I also think the absence of policy reasons to vote for Theresa May may have been a consideration.
I also think that the experience of having pulled the fruit machine handle once with Brexit may have emboldened many voters to do so again with Jeremy Corbyn.
And I think that we're probably missing some important stuff at present.
This is tough for you because you have to admit all 17 million voters weren't all won over by xenophobic lies.
It's not tough for me at all. The referendum was won by xenophobic lies. Without the race-baiting that Leavers were entirely happy to indulge in, Leave would have lost.
That doesn't mean that all Leavers were motivated by xenophobia. There are plenty of batshit mental Leavers who think that Britain isn't presently an independent country. And there are undoubtedly some who thought that £350 million a year would be going to the NHS as a result.
Without all of this coalition of the doubly misled and the lunatic, Leave would have lost.
If you believe all this is true, why were you ever undecided on your vote on the EU ref, as you claimed to be for several months in 2015?
And what sort of Leave case could ever have persuaded you?
The EU is a deeply dysfunctional organisation. A Leave campaign that was based explicitly around a conscious uncoupling from some of the deeper integration with the EU, probably around the EEA., with a clear idea of where it was headed, would probably have won me over.
When it became apparent to me that the Leave campaign was all going to be about Union Jack boxer shorts and being nasty to foreigners, with no clear idea of what it was for, I ran for the hills.
Ah, interesting!
I mean this sincerely: that's one of the most (if not the most) constructive engagement you and I have had on this subject for a long time.
Thank you.
None of that is new.
As it is, Britain is going through a disaster of epic proportions.
What if we ended up in EEA-EFTA, May went, and the language and rhetoric changed? Say, under Hunt, Davidson or Rudd?
I also think the absence of policy reasons to vote for Theresa May may have been a consideration.
I also think that the experience of having pulled the fruit machine handle once with Brexit may have emboldened many voters to do so again with Jeremy Corbyn.
And I think that we're probably missing some important stuff at present.
This is tough for you because you have to admit all 17 million voters weren't all won over by xenophobic lies.
It's not tough for me at all. The referendum was won by xenophobic lies. Without the race-baiting that Leavers were entirely happy to indulge in, Leave would have lost.
That doesn't mean that all Leavers were motivated by xenophobia. There are plenty of batshit mental Leavers who think that Britain isn't presently an independent country. And there are undoubtedly some who thought that £350 million a year would be going to the NHS as a result.
Without all of this coalition of the doubly misled and the lunatic, Leave would have lost.
If you believe all this is true, why were you ever undecided on your vote on the EU ref, as you claimed to be for several months in 2015?
And what sort of Leave case could ever have persuaded you?
The EU is a deeply dysfunctional organisation. A Leave campaign that was based explicitly around a conscious uncoupling from some of the deeper integration with the EU, probably around the EEA., with a clear idea of where it was headed, would probably have won me over.
When it became apparent to me that the Leave campaign was all going to be about Union Jack boxer shorts and being nasty to foreigners, with no clear idea of what it was for, I ran for the hills.
Ah, interesting!
I mean this sincerely: that's one of the most (if not the most) constructive engagement you and I have had on this subject for a long time.
Thank you.
None of that is new.
As it is, Britain is going through a disaster of epic proportions.
What if we ended up in EEA-EFTA, May went, and the language and rhetoric changed? Say, under Hunt, Davidson or Rudd?
On topic, a better solution might be to make it a criminal offence to lie to pollsters.
An even better solution might be to remember that pollsters are nothing more than guesswork merchants and give their product the reliability rating it deserves.
I also think the absence of policy reasons to vote for Theresa May may have been a consideration.
I also think that the experience of having pulled the fruit machine handle once with Brexit may have emboldened many voters to do so again with Jeremy Corbyn.
And I think that we're probably missing some important stuff at present.
This is tough for you because you have to admit all 17 million voters weren't all won over by xenophobic lies.
It's not tough for me at all. The referendum was won by xenophobic lies. Without the race-baiting that Leavers were entirely happy to indulge in, Leave would have lost.
That doesn't mean that all Leavers were motivated by xenophobia. There are plenty of batshit mental Leavers who think that Britain isn't presently an independent country. And there are undoubtedly some who thought that £350 million a year would be going to the NHS as a result.
Without all of this coalition of the doubly misled and the lunatic, Leave would have lost.
If you believe all this is true, why were you ever undecided on your vote on the EU ref, as you claimed to be for several months in 2015?
And what sort of Leave case could ever have persuaded you?
The EU is a deeply dysfunctional organisation. A Leave campaign that was based explicitly around a conscious uncoupling from some of the deeper integration with the EU, probably around the EEA., with a clear idea of where it was headed, would probably have won me over.
When it became apparent to me that the Leave campaign was all going to be about Union Jack boxer shorts and being nasty to foreigners, with no clear idea of what it was for, I ran for the hills.
Ah, interesting!
