Only 35% of Melenchon supporters said they would vote for Macron of those who responded. What should also be worrying is what is not stated in the article - if you took the figures for those who responded, the three answers of will spoil the ballot, will not vote or will vote for Macron came to 100% i.e. there are likely to be some Melenchon voters out there who will vote for Le Pen but will not admit it.
I think the potential grey swan here might be if the allegations that the investigations on Fillon were a way for Hollande to help Macron get the job start to gain serious traction. In that case, I can see a number of Fillon supporters abstaining or possibly even voting Le Pen who, in many cases, is probably closer to their instincts.
Macron's still way our in front though, isn't he?
In practice his vote is substantially softer.
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
One thing we do know for sure is that Le Pen's price on the main Betfair market has drifted since the first round results came in - from about 8.00 to 10.00 currently. This doesn't suggest that punters think there are enough shy LePen supporters out there to bridge a 20 point gap. If you have evidence to the contrary different, let us know. But we need to see it. You can post it after cleaning up all that juicy 10.00 yourself first, but when you've filled your own boots sufficiently, we'd all appreciate the heads up.
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
If they want us out and failing then their stance is perfectly logical, you say yourself that crashing out will be a disaster, and what better way is there to ensure that outcome but by making outrageous demands and getting the Daily Heil frothing at the mouth. .
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
Only 35% of Melenchon supporters said they would vote for Macron of those who responded. What should also be worrying is what is not stated in the article - if you took the figures for those who responded, the three answers of will spoil the ballot, will not vote or will vote for Macron came to 100% i.e. there are likely to be some Melenchon voters out there who will vote for Le Pen but will not admit it.
I think the potential grey swan here might be if the allegations that the investigations on Fillon were a way for Hollande to help Macron get the job start to gain serious traction. In that case, I can see a number of Fillon supporters abstaining or possibly even voting Le Pen who, in many cases, is probably closer to their instincts.
Macron's still way our in front though, isn't he?
In practice his vote is substantially softer.
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
TV debate tomorrow, If Le Pen can win that, then she still has a chance. If Macron can come away with a score-draw, then he is home and dry.
I see the latest thing the nuttier Leavers are getting excited about is that the EU has the temerity to choose its own negotiating team. Words fail me.
You need to choose your side, and soon. You are a Brit, or you are a Hungarian/European and a foreigner. No more havering.
I assume that you hit gin o'clock a few hours ago.
I am British and European. I'm also a Londoner, English and Norfolk and good. I see no need to discard any of these identities just to please dimwitted maniacs.
Indeed. But this choice will soon be unavailable. The EU is simultaneously determined on 1. fleecing us, 2, humiliating us, 3, swindling us, and 4. making us look like fools and supplicants.
You need to find a position on this. As does every Briton. "Hey I Love Brussels and Europe and Hungary and Erasmus!" will not cut it any more.
The iron enters the soul.
No. I'm not one of the paranoiacs who regards every move by the EU as outrageous (the Times front page tomorrow is worthy of the Express). Far too many Leavers are acting as if they are high on Churchill's cigar smoke.
I'm trying to identify those Leavers who are now prepared to admit that their breezy assurance last year that Brexit would be quickly and painlessly negotiated was woefully misplaced. But all of them seem terribly bashful.
I anticipated blood, anger, diminishment, and, at some point, deep deep regret. But then: parenthood, the richest experience available to a human being.
I can see all the way up to the deep deep regret. But a decision procured by a metropolitan elite telling xenophobic lies is not going to lead to rich experiences.
Whatever, yawn, it's now time for you to fuck off to Orban's Hungary, or stay here and fight for Britain. Up to you.
The sooner you sober up and realise that when 27 sovereign countries speak then the one that isn't in accordance is destined to lose, big time.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
If they want us out and failing then their stance is perfectly logical, you say yourself that crashing out will be a disaster, and what better way is there to ensure that outcome but by making outrageous demands and getting the Daily Heil frothing at the mouth. .
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
The problem with that analysis is that it is an enormous act of self harm on the EU's part although given the way the EU commission gets its pay rises, obviously the pain of EU farmers and car workers isn't even of tertiary importance. We will see how important it is to the heads of government.
'If the EU want Brexit to fail then the surest way is to push us out without any sort of deal. At the moment it looks like that is their intention so what they are doing is therefore quite logical from their perspective, it's not that hard to figure out really.'
If that is the case,I wonder how long it will be before the so called EU unity starts to break up'
I may be wrong and 'EU till I die' may be the flavor of the month in every EU country, but would be surprised if some of the Nordic, East European countries & maybe the Dutch don't break ranks.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
Six hours earlier, you said that you had a novel to re-write and you would not be here too often. Why don't you keep your word ?
I see the latest thing the nuttier Leavers are getting excited about is that the EU has the temerity to choose its own negotiating team. Words fail me.
You need to choose your side, and soon. You are a Brit, or you are a Hungarian/European and a foreigner. No more havering.
I assume that you hit gin o'clock a few hours ago.
I am British and European. I'm also a Londoner, English and Norfolk and good. I see no need to discard any of these identities just to please dimwitted maniacs.
Indeed. But this choice will soon be unavailable. The EU is simultaneously determined on 1. fleecing us, 2, humiliating us, 3, swindling us, and 4. making us look like fools and supplicants.
You need to find a position on this. As does every Briton. "Hey I Love Brussels and Europe and Hungary and Erasmus!" will not cut it any more.
The iron enters the soul.
No. I'm not one of the paranoiacs who regards every move by the EU as outrageous (the Times front page tomorrow is worthy of the Express). Far too many Leavers are acting as if they are high on Churchill's cigar smoke.
I'm trying to identify those Leavers who are now prepared to admit that their breezy assurance last year that Brexit would be quickly and painlessly negotiated was woefully misplaced. But all of them seem terribly bashful.
I anticipated blood, anger, diminishment, and, at some point, deep deep regret. But then: parenthood, the richest experience available to a human being.
I can see all the way up to the deep deep regret. But a decision procured by a metropolitan elite telling xenophobic lies is not going to lead to rich experiences.
Whatever, yawn, it's now time for you to fuck off to Orban's Hungary, or stay here and fight for Britain. Up to you.
The sooner you sober up and realise that when 27 sovereign countries speak then the one that isn't in accordance is destined to lose, big time.
Why? They have lots to lose as well and we don't have to do what they say. Besides, we are larger in every metric than something like 20 of those 27 combined.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
If they want us out and failing then their stance is perfectly logical, you say yourself that crashing out will be a disaster, and what better way is there to ensure that outcome but by making outrageous demands and getting the Daily Heil frothing at the mouth. .
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
Strictly speaking it isn't the EU's stance at all. They haven't put a figure on the bill. The €100 billion is a new gross estimate by the FT which they think will come to €55 - €75 billion after netting off, up from the paper's previous estimate of €40 - €60 billion.
I see the latest thing the nuttier Leavers are getting excited about is that the EU has the temerity to choose its own negotiating team. Words fail me.
You need to choose your side, and soon. You are a Brit, or you are a Hungarian/European and a foreigner. No more havering.
I assume that you hit gin o'clock a few hours ago.
I am British and European. I'm also a Londoner, English and Norfolk and good. I see no need to discard any of these identities just to please dimwitted maniacs.
Indeed. But this choice will soon be unavailable. The EU is simultaneously determined on 1. fleecing us, 2, humiliating us, 3, swindling us, and 4. making us look like fools and supplicants.
You need to find a position on this. As does every Briton. "Hey I Love Brussels and Europe and Hungary and Erasmus!" will not cut it any more.
