absolutely terrible idea that was by Foster.
And what a good thing it is too. A disagreement about a NORMAL political fuck up would trigger Assembly elections. Glad to see it tbh.
You would have thought 'someone' in her department would have advised her of the loophole in her policy before it started. An error of that magnitude should be a resigning matter and I'm surprised she didn't see it that way and step aside. I wonder why not?
The Lib/Dems might well win over Labour voters in mid-term but what's their policy going to be at the 2020 election? 'Vote for us and if theoretically we ever get in, we'll take Britain back into the EU again' More chance of a UKIP Prime Minister.
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Corbyn and Starmer's pincer movement is good politics. They're demanding 'Platinum Brexit' - restriction on free movement with all the single-market goodies. Of course, we all know this is unattainable, but so what? The Tories own Brexit utterly, and this is all about portraying whatever settlement they do get as a miserable failure. Clever stuff.
May's main strength is to look like she is getting on with a dirty and difficult job, hence doing it badly is to be expected. Labour have now come along and said they want the impossible, leave freedom of movement and get full access to the market. No trade off. No compromise. There will be Tory researchers up all night finding Labour quotes mocking Tory MP's for wanting this exact same thing and about how this is impossible and they will be lobbing these at Labour for weeks. Their own hysterical reaction will be used against them. It's only a pincer movement if both sides of it march towards each other.
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Nobody in my immediate family has mentioned the EU referendum since 24th June 2016 with the exception of some who did not mention it at all.
What Corbyn has said today has given me the right to vote Lib Dem with a clear conscience,
To support the Tories little helpers? Thought you might have learnt your lesson - just as Von Papen discovered the dangers of helping others to form a Coalition!
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Nobody in my immediate family has mentioned the EU referendum since 24th June 2016 with the exception of some who did not mention it at all.
Apart from some furious virtue signalling on Facebook the matter in general has sunk without trace. It surprises me that someone like Roger - who works in advertising still thinks people pay attention. They don't. They've got their lives to get on with and once every couple of years are happy to bend their thoughts to whether to give the current lot another go or chuck the buggers out - but in the meanwhile there's the kids GCSEs coming up, elderly parents and that leaky sink to worry about.....
One other part of that article struck me as powerful:
The foundation problem with the EU was best summarised by the brilliant physicist David Deutsch......[who] said:
‘The EU is incompatible with Britain’s more advanced political culture. I’m voting Leave… [E]rror correction is the basic issue, and I can’t foresee the EU improving much in this respect… [P]reserving the institutions of error correction is more important than any policy… Whether errors can be corrected without violence is not a “concern” but a condition for successfully addressing concerns.’
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Show me an oil company that hasn't dealt with dodgy regimes, and I'll show you an oil company that's done very poorly for its shareholders.
1. Saudi Arabia 2. Russia 3. USA 4. Iraq 5. China 6. Iran - largest oil producing countries. You have to get to Canada at no.7 to find a non dodgy regime.
Since Trudeau took over I'm not even sure about Canada.
The comments section in the Guardian reporting Corbyn's shift are just hilarious.
You are not kidding. Full scale meltdown.
Some priceless comments in there.
"alexander103 45m ago
What a fucking TURD.Showing his true colours now.We have no second choice in this country, we are truly shafted."
Judging by this reaction, Corbyn has just lost about 1m Guardianista-Remainer middle class voters, and made Brexit completely certain.
CHORTLE
He's also just given carte blanche to right-on Labour voters in affluent Tory seats to go for the Lib Dems en masse, creating a big electoral headache for May.
PS do you want a bet that we will have technically Brexited* by the end of 2019?
I believe we will have Brexited by then, and I'm willing to wager any amount of money under £10,000
*By this I mean legally no longer a part of the European Union, though we may be in some transitional arrangement with regard to the Single Market, ECJ jurisdiction, etc
OK you're on, for £10,000.
I think that is a courageous wager, but would probably be best with a tighter definition of what Brexit consists of.
Let's ask TM
May need sometbing less tautological.
This might be an interesting test of PB-ers' skill, and also elucidate the issues.
Can someone draw up a definition of Brexit likely to satisfy williamglenn AND me, in the pursuit of our hefty wager?
The United Kingdom is removed from the Member Countries section of this web page by midnight on 31st December 2019.
The comments section in the Guardian reporting Corbyn's shift are just hilarious.
You are not kidding. Full scale meltdown.
Some priceless comments in there.
"alexander103 45m ago
What a fucking TURD.Showing his true colours now.We have no second choice in this country, we are truly shafted."
Judging by this reaction, Corbyn has just lost about 1m Guardianista-Remainer middle class voters, and made Brexit completely certain.
CHORTLE
He's also just given carte blanche to right-on Labour voters in affluent Tory seats to go for the Lib Dems en masse, creating a big electoral headache for May.
PS do you want a bet that we will have technically Brexited* by the end of 2019?
I believe we will have Brexited by then, and I'm willing to wager any amount of money under £10,000
*By this I mean legally no longer a part of the European Union, though we may be in some transitional arrangement with regard to the Single Market, ECJ jurisdiction, etc
Show me an oil company that hasn't dealt with dodgy regimes, and I'll show you an oil company that's done very poorly for its shareholders.
1. Saudi Arabia 2. Russia 3. USA 4. Iraq 5. China 6. Iran - largest oil producing countries. You have to get to Canada at no.7 to find a non dodgy regime.
Since Trudeau took over I'm not even sure about Canada.
Show me an oil company that hasn't dealt with dodgy regimes, and I'll show you an oil company that's done very poorly for its shareholders.
1. Saudi Arabia 2. Russia 3. USA 4. Iraq 5. China 6. Iran - largest oil producing countries. You have to get to Canada at no.7 to find a non dodgy regime.
Since Trudeau took over I'm not even sure about Canada.
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Or: "The people that agree with me are just *better*. They make better, more common-sense decisions and do not spend all their time virtue signalling. I have no evidence whatsoever to back this assertion up, but I just know it to be true."
Show me an oil company that hasn't dealt with dodgy regimes, and I'll show you an oil company that's done very poorly for its shareholders.
1. Saudi Arabia 2. Russia 3. USA 4. Iraq 5. China 6. Iran - largest oil producing countries. You have to get to Canada at no.7 to find a non dodgy regime.
Since Trudeau took over I'm not even sure about Canada.
Qatar?
Isn't Qatar gas rather than oil? There was a question about it on University Challenge last night.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
It is, even if some of it is a bit light on evidence (see quote below about the less well off making more coherent political decisions than the better off). As SeanT points out, his deconstruction of David Cameron is savage.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
Show me an oil company that hasn't dealt with dodgy regimes, and I'll show you an oil company that's done very poorly for its shareholders.
1. Saudi Arabia 2. Russia 3. USA 4. Iraq 5. China 6. Iran - largest oil producing countries. You have to get to Canada at no.7 to find a non dodgy regime.
Since Trudeau took over I'm not even sure about Canada.
Qatar?
Isn't Qatar gas rather than oil? There was a question about it on University Challenge last night.
Immigration was certainly central to the Leavers case, but I do wonder at the validity of focus groups. To be useful they need careful selection and a skilled facilitator. It is quite easy for a facilitator to project his on views, particularly when fervently held, and wind up in an echo chamber of their own views. Roger may have more experience of this, but I have seen it during public health campaigns.
I wouldn't be surprised. Perhaps someone from the Guardian has changed his script again.
For a moment, I thought he'd decided that fighting for the Peace Studies lecturer vote with the Liberals was a dead end. But that would be so out of character.
Whatever he decides, the image of a piece of flotsam bobbing on the turbulent ocean of Labour politics isn't a good one..
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
Corbyn has changed his mind again, it seems.
Shrodingers Brexit.
Tis funny that after years of being in and arguing for opt outs, the UK will shortly be out arguing for opt ins. It is almost as if 2000 years of ambivalence in our relationship with the European mainland is going to continue. Arguments about Europe are not going away.
Paul Martin, UK head of retail at KPMG, who help to produce the report, suggested that consumers had "splashed out on treating themselves" ahead of predicted price rises next year.
Hold on...only a few weeks ago the BBC ran a piece saying because of Brexit / currency rates Christmas was much more expensive and that would be dire..
Also:
"UK in 'front seat' for US trade deal, top Republican says"
doesnt the EU suffer more than us if we are not in the single market?
Good morning all. With questions like this, we're in danger of treating the EU as a monolith. There are some sectors of some EU economies who would be badly affected by a WTO trade regimen. However, if you do wish to look at the EU economy in aggregate, UK trade is ~3% of EU GDP. A hiccough rather than a catastrophe.
Paul Martin, UK head of retail at KPMG, who help to produce the report, suggested that consumers had "splashed out on treating themselves" ahead of predicted price rises next year.
Hold on...only a few weeks ago the BBC ran a piece saying because of Brexit / currency rates Christmas was much more expensive and that would be dire..
Also:
"UK in 'front seat' for US trade deal, top Republican says"
But at what point does Trump accuse the UK of unfairly devaluing the pound?