The iron enters the soul.
No. I'm not one of the paranoiacs who regards every move by the EU as outrageous (the Times front page tomorrow is worthy of the Express). Far too many Leavers are acting as if they are high on Churchill's cigar smoke.
I'm trying to identify those Leavers who are now prepared to admit that their breezy assurance last year that Brexit would be quickly and painlessly negotiated was woefully misplaced. But all of them seem terribly bashful.
Do you have a list of those who did acknowledge it would be difficult and not without pain? Because they existed too.
"I think leave have had a few good days but everyone is talking to themsselves while turning the public off. Will start to be interesting by May and the debates, if agreed, will have quite an influence. However leave won't get away with an incoherant plan indefinately and they have two months to get their act (s) together"
A year on and the Leave plan is still incoherent.
Did you mean me Big G - North Wales (not John) wrote that when I was a remainer
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
If they want us out and failing then their stance is perfectly logical, you say yourself that crashing out will be a disaster, and what better way is there to ensure that outcome but by making outrageous demands and getting the Daily Heil frothing at the mouth. .
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
The problem with that analysis is that it is an enormous act of self harm on the EU's part although given the way the EU commission gets its pay rises, obviously the pain of EU farmers and car workers isn't even of tertiary importance. We will see how important it is to the heads of government.
Depends whether they feel a little economic pain is a price with paying to make Brexit fail and discourage others.
Diane herself just kept staggering on, ever deeper into the mire, a frogman wading into a vat of cow manure. Her voice at times was so slurrily indistinct, she might certainly have been wearing a snorkel.- QUENTIN LETTS
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
If they want us out and failing then their stance is perfectly logical, you say yourself that crashing out will be a disaster, and what better way is there to ensure that outcome but by making outrageous demands and getting the Daily Heil frothing at the mouth. .
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
The problem with that analysis is that it is an enormous act of self harm on the EU's part although given the way the EU commission gets its pay rises, obviously the pain of EU farmers and car workers isn't even of tertiary importance. We will see how important it is to the heads of government.
Depends whether they feel a little economic pain is a price with paying to make Brexit fail and discourage others.
Sorry? What economic pain? The commission is immune from it, even during the depth of the financial crisis they still got their pay rises.
It's a bit like the camel castration being totally painless joke. The problem is EU leaders will be looking at pain for their voters, in particular in parts or Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Holland and Denmark,
No. I'm not one of the paranoiacs who regards every move by the EU as outrageous (the Times front page tomorrow is worthy of the Express). Far too many Leavers are acting as if they are high on Churchill's cigar smoke.
I'm trying to identify those Leavers who are now prepared to admit that their breezy assurance last year that Brexit would be quickly and painlessly negotiated was woefully misplaced. But all of them seem terribly bashful.
Do you have a list of those who did acknowledge it would be difficult and not without pain? Because they existed too.
Perhaps you could identify those Remainers who told us that a recession would follow a Leave vote ?
Here's one with a rather a good line in imagery:
' Britain’s Standard & Poors credit rating has dropped two notches, the pound has suffered its biggest fall in one day against the dollar ever, markets around the world have crashed and recession is beckoning with a dark cloak, a skeletal finger and a voice that speaks in block capitals '
Three facts and a (widely shared at the time, including among Leavers) deduction. I'm not embarrassed by that.
Now, will you accept that Leavers were absurdly overoptimistic about the course of Brexit negotiations? It would be refreshing if some of those Leavers were to start owning up. They were happy enough to shoot the messenger on the thread I just linked to.
You called it wrong so that's a fail.
I accept that the EU is a fundamentally anti-British organisation and that we are better off out of it.
Previously I didn't think it was fundamentally hostile to this country and had hoped that a constructive relationship could be maintained. For many years I had thought that a constructive relationship within the EU was possible but its anti-democratic nature cast doubt upon that and Cameron's 'renegotiation' was the last straw.
But it now, sadly, seems that the EU doesn't want a constructive relationship but one of open hostility.
Can we assume that you were aware of the EU's fundamental hostility to this country but still thought that EverCloserUnion within such an organisation was a good thing ?
'If the EU want Brexit to fail then the surest way is to push us out without any sort of deal. At the moment it looks like that is their intention so what they are doing is therefore quite logical from their perspective, it's not that hard to figure out really.'
If that is the case,I wonder how long it will be before the so called EU unity starts to break up'
I may be wrong and 'EU till I die' may be the flavor of the month in every EU country, but would be surprised if some of the Nordic, East European countries & maybe the Dutch don't break ranks.
Isn't that one of the arguments for the EU wanting Brexit to fail, the countries you mention would surely be far more likely to follow the UK's lead if Brexit proves to be a roaring success. I would also say that we have been hearing about the demise of the EU and other countries leaving for years now and it still hasn't come to pass.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
Six hours earlier, you said that you had a novel to re-write and you would not be here too often. Why don't you keep your word ?
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
An interesting study, looking at rates in 2 periods 89-94 and 11-14, so older than what I posted.
Differing methodology. My figures are recorded deaths from dementia, while your paper looks at incident, or mild disease. Both papers could be right.
Smoking probably has a lot to do with it. Tbe smoking rates of the first cohort would be higher in men, while smoking rates would have substantially evened out by the second one.
There is also the posibility of survival bias. As one Glaswegen physician remarked "In Glasgow, we have an excellent preventative for Alzheimers. We call it ischaemic heart disease"
And I mean that sincerely. We've reached a point where EVERYONE has to take sides.
The EU is clearly and fiercely antagonistic, seeking to harm and damage the prosperity of the average Briton. So you are either with the EU - and you want to harm Britons - or you are with Her Majesty's Government, and you seek to defend us against an assault by foreigners.
That's the choice. That's it. Juncker and Orban versus May and Hammond.
CHOOSE.
So what difference will it make even if the whole country thinks the EU are cads and rotters? Sweet FA..
Depends whether they feel a little economic pain is a price with paying to make Brexit fail and discourage others.
Good comment. You have to wonder at what kind of club it is that thinks it has to frighten its members to remain in.
Oh! And before someone counters with the old argument "But countries are seeking membership of the EU", remember that these are countries that want to be taking from the central pot, rather than contributing to it.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
Presumably someone is trying to gag Tony Blair, Alistair Campbell and Lord Mandelson as we speak?
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
One thing we do know for sure is that Le Pen's price on the main Betfair market has drifted since the first round results came in - from about 8.00 to 10.00 currently. This doesn't suggest that punters think there are enough shy LePen supporters out there to bridge a 20 point gap. If you have evidence to the contrary different, let us know. But we need to see it. You can post it after cleaning up all that juicy 10.00 yourself first, but when you've filled your own boots sufficiently, we'd all appreciate the heads up.
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
Do you have any tips Peter ?
It always impressed me how quickly a tip on this site can shift the betting odds.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
Blair was a giant but so slippery nobody trusts him Corbyn is a conviction politician that thepublic think is a nutter Everyone in between was neither here nor there
You can't polish a turd, there doesn't have to be a Labour Party, if it's shit it will die, and it is shit
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
Let me follow the logic.
Not keen on Corbyn.
The Labour Truth Team. Labour Corbyn connection???
Labour, Al Campbell, 45 minutes, Labour, Truth, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour??
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
I think it is too late. This anti UK stance from Junckers will have done huge damage to their standing and many thousands of votes will have been added to TM.
The remainers are now faced with defending the anti UK EU and that in this climate is a vote loser. There is no political gain in attacking TM over the EU now..
5 live at midnight still going on about Abbott. Gillian Duffy moment for labour
I see the latest thing the nuttier Leavers are getting excited about is that the EU has the temerity to choose its own negotiating team. Words fail me.
You need to choose your side, and soon. You are a Brit, or you are a Hungarian/European and a foreigner. No more havering.
I assume that you hit gin o'clock a few hours ago.
I am British and European. I'm also a Londoner, English and Norfolk and good. I see no need to discard any of these identities just to please dimwitted maniacs.
Indeed. But this choice will soon be unavailable. The EU is simultaneously determined on 1. fleecing us, 2, humiliating us, 3, swindling us, and 4. making us look like fools and supplicants.
You need to find a position on this. As does every Briton. "Hey I Love Brussels and Europe and Hungary and Erasmus!" will not cut it any more.
The iron enters the soul.
No. I'm not one of the paranoiacs who regards every move by the EU as outrageous (the Times front page tomorrow is worthy of the Express). Far too many Leavers are acting as if they are high on Churchill's cigar smoke.
I'm trying to identify those Leavers who are now prepared to admit that their breezy assurance last year that Brexit would be quickly and painlessly negotiated was woefully misplaced. But all of them seem terribly bashful.
Do you have a list of those who did acknowledge it would be difficult and not without pain? Because they existed too.
"I think leave have had a few good days but everyone is talking to themsselves while turning the public off. Will start to be interesting by May and the debates, if agreed, will have quite an influence. However leave won't get away with an incoherant plan indefinately and they have two months to get their act (s) together"
A year on and the Leave plan is still incoherent.
Did you mean me Big G - North Wales (not John) wrote that when I was a remainer
'If the EU want Brexit to fail then the surest way is to push us out without any sort of deal. At the moment it looks like that is their intention so what they are doing is therefore quite logical from their perspective, it's not that hard to figure out really.'
If that is the case,I wonder how long it will be before the so called EU unity starts to break up'
I may be wrong and 'EU till I die' may be the flavor of the month in every EU country, but would be surprised if some of the Nordic, East European countries & maybe the Dutch don't break ranks.
Isn't that one of the arguments for the EU wanting Brexit to fail, the countries you mention would surely be far more likely to follow the UK's lead if Brexit proves to be a roaring success. I would also say that we have been hearing about the demise of the EU and other countries leaving for years now and it still hasn't come to pass.
Except that the way the EU is acting is like a poker playing calling "All In" because he thinks he has good cards but we've not even seen the flop yet.
If the EU tries to sabotage Brexit pour encourager les autres but then Brexit is a success then the EU will have failed and been seen to fail. The UK will have set a path for others to follow.
The alternative was the EU could have dismissed Brexit as a peculiar British symptom and that Britain was never really fully engaged as De Gaulle had warned would happen before we even joined.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
One thing we do know for sure is that Le Pen's price on the main Betfair market has drifted since the first round results came in - from about 8.00 to 10.00 currently. This doesn't suggest that punters think there are enough shy LePen supporters out there to bridge a 20 point gap. If you have evidence to the contrary different, let us know. But we need to see it. You can post it after cleaning up all that juicy 10.00 yourself first, but when you've filled your own boots sufficiently, we'd all appreciate the heads up.
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
Do you have any tips Peter ?
It always impressed me how quickly a tip on this site can shift the betting odds.
Not really, Richard. I don't bet so much these days. I don't have enough time to do the necessary research and even when I do, I find it very difficult to get on.
I suppose backing Macron is fairly safe and better than bank interest, but that's hardly telling you anything you couldn't work out for yourself.
'If the EU want Brexit to fail then the surest way is to push us out without any sort of deal. At the moment it looks like that is their intention so what they are doing is therefore quite logical from their perspective, it's not that hard to figure out really.'
If that is the case,I wonder how long it will be before the so called EU unity starts to break up'
I may be wrong and 'EU till I die' may be the flavor of the month in every EU country, but would be surprised if some of the Nordic, East European countries & maybe the Dutch don't break ranks.
Isn't that one of the arguments for the EU wanting Brexit to fail, the countries you mention would surely be far more likely to follow the UK's lead if Brexit proves to be a roaring success. I would also say that we have been hearing about the demise of the EU and other countries leaving for years now and it still hasn't come to pass.
Except that the way the EU is acting is like a poker playing calling "All In" because he thinks he has good cards but we've not even seen the flop yet.
If the EU tries to sabotage Brexit pour encourager les autres but then Brexit is a success then the EU will have failed and been seen to fail. The UK will have set a path for others to follow.
The alternative was the EU could have dismissed Brexit as a peculiar British symptom and that Britain was never really fully engaged as De Gaulle had warned would happen before we even joined.
There are risks either way but from their perspective the best way for the EU to hold together would be for Brexit to be seen as a failure and that is more likely (though not inevitably) to be the case if we have to exit onto WTO terms.
Did you mean me Big G - North Wales (not John) wrote that when I was a remainer
Yes, sorry, mixed your name with BJO.
The plan is still incohent though.
The plan is presently incoherant from both sides. I assume TM will not be drawn into a slanging match but at some time later this year, possibly after Merkel wins, if she does, the crunch time will approach but in the meantime there will many EU countries looking on in dismay. I expect the Irish, Danes and Dutch will row back on the anti UK nonsense and demand trade talks, indeed I believe moves are already under way on this subject
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
I think it is too late. This anti UK stance from Junckers will have done huge damage to their standing and many thousands of votes will have been added to TM.
The remainers are now faced with defending the anti UK EU and that in this climate is a vote loser. There is no political gain in attacking TM over the EU now..
5 live at midnight still going on about Abbott. Gillian Duffy moment for labour
but over 5 weeks from Polling Day rather than less than a week!
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
One thing we do know for sure is that Le Pen's price on the main Betfair market has drifted since the first round results came in - from about 8.00 to 10.00 currently. This doesn't suggest that punters think there are enough shy LePen supporters out there to bridge a 20 point gap. If you have evidence to the contrary different, let us know. But we need to see it. You can post it after cleaning up all that juicy 10.00 yourself first, but when you've filled your own boots sufficiently, we'd all appreciate the heads up.
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
Do you have any tips Peter ?
It always impressed me how quickly a tip on this site can shift the betting odds.
Not really, Richard. I don't bet so much these days. I don't have enough time to do the necessary research and even when I do, I find it very difficult to get on.
I suppose backing Macron is fairly safe and better than bank interest, but that's hardly telling you anything you couldn't work out for yourself.
I've already loaded up on Macron - if MLP wins the financial turmoil will cost me more than the betting loss anyway.
I don't know if I'm odd but I can go for months without placing a bet but then the buzz comes back. Its not even the making a bit of money which is the thrill its knowing that you picked up a really good value bet, almost as if its an intellectual challenge.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
I think it is too late. This anti UK stance from Junckers will have done huge damage to their standing and many thousands of votes will have been added to TM.
The remainers are now faced with defending the anti UK EU and that in this climate is a vote loser. There is no political gain in attacking TM over the EU now..
5 live at midnight still going on about Abbott. Gillian Duffy moment for labour
but over 5 weeks from Polling Day rather than less than a week!
Its over for labour Justin. The only hope for good labour party members is for voters to give labour a massive vote of no confidence big enough to rid the nation of Corbyn
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
I think their differences are too big to formally unite though pacts are likely, there will be no more UUP tactical votes for the SDLP that the former UUP leader Mike Nesbitt was pushing, new leader Robin Swann is more traditionalist
Three facts and a (widely shared at the time, including among Leavers) deduction. I'm not embarrassed by that.