Getting a trade deal is not the issue, we can get those at the drop of the hat. It's the kind of trade deal that we get which matters. Will the Americans give us one that significantly improves our access to the US market in areas where we want it improved? What will they demand in return?
We are very strong in financial services, for example. How keen will the Americans be - and, more important, how keen will American lawmakers in states where financial servicers are big - to open up to more competition in that area?
Will a deal we get from the Americans make up for the fact that it will soon become more expensive and time consuming to do business in our single biggest export market?
doesnt the EU suffer more than us if we are not in the single market?
Good morning all. With questions like this, we're in danger of treating the EU as a monolith. There are some sectors of some EU economies who would be badly affected by a WTO trade regimen. However, if you do wish to look at the EU economy in aggregate, UK trade is ~3% of EU GDP. A hiccough rather than a catastrophe.
Leaving the single market is that it will make it more expensive and time consuming to do business in the our number one export destination. And that will happen while we do not have other agreements in place that will make up for this.
We know this, the Europeans know this and all other countries we may want trade deals with know this too.
Given 161 out of 232 Labour seats voted Leave and in most of those the Tories or UKIP are the main challengers to Labour this is probably the best tactical decision by Labour. Even if they lost a few inner London and inner Manchester seats to the LDs Farron is unlikely to back the Tories in the event of a hung parliament given his current statements
Corbyn is on dangerous ground here. Being all things to all men is routine for some politicians but his reputation (such as it is) is built on being genuine.
If he loses that, he's just a doddery old bloke looking around in gormless confusion on what's going on around him.
I think that in his own slightly confused way Corbyn is recognising that Brexit is a fact and will have happened by the next election. If even Corbyn can recognise that any meaningful debate has moved on from whether the UK leaves to how it leaves and on what terms we can only hope the considerably brighter contributors to PB will do likewise.
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Or: "The people that agree with me are just *better*. They make better, more common-sense decisions and do not spend all their time virtue signalling. I have no evidence whatsoever to back this assertion up, but I just know it to be true."
Don't know how many focus groups you've sat in with 'ordinary punters' but I've sat in plenty and the phenomenon he describes is real.
In one classic case a middle class mum - to nodding approval from some in the group described how she really cared for the planet, was worried about her children's future so of course only used an 'environmentally friendly' (sic) washing powder - then went on to describe the many extra steps she had to take to make sure her kids clothes were actually clean.
The next, working class, mum simply said 'I just bung it in with Ariel and that does the job'.....
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
I;m still amused by NP calling the centrists within Labour 'hard right'. Yes, I know it's in the context of Labour itself, but the label is obviously something designed to denigrate them.
What Corbyn has said today has given me the right to vote Lib Dem with a clear conscience,
To support the Tories little helpers? Thought you might have learnt your lesson - just as Von Papen discovered the dangers of helping others to form a Coalition!
I am talking about Kingston and Surbiton.
I have to admit that given the electoral map Labour faces this "change of course" may not be that bad. Actually quite sensible. Otherwise, the North could go the same way as Scotland.
The difference is that in Scotland the beneficiaries are also anti-Tory. In the North, that would not have been the case.
However, I am personally not happy. I want open borders, open trade, everywhere.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
lol!
More seriously, all the parties have an awkward choice as their aspirations encounter reality. "Full-throated Remain" a la Clegg is an option now and my own natural instinct, but is likely to look seriously dated by 2020. "Bless the single market, never mind about immigration" annoys the majority of voters. "Control immigration, never mind about the single market" will in most politicians' opinion do real economic damage. "Fudge" irritates everyone, since most voters think politicians should come up with clear, workable strategies, even if actually they don't exist.
Labour is trying to change the subject to "what about the economy, taxation and workers' rights?" which is sensible. But it's difficult to avoid any interview being dominated by the single market vs immigration theme, since that's been the theme up to now. IMO Labour needs to be more radical on other issues simply to get attention.
' For the first few months, all sorts of things spewed from the Department causing chaos. The organisation was in meltdown. Everything that could go wrong went wrong. It was often impossible to distinguish between institutionalised incompetence and hostile action. Things were reported as ‘Gove announces…’ that he did not even know about, never mind agree with. Then pundits and bloggers would spin to themselves elaborate tales of how the latest leak was ‘really’ deliberate spin, preparing the ground for some diabolical scheme. (I would guess that <5% of the things people thought we leaked actually came from us – maybe <1%.)