Now, will you accept that Leavers were absurdly overoptimistic about the course of Brexit negotiations? It would be refreshing if some of those Leavers were to start owning up. They were happy enough to shoot the messenger on the thread I just linked to.
You called it wrong so that's a fail.
I accept that the EU is a fundamentally anti-British organisation and that we are better off out of it.
Previously I didn't think it was fundamentally hostile to this country and had hoped that a constructive relationship could be maintained. For many years I had thought that a constructive relationship within the EU was possible but its anti-democratic nature cast doubt upon that and Cameron's 'renegotiation' was the last straw.
But it now, sadly, seems that the EU doesn't want a constructive relationship but one of open hostility.
Can we assume that you were aware of the EU's fundamental hostility to this country but still thought that EverCloserUnion within such an organisation was a good thing ?
It's a shame to see an ordinarily smart poster succumb to such absurd paranoia. Every move by the EU, no matter how innocuous, leads to hysteria from bedwetting Leavers.
It seems that those on the EU side have concluded that for the foreseeable future the EU is not going to have a relational engagement with Britain but a transactional one. It has reached that conclusion from the behaviour of the British government, the xenophobic lies of the Leave campaign, the wild tone of the press and the aggressive online reaction of Leavers to every minor development.
There's a negotiation ahead. It was always going to be hard, as I explained last year (to catcalls from the entrenched Leavers). The EU will conduct the negotiation from its perspective in order to maximise its advantage. In a transactional engagement, that involves screwing your opposite number down as hard as you can.
Leavers really need to take a good long hard look in the mirror. If this was something that Leavers did not wish to happen, perhaps they should have spent less time wishing the EU to fail completely and deriding it as an organisation and more time explaining how they wanted Britain's new constructive relationship to work. But insulting foreigners is always more fun.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
Not English speaking with each other? Been on the crack pipe again?
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyonsnipwas the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
Really? Already? Business is good here in Sussex.
I didn't realise you were in Somerset, we were there on holiday last year.
BenedictWhite - the problem is, the EU clearly intends to damage our financial services, and will rely on WTO terms to limit damage to their exports. Why let it happen? Does the WTO help or hinder when we import so much more than we export?
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
Blair was a giant but so slippery nobody trusts him Corbyn is a conviction politician that thepublic think is a nutter Everyone in between was neither here nor there
You can't polish a turd, there doesn't have to be a Labour Party, if it's shit it will die, and it is shit
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
Not English speaking with each other? Been on the crack pipe again?
No, they don't have a trade deal with each other. You cited them as examples of wonderfully rational countries in the free-trade paradise that exists outside the EU, yet they don't have a deal with each other.
Also regarding Canada, the CETA deal is much more comprehensive than the deal Canada did with EFTA.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
I think it is too late. This anti UK stance from Junckers will have done huge damage to their standing and many thousands of votes will have been added to TM.
The remainers are now faced with defending the anti UK EU and that in this climate is a vote loser. There is no political gain in attacking TM over the EU now..
5 live at midnight still going on about Abbott. Gillian Duffy moment for labour
but over 5 weeks from Polling Day rather than less than a week!
Its over for labour Justin. The only hope for good labour party members is for voters to give labour a massive vote of no confidence big enough to rid the nation of Corbyn
I agree re- Corbyn and cannot understand why he is masochistically putting himself through an election which he will heavily lose and which will result in him being ousted from the leadership a few months later.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I honestly think it was necessary.
We do not want to go the same route as them and were always an outsider.
The Labour Truth Team is a good idea. There is a swathe of the electorate who are not keen on Corbyn but suspicious of May and her team. They need encouragement to vote Labour by people who they trust.
Labour and truth in same sentence - who would have thought it.
Also who in their right mind is going to admin that they will vote Le Pen?
Well two things: His vote is apparently more solid than polling would suggest given the first round voting figures. Secondly the pollsters did not underestimate Le Pen's first round vote.
The reason why Le Pen's vote apparently drifted in the first round was that Melenchon was attracting some of her supporters on the economic side. You would assume they would go back to Le Pen or at least not back Macron. If Macron only has 1/3 of Melenchon voters, then it suggests, net, he does not have much advantage over Le Pen from that base.
Sounds like wishful thinking to me.
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
{snip}
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
Do you have any tips Peter ?
It always impressed me how quickly a tip on this site can shift the betting odds.
Not really, Richard. I don't bet so much these days. I don't have enough time to do the necessary research and even when I do, I find it very difficult to get on.
I suppose backing Macron is fairly safe and better than bank interest, but that's hardly telling you anything you couldn't work out for yourself.
I've already loaded up on Macron - if MLP wins the financial turmoil will cost me more than the betting loss anyway.
I don't know if I'm odd but I can go for months without placing a bet but then the buzz comes back. Its not even the making a bit of money which is the thrill its knowing that you picked up a really good value bet, almost as if its an intellectual challenge.
Anyway its great to see you back here Peter.
Yes, I know what you mean. Went to a point to point meeting yesterday. They're great fun and if you are used to looking at decent horses you can pretty soon sort out the likely winners by just paddock watching. Found one at 9/4 and had all of a tenner on it. Made my day!
Thank you for your kind words. Quite a few 'golden oldies' returning lately. Not sure why.
I do think there is some deep resentment that the little offshore island won.
I think you're projecting somewhat. I've spoken to a lot of people who instinctively don't like the idea of Britain being part of the EU, and a common sentiment is, "I thought we won." They find something viscerally objectionable about finding ourselves on equal, or inferior, terms with our neighbours.
The great unspoken truth of that wretched war is, of course, that Britain lost and West Germany won. But I'm not sure if helps much trawling through history (although, for the record, we should never have joined the EEC in the first place.) We are where we are.
The reasons for ditching the EU now are that (a) most people still aren't interested in being part of a United States of Europe, which is where all of this is going, and (b) voters are fed up of endless waves of uncontrolled mass immigration, which is the main contributor to a wholly unsustainable and unnecessary population growth rate of 500,000 per year. The rest is noise.
All of this has little or nothing to do with rampant xenophobia, nostalgia for a long dead empire, wanting to boss about the neighbours, or any of the other assorted random motives commonly ascribed to it by liberal commentators struggling to come to terms with a country which, it turns out, they barely know or understand. If there is any other important factor behind the Leave vote then it is probably simple exhaustion: in cultural terms Europe is a wonderful thing, but geopolitically it's been a running sore and a source of repeated conflict, misery and death for centuries. And nor is the EU a viable solution to the problem, for us anyway. There isn't enough room here for me to critique the wrong-headed analysis of the events of the first half of the 20th Century which led to the genesis of the European Project: suffice it to say that we weren't entitled to tell the other European countries not to gradually merge themselves out of existence if they were determined to do it, but we shouldn't have joined in and it was a great mistake to have done so.
If you think that's wrong then try this thought experiment: if it were physically possible to sail the country to another part of the world, and moor it perhaps just off British Columbia, or perhaps New Zealand, then do you seriously think that most of the British population would hesitate for a second before breathing a sigh of relief, and nodding in assent? Would it not make us, and the other Europeans, happier? As it is, we can't escape our geography but we can do our best to reorient the country away from Europe, and make ourselves less reliant on it and less involved in its endless, largely self-inflicted, problems.
Most Britons wish neither to be part of a political Europe, nor to do it harm. They just want nothing to do with it at all.
BenedictWhite - the problem is, the EU clearly intends to damage our financial services, and will rely on WTO terms to limit damage to their exports. Why let it happen? Does the WTO help or hinder when we import so much more than we export?
The WTO tariffs for their exports to us are much higher than that for ours to them, on a trade weighted average.