From that day for over a year, about every 2 hours, officials would knock at our door bearing news of the latest cockup, disaster, leak, and shambles, all compounded with intermittent ‘ideas for announcements’ from Downing Street. The last one would be at about 9ish on Friday evening – thump, thump, thump down the corridor, the door opens, ‘Dominic, bad news I’m afraid…’
For all of these problems, Gove was held ‘responsible’. With all of them, regardless of how incompetently they had been handled – nobody was ever fired. '
and
' In my first fortnight in January 2011, there was a terrible blunder with capital. We were told one Sunday that a senior official had made mistakes that had cost the taxpayer many millions of pounds. I said, naively, to one of the four most senior officials ‘so who will be replacing X [the official who had blundered]?’ Shock.
... The official was, of course, not fired. He had an extended paid holiday then was promoted into a non-job for another few months before being pensioned off with a gong in the next honours list.
... This time there was an added twist – the DfE had used (at the direction of the Cabinet Office, officials said) an EU Framework that actually forbade the DfE from clawing back the money from the company that had screwed up. This I had not predicted, it was a new twist though not a surprising one. ‘How many other contracts have been signed under this EU Framework which stop us from clawing back money?’ ‘Err, we’ll get back to you…’
... Some people who make blunders like those described above are then deemed by the HR system to be ‘priority movers’. This means that a) they are regarded as among the worst performers but also means b) they have to be interviewed for new jobs ahead of people who are better qualified. It is a very bizarre system, made more bizarre by the fact that there are great efforts to keep it hidden from ministers and the outside world. '
Immigration was certainly central to the Leavers case, but I do wonder at the validity of focus groups. To be useful they need careful selection and a skilled facilitator. It is quite easy for a facilitator to project his on views, particularly when fervently held, and wind up in an echo chamber of their own views. Roger may have more experience of this, but I have seen it during public health campaigns.
But, that is why Dominic's piece has as its intro the famous quote of Feynman: "The most important thing is not to fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
There are many good and sharp observations -- on politicians, on Remaina and on Leaverstan -- in the Cummings piece.
It really is the best bit of political writing I have seen for a long time.
Does anyone, including anyone in the Labour Party, have a clue what Labour's policy is on free movement, single market or customs union? It's not like this is important or topical or anything!
The PM seems to heading towards clarity on this: No free movement (ie right to live and work) but controlled movement. Access to single market but potentially with constraints as required by the above (and no worse or different from eg China, USA or Japan). Not in THE EU customs union but in A customs union with the EU (a la Turkey). We get to sign trade deals elsewhere as we see fit. We might pay in a bit but not a lot. Fair dinkum.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
I;m still amused by NP calling the centrists within Labour 'hard right'. Yes, I know it's in the context of Labour itself, but the label is obviously something designed to denigrate them.
It says a great deal about Corbyn-style politics.
Corbyn's only USP was that he couldn't be called an opportunist.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
lol!
More seriously, all the parties have an awkward choice as their aspirations encounter reality. "Full-throated Remain" a la Clegg is an option now and my own natural instinct, but is likely to look seriously dated by 2020. "Bless the single market, never mind about immigration" annoys the majority of voters. "Control immigration, never mind about the single market" will in most politicians' opinion do real economic damage. "Fudge" irritates everyone, since most voters think politicians should come up with clear, workable strategies, even if actually they don't exist.
Labour is trying to change the subject to "what about the economy, taxation and workers' rights?" which is sensible. But it's difficult to avoid any interview being dominated by the single market vs immigration theme, since that's been the theme up to now. IMO Labour needs to be more radical on other issues simply to get attention.
Workers rights.??. LOL let them concentrate on it whilst ludicrous strikes are pissing off millions of voters.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
I love the roast beef - it used to come as a shared meal and with gorgeous Yorkshire pud. Love Rules - haven't been for a while, but its so different - all the crimson, booths and Victorian feel. We spent a whole lunch/evening day there once. The pre-theatre diners dripping with pearls are wonderful.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
I;m still amused by NP calling the centrists within Labour 'hard right'. Yes, I know it's in the context of Labour itself, but the label is obviously something designed to denigrate them.
It says a great deal about Corbyn-style politics.
The king is dead; long live the king. Look at the right's volte-face on Cameron since his resignation.
' For the first few months, all sorts of things spewed from the Department causing chaos. The organisation was in meltdown. Everything that could go wrong went wrong. It was often impossible to distinguish between institutionalised incompetence and hostile action. Things were reported as ‘Gove announces…’ that he did not even know about, never mind agree with. Then pundits and bloggers would spin to themselves elaborate tales of how the latest leak was ‘really’ deliberate spin, preparing the ground for some diabolical scheme. (I would guess that <5% of the things people thought we leaked actually came from us – maybe <1%.)
From that day for over a year, about every 2 hours, officials would knock at our door bearing news of the latest cockup, disaster, leak, and shambles, all compounded with intermittent ‘ideas for announcements’ from Downing Street. The last one would be at about 9ish on Friday evening – thump, thump, thump down the corridor, the door opens, ‘Dominic, bad news I’m afraid…’
For all of these problems, Gove was held ‘responsible’. With all of them, regardless of how incompetently they had been handled – nobody was ever fired. '
and
' In my first fortnight in January 2011, there was a terrible blunder with capital. We were told one Sunday that a senior official had made mistakes that had cost the taxpayer many millions of pounds. I said, naively, to one of the four most senior officials ‘so who will be replacing X [the official who had blundered]?’ Shock.
... The official was, of course, not fired. He had an extended paid holiday then was promoted into a non-job for another few months before being pensioned off with a gong in the next honours list.
... This time there was an added twist – the DfE had used (at the direction of the Cabinet Office, officials said) an EU Framework that actually forbade the DfE from clawing back the money from the company that had screwed up. This I had not predicted, it was a new twist though not a surprising one. ‘How many other contracts have been signed under this EU Framework which stop us from clawing back money?’ ‘Err, we’ll get back to you…’
... Some people who make blunders like those described above are then deemed by the HR system to be ‘priority movers’. This means that a) they are regarded as among the worst performers but also means b) they have to be interviewed for new jobs ahead of people who are better qualified. It is a very bizarre system, made more bizarre by the fact that there are great efforts to keep it hidden from ministers and the outside world. '</p>
Why are we talking about Arlene Foster so early in the day ?
Corbyn is on dangerous ground here. Being all things to all men is routine for some politicians but his reputation (such as it is) is built on being genuine.
If he loses that, he's just a doddery old bloke looking around in gormless confusion on what's going on around him.
It's a tightrope for him to be fair.
Clearly he, or the people around him, seem to have at last concluded that his pure "roll up,roll out the red carpet" stance on migration is becoming the electoral equivalent of plugging his dangly bits into the mains, and even he is realising the growing smell and smoke might not be a good sign, so some kind of nod in the direction of "controlled migration" is needed. The danger is of course that the classic Guardianistas will decamp to the Greens/Libs (Tim Farron must be having a good morning) or others. One assumes they've concluded there's more danger in losing plumbers in Stoke than TV producers in Highgate.
However, if you are a plumber in a marginal but fairly gritty Midlands seat, who is concerned about migration type and levels, are you going to place your faith in controlling that in whoever the Tory nonentity Home Sec is or err Diane Abbott? Jezza's sudden partial conversion rings about as true as T May proposing 75% top rate income tax.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
"The next, working class, mum simply said 'I just bung it in with Ariel and that does the job'..... "
LOL
Ariel is fab for cleaning pet stains on carpets - but Sugar Soap, yes the yellow liquid used to remove nasty grease in kitchens/nicotine is much better - and my personal top choice. It works wonders. Oh, and Oxy clothes cleaner will disappear a red wine stain on limestone too.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
Without actually putting an amount on it, calling for a 'wage cap' is just vacuous lefty virtual signalling.
The point is -- like '350 million to fund the NHS' (Farage), or 'it is rigged' (Trump)-- will it work? It will, because it strikes a chord in many people (Tory and Labour).
In fact, Jezza did a reasonable job of articulating a coherent position on R4.
Being serious, it's demented. It's the Leader of the Opposition's latest utterance. But I repeat myself.
Well he hasn't put a figure on it but I do remember some of the SWP wanted a tax rate of 100% on salaries over £50,000 per annum.
I would not have studied so hard and worked so hard if I knew there'd be a limit on what I could earn.
It's hardly worth discussing it as the actual idea is so stupid, but the avoidance this would enable would be huge. Benfits-in-kind, supplementary remuneration, operating overseas, perks, capital gains creation etc etc.
Not to mention anyone would really then de-camp to another country.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
Fact checked by a Nat! How humiliating!
Small got megalomania and chose to drive away his customers/followers by his actions. Just bad business plan to think that being rabid left wing would be great idea.
Corbyn is on dangerous ground here. Being all things to all men is routine for some politicians but his reputation (such as it is) is built on being genuine.
If he loses that, he's just a doddery old bloke looking around in gormless confusion on what's going on around him.
It's a tightrope for him to be fair.
Clearly he, or the people around him, seem to have at last concluded that his pure "roll up,roll out the red carpet" stance on migration is becoming the electoral equivalent of plugging his dangly bits into the mains, and even he is realising the growing smell and smoke might not be a good sign, so some kind of nod in the direction of "controlled migration" is needed. The danger is of course that the classic Guardianistas will decamp to the Greens/Libs (Tim Farron must be having a good morning) or others. One assumes they've concluded there's more danger in losing plumbers in Stoke than TV producers in Highgate.