Also, their spite on our financial services will hit them harder than us.
Lastly, we are WTO members. We can't break the rules. That would be very very bad.
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
Not English speaking with each other? Been on the crack pipe again?
No, they don't have a trade deal with each other. You cited them as examples of wonderfully rational countries in the free-trade paradise that exists outside the EU, yet they don't have a deal with each other.
Also regarding Canada, the CETA deal is much more comprehensive than the deal Canada did with EFTA.
I didn't mention India nor did I suggest it was a rational country.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyond. They are our true allies. The EU was a pathetic delusion.
That BBC documentary about populist movements across Europe who are anti-EU was really telling. When asked what was their response to people questioning the way the EU ran, the reply was well what we need is more power with the EU commission....not even a faux we should listen and see what is going wrong...no no, what was wrong was the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I honestly think it was necessary.
We do not want to go the same route as them and were always an outsider.
Well, as a former referee I'd be bound to point out that you can't be stopped from leaving the pitch, but you definitely can't come back on!
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
Not English speaking with each other? Been on the crack pipe again?
No, they don't have a trade deal with each other. You cited them as examples of wonderfully rational countries in the free-trade paradise that exists outside the EU, yet they don't have a deal with each other.
Also regarding Canada, the CETA deal is much more comprehensive than the deal Canada did with EFTA.
I didn't mention India nor did I suggest it was a rational country.
You mentioned Switzerland and Australia in response to my post, yet they don't have a trade deal with each other.
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Why do rational, English-speaking countries like Australia and India find it so difficult to do a trade deal with each other, Benedict?
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
India is protectionist and has been since independence. Also it isn't quite "English speaking".
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
Although again, not with each other. What's stopping them?
Not English speaking with each other? Been on the crack pipe again?
No, they don't have a trade deal with each other. You cited them as examples of wonderfully rational countries in the free-trade paradise that exists outside the EU, yet they don't have a deal with each other.
Also regarding Canada, the CETA deal is much more comprehensive than the deal Canada did with EFTA.
I didn't mention India nor did I suggest it was a rational country.
You mentioned Switzerland and Australia in response to my post, yet they don't have a trade deal with each other.
And? Perhaps the Swiss do not want wool, mutton and iron ore nor the Australians watches and chocolate.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
Really? Already? Business is good here in Sussex.
I didn't realise you were in Somerset, we were there on holiday last year.
No, I'm still in London. Son is in Oxford working for a private firm that basically does research into Global Warming topics and the like. Firm is quietly disbanding. He thinks his best chances now are in Asia and the Far East.
Daughter has kids and works from home as an HR specialist for a local Law firm. They haven't downsized yet but the signs aren't good. (She's a Tory voter and her opinion of Cameron is unrepeatable!)
Labour candidates are being warned off mounting an effort to oust Jeremy Corbyn after tomorrow’s local elections, however badly the party performs.
Activists are being summoned to help to defend even once rock-solid local authority strongholds such as Doncaster in a sign of Labour fears that it will sustain heavy losses. With one respected analyst suggesting that the party is on course to lose 125 council seats, a worse defeat is certain to trigger fresh questions about Mr Corbyn’s leadership.
Members of Labour’s parliamentary committee last week discussed begging Mr Corbyn to stand down if the local election results pointed to a wipeout in the general election, according to one present.
If you think that's wrong then try this thought experiment: if it were physically possible to sail the country to another part of the world, and moor it perhaps just off British Columbia, or perhaps New Zealand, then do you seriously think that most of the British population would hesitate for a second before breathing a sigh of relief, and nodding in assent? Would it not make us, and the other Europeans, happier? As it is, we can't escape our geography but we can do our best to reorient the country away from Europe, and make ourselves less reliant on it and less involved in its endless, largely self-inflicted, problems.
An interesting thought experiment. Would the Republic of Ireland get a say in whether it gets dragged with us?
The fact is that idle daydreaming doesn't change the facts of history and geography. I can fully accept that many people of the Leaver mindset wish this country were a part of the New World and deeply envy their ancestors who left Europe for other shores. But we can't base a national strategy on indulging that psychosis.
Under WTO rules the UK would receive a financial benefit since the tariffs we collect on EU imports to the UK would be significantly larger than the reverse (this does not account for the possible cost to both entitles as a result of reduction of trade due to tariffs). The WTO does have rules on services but they are not well developed.
Therefore, there is little point in the UK agreeing tariff free goods trade with the EU unless services are covered. However, the EU seem to be angling for massive restrictions on services but they will no doubt welcome tariff free goods trade. The UK should refuse.
BenedictWhite - the problem is, the EU clearly intends to damage our financial services, and will rely on WTO terms to limit damage to their exports. Why let it happen? Does the WTO help or hinder when we import so much more than we export?
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
Really? Already? Business is good here in Sussex.
I didn't realise you were in Somerset, we were there on holiday last year.
No, I'm still in London. Son is in Oxford working for a private firm that basically does research into Global Warming topics and the like. Firm is quietly disbanding. He thinks his best chances now are in Asia and the Far East.
Daughter has kids and works from home as an HR specialist for a local Law firm. They haven't downsized yet but the signs aren't good. (She's a Tory voter and her opinion of Cameron is unrepeatable!)
That's interesting. Why the far east? As for an HR specialist, she could always set up as an external HR person for small companies. We've hired them from time to time. As for Cameron, I don't have a fantastically high opinion of him as a PM either.
Labour candidates are being warned off mounting an effort to oust Jeremy Corbyn after tomorrow’s local elections, however badly the party performs.
Activists are being summoned to help to defend even once rock-solid local authority strongholds such as Doncaster in a sign of Labour fears that it will sustain heavy losses. With one respected analyst suggesting that the party is on course to lose 125 council seats, a worse defeat is certain to trigger fresh questions about Mr Corbyn’s leadership.
Members of Labour’s parliamentary committee last week discussed begging Mr Corbyn to stand down if the local election results pointed to a wipeout in the general election, according to one present.
Corbyn be in the bunker till the last, ordering around battalions he no longer has. In years to come, Ken will be interviewed and talk about the days before he went mad....
Under WTO rules the UK would receive a financial benefit since the tariffs we collect on EU imports to the UK would be significantly larger than the reverse (this does not account for the possible cost to both entitles as a result of reduction of trade due to tariffs). The WTO does have rules on services but they are not well developed.
Therefore, there is little point in the UK agreeing tariff free goods trade with the EU unless services are covered. However, the EU seem to be angling for massive restrictions on services but they will no doubt welcome tariff free goods trade. The UK should refuse.
BenedictWhite - the problem is, the EU clearly intends to damage our financial services, and will rely on WTO terms to limit damage to their exports. Why let it happen? Does the WTO help or hinder when we import so much more than we export?
Agree. Totally. WTO rules is better than an FTA not including services.
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
This is not a jolly democratic club, it is, literally, a mafia. They WANT to harm us. They WANT us to suffer. You are either part of the gang or you get your ear sliced off by Romania. They have no interest in a deal. They are c*nts.
How could anyone want to be part of this. We have friends, good friends, around the English speaking world and beyonsnipwas the EU project currently wasn't finished and until it is, every issue is because of that.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
Hi Benedict. Nice to see you posting again. You well?
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
I am well, yes. I understand you "hold the bet" between Scott_P and I over an EU/ Brazil trade deal before a UK/Brazil one?
{snip} by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
Sure. Send me an email when you claim the win (or concede!)
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time will tell. I suspect that no matter what the EU's position ends up being we will be a success provided we don't cave in to silly demands with or without an EU trade deal.