However, if you are a plumber in a marginal but fairly gritty Midlands seat, who is concerned about migration type and levels, are you going to place your faith in controlling that in whoever the Tory nonentity Home Sec is or err Diane Abbott? Jezza's sudden partial conversion rings about as true as T May proposing 75% top rate income tax.
One other possibility is that Corbyn has realised that immigrants are, quite often, by his standards right wing.
Ask the average Ghanaian about law and order (sentencing particularly), for example. Or a Peruvian.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
Being serious, it's demented. It's the Leader of the Opposition's latest utterance. But I repeat myself.
It is also far from easy in practice. Wages are just one part of remuneration; how would income from options and other shares be handled? If they are not included, companies will just grant employees share options that immediately vest. There will be a whole load of similar holes that will need plugging, and which clever accountants will work around.
How do you police it in this international world? Do you stop companies paying the rest of an employee's salary abroad? As an example, we have a significant (for us) Swiss and US holdings in cash and shares granted by Swiss and US companies we have worked for, despite having been in the UK the whole time. Would they count?
Then there are people who own small and medium-sized companies, who have created employment at some risk to their own finances. Should the amount they take out of their own company be restricted?
It seems to me that this will just hurt the upper middle classes than the really ultra-rich they are targeting.
Has this ever been done before in a western-style economy, and how did it work out?
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
' In my first fortnight in January 2011, there was a terrible blunder with capital. We were told one Sunday that a senior official had made mistakes that had cost the taxpayer many millions of pounds. I said, naively, to one of the four most senior officials ‘so who will be replacing X [the official who had blundered]?’ Shock.
... The official was, of course, not fired. He had an extended paid holiday then was promoted into a non-job for another few months before being pensioned off with a gong in the next honours list.
... This time there was an added twist – the DfE had used (at the direction of the Cabinet Office, officials said) an EU Framework that actually forbade the DfE from clawing back the money from the company that had screwed up. This I had not predicted, it was a new twist though not a surprising one. ‘How many other contracts have been signed under this EU Framework which stop us from clawing back money?’ ‘Err, we’ll get back to you…’
... Some people who make blunders like those described above are then deemed by the HR system to be ‘priority movers’. This means that a) they are regarded as among the worst performers but also means b) they have to be interviewed for new jobs ahead of people who are better qualified. It is a very bizarre system, made more bizarre by the fact that there are great efforts to keep it hidden from ministers and the outside world. '
IIRC the official in the captial screw up - they tried to block his honour, but it kept being put back on the list, by the civil service.
Read that when.it came out. Wings is a bullshitter, its his job and how he makes a living. He isn't going to stop now.
Although David Small of Bella Caledonia is stepping down - which is a pity because although I rarely agree with him, at least he argues his case, rather than the Vicar who just twists facts...
Evidently you even disagree with Mike Small on his name.
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
I worry for Nick P. After his seamless shift from Iraq supporting Blairite to solid Corbn loyalist this volte-face might be one twist too many. I faltered at the second hurdle so I understand how tricky this course is to navigate
I;m still amused by NP calling the centrists within Labour 'hard right'. Yes, I know it's in the context of Labour itself, but the label is obviously something designed to denigrate them.
It says a great deal about Corbyn-style politics.
The king is dead; long live the king. Look at the right's volte-face on Cameron since his resignation.
Hardly all the right; in fact most of the 'Conservatives' who have been anti-Cameron since his resignation were against him well before.
In fact, there seems to be far fewer fans of May on here than there were fans of Cameron pre-2016.
Who on here would call themselves a 'fan' of May, and why?
1) So Jezza thinks that we are exploiting EU migrant workers? Hmm
2) Having read 5/14ths of Cummings work it is evidently good. As a Remaining snowflake I'm still mildly shocked to hear how flagrantly the NHS/Turkey/350m was thought necessary to be pushed.
Comments
£10,000 is a lot of money. Before you get embroiled in this, would you care to drop the bet to a more reasonable value?
https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries_en
NATO number 2 not a member of Five Eyes?
I don't think so......
You might want to consider a neutral to oversee the bet in case of ambiguity.
'Vote for us and if theoretically we ever get in, we'll take Britain back into the EU again'
More chance of a UKIP Prime Minister.
https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/on-the-referendum-21-branching-histories-of-the-2016-referendum-and-the-frogs-before-the-storm-2/
This probably particularly relevant:
Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’
Anyone know the background to his jibe at Matt Goodwin?