Time's not on my side, Benedict.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
Sorry to hear that Peter
Thanks, Floater, that's kind of you, but I wouldn't want to overstate matters. Brexit was a blow, but it won't be the end of civilisation as we know it. Those of us that are adaptable will adapt, and I'm sure my children will too.
If you think that's wrong then try this thought experiment: if it were physically possible to sail the country to another part of the world, and moor it perhaps just off British Columbia, or perhaps New Zealand, then do you seriously think that most of the British population would hesitate for a second before breathing a sigh of relief, and nodding in assent? Would it not make us, and the other Europeans, happier? As it is, we can't escape our geography but we can do our best to reorient the country away from Europe, and make ourselves less reliant on it and less involved in its endless, largely self-inflicted, problems.
An interesting thought experiment. Would the Republic of Ireland get a say in whether it gets dragged with us?
The fact is that idle daydreaming doesn't change the facts of history and geography. I can fully accept that many people of the Leaver mindset wish this country were a part of the New World and deeply envy their ancestors who left Europe for other shores. But we can't base a national strategy on indulging that psychosis.
In the imaginary scenario as in reality, the Republic has its own government. It must do what it believes to be in its interest, just as we must do what we believe to be in ours.
Ireland is an interesting case actually. It joined the EEC, amongst other things, to make itself less dependent on its closest neighbour by reaching out to more distant lands. I merely suggest that leaving the EU ought, in the long run, to help us become less dependent on the EU itself. Given how much trouble it is, this can only be a good thing.
Under WTO rules the UK would receive a financial benefit since the tariffs we collect on EU imports to the UK would be significantly larger than the reverse
I hate to keep bringing this up, but:
* a) tariffs are not a benefit, they are a cost: it's a tax. * b) there is no such thing as a net tariff
A UK tariff is a tax on UK consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the UK consumer to the UK government A Country X tariff is a tax on Country X consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the Country X consumer to the Country X government.
Money doesn't cross the border and there is no net flow. If one person cuts off half a leg, and another person cuts off a quarter of a leg, there isn't a flow of a quarter of a leg from one to the other. You can't net a tariff and they are not a financial benefit
To illustrate this, imagine the UK imposing a tariff of 1 trillion dollars on every pound of uranium imported. Is that a benefit of 1 trillion? No, it's a cost to the person who pays it, and that person is the Brit importing it.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
It would be difficult as well as inappropriate to explain why my offspring both felt their futures adversely affected by Brexit and I really wouldn't want to overstate the cases anyway. They are both well educated and resourceful (and of course come from the finest stock!) so they will manage. But in brief....
The boy is quite eminent in his field so the number of potential employers is small. Funding for his kind of work comes mainly from the UK Government and the EU. The UK is cutting back on cost grounds and the EU would prefer to appoint nationals of EU member States. The other big funding agencies are mainly in Japan, Korea, Australia, NZ and similar places that are a long bus ride home. He'll be ok. He's qualified, and single, but it ain't what he had in mind.
The girl's problem is simply managing work and small children. She's established with her current firm so if they cut back it would be hard for her to find similar equally well-paid work. Consultancy s always an option, but it would be a new departure and not an easy one.
Me, I'm just f*cked off at what's happened to the pound and my pension prospects, but that's another story. And anyway, I can always make good any shortfall by taking money off mug punters. ;-)
Under WTO rules the UK would receive a financial benefit since the tariffs we collect on EU imports to the UK would be significantly larger than the reverse
I hate to keep bringing this up, but:
* a) tariffs are not a benefit, they are a cost: it's a tax. * b) there is no such thing as a net tariff
A UK tariff is a tax on UK consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the UK consumer to the UK government A Country X tariff is a tax on Country X consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the Country X consumer to the Country X government.
Money doesn't cross the border and there is no net flow. If one person cuts off half a leg, and another person cuts off a quarter of a leg, there isn't a flow of a quarter of a leg from one to the other. You can't net a tariff and they are not a financial benefit
To illustrate this, imagine the UK imposing a tariff of 1 trillion dollars on every pound of uranium imported. Is that a benefit of 1 trillion? No, it's a cost to the person who pays it, and that person is the Brit importing it.
Quite, but what it means in the context of UK EU trade is this:
They sell us beef which we could produce in the UK or from some of our old trading partners, Argentina for example, which under WTO rules attracts a high tariff whilst we export cars to them which attracts a lower tariff more than compensated for by the currency drop.
The implication being that our trade with them will be hit less hard than theirs with us. In short they'd be nuts. We have now however established that indeed they do appear to be nuts, so lets hope Dr. Fox gets on with the trade deals.
They really are that bonkers. The solution to every problem, especially too much EU is more EU. Oh dear.
It would be difficult as well as inappropriate to explain why my offspring both felt their futures adversely affected by Brexit and I really wouldn't want to overstate the cases anyway. They are both well educated and resourceful (and of course come from the finest stock!) so they will manage. But in brief....
The boy is quite eminent in his field so the number of potential employers is small. Funding for his kind of work comes mainly from the UK Government and the EU. The UK is cutting back on cost grounds and the EU would prefer to appoint nationals of EU member States. The other big funding agencies are mainly in Japan, Korea, Australia, NZ and similar places that are a long bus ride home. He'll be ok. He's qualified, and single, but it ain't what he had in mind.
The girl's problem is simply managing work and small children. She's established with her current firm so if they cut back it would be hard for her to find similar equally well-paid work. Consultancy s always an option, but it would be a new departure and not an easy one.
Me, I'm just f*cked off at what's happened to the pound and my pension prospects, but that's another story. And anyway, I can always make good any shortfall by taking money off mug punters. ;-)
Sorry to hear about your pension prospects. I thought the stock markets had recovered. Good luck!
The behaviour of the EU, since Brexit, has horribly lived up to too every eurosceptics' darkest nightmare, in regard to their deviousness, nastiness and malice.
Germany has been accused by allies of Theresa May of trying to influence the General Election by undermining the Prime Minister over Brexit talks.
Allies of Mrs May believe Germany, in tandem with the EU, is embarking on a new “project fear” by repeatedly briefing against her.
Senior officials in the German government and in Brussels have openly mocked Mrs May or leaked sensitive information about private meetings in what is being seen as an attempt to undermine the Prime Minister.
I don't agree with this analysis. A tariff is paid at the time of import by the importer. It is real revenue to the UK Government. The importer needs to recover this tariff when the goods are sold along inside the UK. Remember, most imports are not sold directly to the end consumer. If BMW import cars, it is BMW UK (or whoever) who pay the tariff. They have to recover this when they sell the cars to users.
It IS a tax. However, the ability of the importer to pass this 'tax' along to the ultimate consumer depends on market conditions - that is the whole point of a tariff. It makes the imports relatively more expensive compared to domestic equivalents (if there are any). If BMW is subject to (say) a 10% tariff on imports to the UK, then you cannot assume that UK consumers will simply pay the extra 10%. They may substitute locally produced cars instead. In reality, it will be some measure of BWM absorbing some of the cost and passing some on.
So, the UK Government under WTO rules would collect billions of dollars in tariffs, which is considerably more than the total than would be paid on UK exports to the EU.
What is to stop the UK Government re-imbursing all UK companies for any tariffs levied on their exports to the EU? That way, they would not need to increase their ultimate sale price to account for the tariff.
Remember that the EU common external tariff already applies to all UK imports from non-EU countries. This could be waived after Brexit. So overall both the UK Government and the consumer could be better off overall even with WTO rules to the EU - it would just push trade to non-EU countries which is probably what we want to do anyway, especially given the relative decline of the EU. I agree that tariffs are a tax and are not desirable, but there is no point waiving tariffs on goods to and from the EU unless we get access to services. That is not an equal trade.
* a) tariffs are not a benefit, they are a cost: it's a tax. * b) there is no such thing as a net tariff
A UK tariff is a tax on UK consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the UK consumer to the UK government A Country X tariff is a tax on Country X consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the Country X consumer to the Country X government.
Money doesn't cross the border and there is no net flow. If one person cuts off half a leg, and another person cuts off a quarter of a leg, there isn't a flow of a quarter of a leg from one to the other. You can't net a tariff and they are not a financial benefit
To illustrate this, imagine the UK imposing a tariff of 1 trillion dollars on every pound of uranium imported. Is that a benefit of 1 trillion? No, it's a cost to the person who pays it, and that person is the Brit importing it.
It would be fine if we did owe them €100bn, but it is clear that we don't. Their case is so weak that they are just adding on anything to make it look good. The problem is that the Commission has promised the EU members that they are legally entitled to this and will get it, and they won't. Suspect this was on purpose to poison the outcome.
Perhaps May should tell Junker that he is quite correct - the EU is not a golf club. In a golf club, people are expected to treat each other with respect.
I actively WANT Diamond Brexit now. Just do it. We leave. We're out. Don't give them a penny. Lorries pile up at Dover. Who fucking cares. Treat it as a a warlike experience.
Alistair Meeks can go live in nazi Hungary. The rest of us will defend our island.
Do it.
Our nation is not an island. And it cannot be towed across the face of the globe.
Comments
Le Pen didn't 'drift'. She performed very well. It's just that Macron performed better.
Your assumptions about the way the votes of the defeated candidates will split are at odds with the analyses I have seen to date, here on PB and elsewhere. Do you have a source, or are you hypothesising?
One thing we do know for sure is that Le Pen's price on the main Betfair market has drifted since the first round results came in - from about 8.00 to 10.00 currently. This doesn't suggest that punters think there are enough shy LePen supporters out there to bridge a 20 point gap. If you have evidence to the contrary different, let us know. But we need to see it. You can post it after cleaning up all that juicy 10.00 yourself first, but when you've filled your own boots sufficiently, we'd all appreciate the heads up.
We can't offer you any money. But you'd be hot favorite for PB Tipster of the Year!
I think your mistake, if I may be so bold, is that you persist in looking at the EU's actions through UK eyes, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.
Having said that I am far from convinced this will be their final stance.
'If the EU want Brexit to fail then the surest way is to push us out without any sort of deal. At the moment it looks like that is their intention so what they are doing is therefore quite logical from their perspective, it's not that hard to figure out really.'
If that is the case,I wonder how long it will be before the so called EU unity starts to break up'
I may be wrong and 'EU till I die' may be the flavor of the month in every EU country, but would be surprised if some of the Nordic, East European countries & maybe the Dutch don't break ranks.
It's a bit like the camel castration being totally painless joke. The problem is EU leaders will be looking at pain for their voters, in particular in parts or Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Holland and Denmark,
I accept that the EU is a fundamentally anti-British organisation and that we are better off out of it.
Previously I didn't think it was fundamentally hostile to this country and had hoped that a constructive relationship could be maintained. For many years I had thought that a constructive relationship within the EU was possible but its anti-democratic nature cast doubt upon that and Cameron's 'renegotiation' was the last straw.
But it now, sadly, seems that the EU doesn't want a constructive relationship but one of open hostility.
Can we assume that you were aware of the EU's fundamental hostility to this country but still thought that EverCloserUnion within such an organisation was a good thing ?
Isn't that one of the arguments for the EU wanting Brexit to fail, the countries you mention would surely be far more likely to follow the UK's lead if Brexit proves to be a roaring success. I would also say that we have been hearing about the demise of the EU and other countries leaving for years now and it still hasn't come to pass.
Differing methodology. My figures are recorded deaths from dementia, while your paper looks at incident, or mild disease. Both papers could be right.
Smoking probably has a lot to do with it. Tbe smoking rates of the first cohort would be higher in men, while smoking rates would have substantially evened out by the second one.
There is also the posibility of survival bias. As one Glaswegen physician remarked "In Glasgow, we have an excellent preventative for Alzheimers. We call it ischaemic heart disease"
You have to wonder at what kind of club it is that thinks it has to frighten its members to remain in.
Oh! And before someone counters with the old argument "But countries are seeking membership of the EU", remember that these are countries that want to be taking from the central pot, rather than contributing to it.
Yes, they resemble Momentum members in that respect. The more they encounter criticism and problems, the more certain they are that more of the same is what is required. Their contribution to the current crisis should therefore not be underestimated.
Not sure our solution of walking off the pitch is necessarily the best one though - understandable, yes. But wise?
It always impressed me how quickly a tip on this site can shift the betting odds.
Corbyn is a conviction politician that thepublic think is a nutter
Everyone in between was neither here nor there
You can't polish a turd, there doesn't have to be a Labour Party, if it's shit it will die, and it is shit
Not keen on Corbyn.
The Labour Truth Team. Labour Corbyn connection???
Labour, Al Campbell, 45 minutes, Labour, Truth, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour??
Computer says NO!
The remainers are now faced with defending the anti UK EU and that in this climate is a vote loser. There is no political gain in attacking TM over the EU now..
5 live at midnight still going on about Abbott. Gillian Duffy moment for labour
The plan is still incohent though.
If the EU tries to sabotage Brexit pour encourager les autres but then Brexit is a success then the EU will have failed and been seen to fail. The UK will have set a path for others to follow.
The alternative was the EU could have dismissed Brexit as a peculiar British symptom and that Britain was never really fully engaged as De Gaulle had warned would happen before we even joined.
We walked off the pitch because we realised that there was no way of influencing the direction of the EU from within so gave up to make our own path. The reasons are best demonstrated by how long the EU Canada deal took verses how long it takes rational countries to do the same thing. 10 years verses 2.
I suppose backing Macron is fairly safe and better than bank interest, but that's hardly telling you anything you couldn't work out for yourself.
DUP 29%
SF 28%
UUP 15%
SDLP 12%
Alliance 10%
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/859525432894525440
Did you mean me Big G - North Wales (not John) wrote that when I was a remainer
Yes, sorry, mixed your name with BJO.
The plan is still incohent though.
The plan is presently incoherant from both sides. I assume TM will not be drawn into a slanging match but at some time later this year, possibly after Merkel wins, if she does, the crunch time will approach but in the meantime there will many EU countries looking on in dismay. I expect the Irish, Danes and Dutch will row back on the anti UK nonsense and demand trade talks, indeed I believe moves are already under way on this subject
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-10/new-trade-deal-with-india-could-be-years-away-turnbull/8432130
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has conceded a free-trade deal with India could still be years away, saying Australia has to be "realistic" about the length of time it would take to hammer out an agreement.
We are unlikely to agree on the wisdom of Brexit but as an old friend I am sure will accept my complete sincerity when I say that on this occasion I desperately hope that you are right and I am completely wrong.
Time for DUP and UUP to unite?
I don't know if I'm odd but I can go for months without placing a bet but then the buzz comes back. Its not even the making a bit of money which is the thrill its knowing that you picked up a really good value bet, almost as if its an intellectual challenge.
Anyway its great to see you back here Peter.
By rational I was referring to deals the Swiss and Australians have made in various different places for example.
It seems that those on the EU side have concluded that for the foreseeable future the EU is not going to have a relational engagement with Britain but a transactional one. It has reached that conclusion from the behaviour of the British government, the xenophobic lies of the Leave campaign, the wild tone of the press and the aggressive online reaction of Leavers to every minor development.