Labour have now come along and said they want the impossible, leave freedom of movement and get full access to the market. No trade off. No compromise. There will be Tory researchers up all night finding Labour quotes mocking Tory MP's for wanting this exact same thing and about how this is impossible and they will be lobbing these at Labour for weeks.
Their own hysterical reaction will be used against them.
It's only a pincer movement if both sides of it march towards each other.
https://whytepaper.wordpress.com/2017/01/08/data-without-information-now-with-data/amp/
One other part of that article struck me as powerful:
The foundation problem with the EU was best summarised by the brilliant physicist David Deutsch......[who] said:
‘The EU is incompatible with Britain’s more advanced political culture. I’m voting Leave… [E]rror correction is the basic issue, and I can’t foresee the EU improving much in this respect… [P]reserving the institutions of error correction is more important than any policy… Whether errors can be corrected without violence is not a “concern” but a condition for successfully addressing concerns.’
Obviously, the northern hordes have convinced him, but does Ms Abbott agree. I look forward to her next interview if this comes to pass.
"Corbyn has changed his mind again, it seems."
I wouldn't be surprised. Perhaps someone from the Guardian has changed his script again.
For a moment, I thought he'd decided that fighting for the Peace Studies lecturer vote with the Liberals was a dead end. But that would be so out of character.
Whatever he decides, the image of a piece of flotsam bobbing on the turbulent ocean of Labour politics isn't a good one..
Tis funny that after years of being in and arguing for opt outs, the UK will shortly be out arguing for opt ins. It is almost as if 2000 years of ambivalence in our relationship with the European mainland is going to continue. Arguments about Europe are not going away.
We are very strong in financial services, for example. How keen will the Americans be - and, more important, how keen will American lawmakers in states where financial servicers are big - to open up to more competition in that area?
Will a deal we get from the Americans make up for the fact that it will soon become more expensive and time consuming to do business in our single biggest export market?
De nada.
We know this, the Europeans know this and all other countries we may want trade deals with know this too.
If he loses that, he's just a doddery old bloke looking around in gormless confusion on what's going on around him.
In one classic case a middle class mum - to nodding approval from some in the group described how she really cared for the planet, was worried about her children's future so of course only used an 'environmentally friendly' (sic) washing powder - then went on to describe the many extra steps she had to take to make sure her kids clothes were actually clean.
The next, working class, mum simply said 'I just bung it in with Ariel and that does the job'.....
It says a great deal about Corbyn-style politics.
https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/2017/01/09/on-the-referendum-21-branching-histories-of-the-2016-referendum-and-the-frogs-before-the-storm-2/
"The next, working class, mum simply said 'I just bung it in with Ariel and that does the job'..... "
LOL
I have to admit that given the electoral map Labour faces this "change of course" may not be that bad. Actually quite sensible. Otherwise, the North could go the same way as Scotland.
The difference is that in Scotland the beneficiaries are also anti-Tory. In the North, that would not have been the case.
However, I am personally not happy. I want open borders, open trade, everywhere.
More seriously, all the parties have an awkward choice as their aspirations encounter reality. "Full-throated Remain" a la Clegg is an option now and my own natural instinct, but is likely to look seriously dated by 2020. "Bless the single market, never mind about immigration" annoys the majority of voters. "Control immigration, never mind about the single market" will in most politicians' opinion do real economic damage. "Fudge" irritates everyone, since most voters think politicians should come up with clear, workable strategies, even if actually they don't exist.
Labour is trying to change the subject to "what about the economy, taxation and workers' rights?" which is sensible. But it's difficult to avoid any interview being dominated by the single market vs immigration theme, since that's been the theme up to now. IMO Labour needs to be more radical on other issues simply to get attention.
This is well worth a look as well:
https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/2014/10/30/the-hollow-men-ii-some-reflections-on-westminster-and-whitehall-dysfunction/
Two (of many) highlights:
' For the first few months, all sorts of things spewed from the Department causing chaos. The organisation was in meltdown. Everything that could go wrong went wrong. It was often impossible to distinguish between institutionalised incompetence and hostile action. Things were reported as ‘Gove announces…’ that he did not even know about, never mind agree with. Then pundits and bloggers would spin to themselves elaborate tales of how the latest leak was ‘really’ deliberate spin, preparing the ground for some diabolical scheme. (I would guess that <5% of the things people thought we leaked actually came from us – maybe <1%.)