There's a negotiation ahead. It was always going to be hard, as I explained last year (to catcalls from the entrenched Leavers). The EU will conduct the negotiation from its perspective in order to maximise its advantage. In a transactional engagement, that involves screwing your opposite number down as hard as you can.
Leavers really need to take a good long hard look in the mirror. If this was something that Leavers did not wish to happen, perhaps they should have spent less time wishing the EU to fail completely and deriding it as an organisation and more time explaining how they wanted Britain's new constructive relationship to work. But insulting foreigners is always more fun.
My retirement plans have been hit. My son is having to seek employment on the other side of the world, and my daughter's job prospects in rural Somerset have taken a hit.
From a purely personal point of view, it has been a bit of a disaster.
Junker and Abbott making her life easy, is the general impression. Why they want to make it so easy for her I do not comprehend.
I didn't realise you were in Somerset, we were there on holiday last year.
Also regarding Canada, the CETA deal is much more comprehensive than the deal Canada did with EFTA.
We do not want to go the same route as them and were always an outsider.
Tick tock
Thank you for your kind words. Quite a few 'golden oldies' returning lately. Not sure why.
The reasons for ditching the EU now are that (a) most people still aren't interested in being part of a United States of Europe, which is where all of this is going, and (b) voters are fed up of endless waves of uncontrolled mass immigration, which is the main contributor to a wholly unsustainable and unnecessary population growth rate of 500,000 per year. The rest is noise.
All of this has little or nothing to do with rampant xenophobia, nostalgia for a long dead empire, wanting to boss about the neighbours, or any of the other assorted random motives commonly ascribed to it by liberal commentators struggling to come to terms with a country which, it turns out, they barely know or understand. If there is any other important factor behind the Leave vote then it is probably simple exhaustion: in cultural terms Europe is a wonderful thing, but geopolitically it's been a running sore and a source of repeated conflict, misery and death for centuries. And nor is the EU a viable solution to the problem, for us anyway. There isn't enough room here for me to critique the wrong-headed analysis of the events of the first half of the 20th Century which led to the genesis of the European Project: suffice it to say that we weren't entitled to tell the other European countries not to gradually merge themselves out of existence if they were determined to do it, but we shouldn't have joined in and it was a great mistake to have done so.
If you think that's wrong then try this thought experiment: if it were physically possible to sail the country to another part of the world, and moor it perhaps just off British Columbia, or perhaps New Zealand, then do you seriously think that most of the British population would hesitate for a second before breathing a sigh of relief, and nodding in assent? Would it not make us, and the other Europeans, happier? As it is, we can't escape our geography but we can do our best to reorient the country away from Europe, and make ourselves less reliant on it and less involved in its endless, largely self-inflicted, problems.
Most Britons wish neither to be part of a political Europe, nor to do it harm. They just want nothing to do with it at all.
Also, their spite on our financial services will hit them harder than us.
Lastly, we are WTO members. We can't break the rules. That would be very very bad.
Well, as a former referee I'd be bound to point out that you can't be stopped from leaving the pitch, but you definitely can't come back on!
Daughter has kids and works from home as an HR specialist for a local Law firm. They haven't downsized yet but the signs aren't good. (She's a Tory voter and her opinion of Cameron is unrepeatable!)
The last 4 YG Tory leads: 24, 23, 16, 13
What happened after 24th April ?
Activists are being summoned to help to defend even once rock-solid local authority strongholds such as Doncaster in a sign of Labour fears that it will sustain heavy losses. With one respected analyst suggesting that the party is on course to lose 125 council seats, a worse defeat is certain to trigger fresh questions about Mr Corbyn’s leadership.
Members of Labour’s parliamentary committee last week discussed begging Mr Corbyn to stand down if the local election results pointed to a wipeout in the general election, according to one present.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/dont-use-poor-council-results-to-topple-corbyn-mps-warned-nnhh2q7ch
The fact is that idle daydreaming doesn't change the facts of history and geography. I can fully accept that many people of the Leaver mindset wish this country were a part of the New World and deeply envy their ancestors who left Europe for other shores. But we can't base a national strategy on indulging that psychosis.
Therefore, there is little point in the UK agreeing tariff free goods trade with the EU unless services are covered. However, the EU seem to be angling for massive restrictions on services but they will no doubt welcome tariff free goods trade. The UK should refuse.
Ireland is an interesting case actually. It joined the EEC, amongst other things, to make itself less dependent on its closest neighbour by reaching out to more distant lands. I merely suggest that leaving the EU ought, in the long run, to help us become less dependent on the EU itself. Given how much trouble it is, this can only be a good thing.
* a) tariffs are not a benefit, they are a cost: it's a tax.
* b) there is no such thing as a net tariff
A UK tariff is a tax on UK consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the UK consumer to the UK government
A Country X tariff is a tax on Country X consumers who purchase goods from outside. It is paid by the Country X consumer to the Country X government.
Money doesn't cross the border and there is no net flow. If one person cuts off half a leg, and another person cuts off a quarter of a leg, there isn't a flow of a quarter of a leg from one to the other. You can't net a tariff and they are not a financial benefit
To illustrate this, imagine the UK imposing a tariff of 1 trillion dollars on every pound of uranium imported. Is that a benefit of 1 trillion? No, it's a cost to the person who pays it, and that person is the Brit importing it.
They sell us beef which we could produce in the UK or from some of our old trading partners, Argentina for example, which under WTO rules attracts a high tariff whilst we export cars to them which attracts a lower tariff more than compensated for by the currency drop.
The implication being that our trade with them will be hit less hard than theirs with us. In short they'd be nuts. We have now however established that indeed they do appear to be nuts, so lets hope Dr. Fox gets on with the trade deals.
Germany has been accused by allies of Theresa May of trying to influence the General Election by undermining the Prime Minister over Brexit talks.
Allies of Mrs May believe Germany, in tandem with the EU, is embarking on a new “project fear” by repeatedly briefing against her.
Senior officials in the German government and in Brussels have openly mocked Mrs May or leaked sensitive information about private meetings in what is being seen as an attempt to undermine the Prime Minister.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/02/germany-interfering-general-election-undermine-theresa-may/
It IS a tax. However, the ability of the importer to pass this 'tax' along to the ultimate consumer depends on market conditions - that is the whole point of a tariff. It makes the imports relatively more expensive compared to domestic equivalents (if there are any). If BMW is subject to (say) a 10% tariff on imports to the UK, then you cannot assume that UK consumers will simply pay the extra 10%. They may substitute locally produced cars instead. In reality, it will be some measure of BWM absorbing some of the cost and passing some on.
So, the UK Government under WTO rules would collect billions of dollars in tariffs, which is considerably more than the total than would be paid on UK exports to the EU.
What is to stop the UK Government re-imbursing all UK companies for any tariffs levied on their exports to the EU? That way, they would not need to increase their ultimate sale price to account for the tariff.
Remember that the EU common external tariff already applies to all UK imports from non-EU countries. This could be waived after Brexit. So overall both the UK Government and the consumer could be better off overall even with WTO rules to the EU - it would just push trade to non-EU countries which is probably what we want to do anyway, especially given the relative decline of the EU. I agree that tariffs are a tax and are not desirable, but there is no point waiving tariffs on goods to and from the EU unless we get access to services. That is not an equal trade.
Perhaps May should tell Junker that he is quite correct - the EU is not a golf club. In a golf club, people are expected to treat each other with respect.
PB is becoming unreadable.