From that day for over a year, about every 2 hours, officials would knock at our door bearing news of the latest cockup, disaster, leak, and shambles, all compounded with intermittent ‘ideas for announcements’ from Downing Street. The last one would be at about 9ish on Friday evening – thump, thump, thump down the corridor, the door opens, ‘Dominic, bad news I’m afraid…’
For all of these problems, Gove was held ‘responsible’. With all of them, regardless of how incompetently they had been handled – nobody was ever fired. '
and
' In my first fortnight in January 2011, there was a terrible blunder with capital. We were told one Sunday that a senior official had made mistakes that had cost the taxpayer many millions of pounds. I said, naively, to one of the four most senior officials ‘so who will be replacing X [the official who had blundered]?’ Shock.
... The official was, of course, not fired. He had an extended paid holiday then was promoted into a non-job for another few months before being pensioned off with a gong in the next honours list.
... This time there was an added twist – the DfE had used (at the direction of the Cabinet Office, officials said) an EU Framework that actually forbade the DfE from clawing back the money from the company that had screwed up. This I had not predicted, it was a new twist though not a surprising one. ‘How many other contracts have been signed under this EU Framework which stop us from clawing back money?’ ‘Err, we’ll get back to you…’
... Some people who make blunders like those described above are then deemed by the HR system to be ‘priority movers’. This means that a) they are regarded as among the worst performers but also means b) they have to be interviewed for new jobs ahead of people who are better qualified. It is a very bizarre system, made more bizarre by the fact that there are great efforts to keep it hidden from ministers and the outside world. '
There are many good and sharp observations -- on politicians, on Remaina and on Leaverstan -- in the Cummings piece.
It really is the best bit of political writing I have seen for a long time.
The PM seems to heading towards clarity on this:
No free movement (ie right to live and work) but controlled movement.
Access to single market but potentially with constraints as required by the above (and no worse or different from eg China, USA or Japan).
Not in THE EU customs union but in A customs union with the EU (a la Turkey). We get to sign trade deals elsewhere as we see fit.
We might pay in a bit but not a lot.
Fair dinkum.
That was yesterday.....
Of course your expertise on the Scottish media scene has always been legendary.
I love the roast beef - it used to come as a shared meal and with gorgeous Yorkshire pud. Love Rules - haven't been for a while, but its so different - all the crimson, booths and Victorian feel. We spent a whole lunch/evening day there once. The pre-theatre diners dripping with pearls are wonderful.
#brave
See Cummings article on how dislike of outrageous salary inequality is universal outside FatCatLand (or Remaina).
The trains service used by commuters is abominably poor.
Clearly he, or the people around him, seem to have at last concluded that his pure "roll up,roll out the red carpet" stance on migration is becoming the electoral equivalent of plugging his dangly bits into the mains, and even he is realising the growing smell and smoke might not be a good sign, so some kind of nod in the direction of "controlled migration" is needed. The danger is of course that the classic Guardianistas will decamp to the Greens/Libs (Tim Farron must be having a good morning) or others. One assumes they've concluded there's more danger in losing plumbers in Stoke than TV producers in Highgate.
However, if you are a plumber in a marginal but fairly gritty Midlands seat, who is concerned about migration type and levels, are you going to place your faith in controlling that in whoever the Tory nonentity Home Sec is or err Diane Abbott? Jezza's sudden partial conversion rings about as true as T May proposing 75% top rate income tax.
Being serious, it's demented. It's the Leader of the Opposition's latest utterance. But I repeat myself.
I would not have studied so hard and worked so hard if I knew there'd be a limit on what I could earn.
The 2020 Labour manifesto will be the most leftwing since 1983 but match the euroscepticism of Foot and Benn too
In fact, Jezza did a reasonable job of articulating a coherent position on R4.
Not to mention anyone would really then de-camp to another country.
Ask the average Ghanaian about law and order (sentencing particularly), for example. Or a Peruvian.
How do you police it in this international world? Do you stop companies paying the rest of an employee's salary abroad? As an example, we have a significant (for us) Swiss and US holdings in cash and shares granted by Swiss and US companies we have worked for, despite having been in the UK the whole time. Would they count?
Then there are people who own small and medium-sized companies, who have created employment at some risk to their own finances. Should the amount they take out of their own company be restricted?
It seems to me that this will just hurt the upper middle classes than the really ultra-rich they are targeting.
Has this ever been done before in a western-style economy, and how did it work out?
In fact, there seems to be far fewer fans of May on here than there were fans of Cameron pre-2016.
Who on here would call themselves a 'fan' of May, and why?
The Lib Dems must be loving Corbyn.
2) Having read 5/14ths of Cummings work it is evidently good. As a Remaining snowflake I'm still mildly shocked to hear how flagrantly the NHS/Turkey/350m was thought necessary to be pushed.
3) What. A. Bet.