I mean this sincerely: that's one of the most (if not the most) constructive engagement you and I have had on this subject for a long time.
Thank you.
None of that is new.
As it is, Britain is going through a disaster of epic proportions.
What if we ended up in EEA-EFTA, May went, and the language and rhetoric changed? Say, under Hunt, Davidson or Rudd?
Four words.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
It might. I don't rule anything out after the experiences of the last few years.
Technical consultant to the planning and development industry.
You don't feel some of the EU environmental regulations are overly burdensome and couldn't be better crafted from Whitehall?
Some of the beneficial legislation wouldn't have appeared without the EU. The Drinking Water Directive for instance and related regulations. 1989, I think.
It resulted in cleaner drinking water in most counties. There was a huge fuss but today's UK tapwater is probably at least as clean as the EU average. It wasn't then.
Until the directive, coastal resorts had piped their raw sewage a short distance offshore. Surfers came into contact with far more turds than they wished to. Water authorities were forced to treat sewage to higher standards.
Heard today of a major (ex Government) research establishment laying off staff.
This has the smell of 2008 - went away on holiday, came back to a wailing and a gnashing of teeth.
QinetiQ, while a jewel of the British defence industry, is not of great macroeconomic importance.
The big risks at the moment appear to be a fall in house prices and rising consumer debt. The difference from 2007/8 is that the banks are much better capitalised, so there should be less contagion even if those sectors have difficulties.
I also think the absence of policy reasons to vote for Theresa May may have been a consideration.
I also think that the experience of having pulled the fruit machine handle once with Brexit may have emboldened many voters to do so again with Jeremy Corbyn.
And I think that we're probably missing some important stuff at present.
This is tough for you because you have to admit all 17 million voters weren't all won over by xenophobic lies.
It's not tough for me at all. The referendum was won by xenophobic lies. Without the race-baiting that Leavers were entirely happy to indulge in, Leave would have lost.
That doesn't mean that all Leavers were motivated by xenophobia. There are plenty of batshit mental Leavers who think that Britain isn't presently an independent country. And there are undoubtedly some who thought that £350 million a year would be going to the NHS as a result.
Without all of this coalition of the doubly misled and the lunatic, Leave would have lost.
If you believe all this is true, why were you ever undecided on your vote on the EU ref, as you claimed to be for several months in 2015?
And what sort of Leave case could ever have persuaded you?
The EU is a deeply dysfunctional organisation. A Leave campaign that was based explicitly around a conscious uncoupling from some of the deeper integration with the EU, probably around the EEA., with a clear idea of where it was headed, would probably have won me over.
When it became apparent to me that the Leave campaign was all going to be about Union Jack boxer shorts and being nasty to foreigners, with no clear idea of what it was for, I ran for the hills.
Ah, interesting!
I mean this sincerely: that's one of the most (if not the most) constructive engagement you and I have had on this subject for a long time.
Thank you.
None of that is new.
As it is, Britain is going through a disaster of epic proportions.
What if we ended up in EEA-EFTA, May went, and the language and rhetoric changed? Say, under Hunt, Davidson or Rudd?
Four words.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
It might. I don't rule anything out after the experiences of the last few years.
The way in which the referendum was won means that controlling immigration is a boundary condition. That excludes EEA-EFTA.
Heard today of a major (ex Government) research establishment laying off staff.
This has the smell of 2008 - went away on holiday, came back to a wailing and a gnashing of teeth.
QinetiQ, while a jewel of the British defence industry, is not of great macroeconomic importance.
The big risks at the moment appear to be a fall in house prices and rising consumer debt. The difference from 2007/8 is that the banks are much better capitalised, so there should be less contagion even if those sectors have difficulties.
It's not QinetiQ. And I'm not claiming it is of itself significant. But it's a surprise, and I don't like bad surprises.
You do all realise that "EU citizen" is just a convenient expression? British citizens, German citizens, Polish citizens etc are all "citizens of a European Union country".
That hasn't been true since the distinct EU citizenship was introduced by the Maastricht treaty.
We didn't get a chance to vote on that, obviously.
I also think the absence of policy reasons to vote for Theresa May may have been a consideration.
I also think that the experience of having pulled the fruit machine handle once with Brexit may have emboldened many voters to do so again with Jeremy Corbyn.
And I think that we're probably missing some important stuff at present.
This is tough for you because you have to admit all 17 million voters weren't all won over by xenophobic lies.
It's not tough for me at all. The referendum was won by xenophobic lies. Without the race-baiting that Leavers were entirely happy to indulge in, Leave would have lost.
That doesn't mean that all Leavers were motivated by xenophobia. There are plenty of batshit mental Leavers who think that Britain isn't presently an independent country. And there are undoubtedly some who thought that £350 million a year would be going to the NHS as a result.
Without all of this coalition of the doubly misled and the lunatic, Leave would have lost.
If you believe all this is true, why were you ever undecided on your vote on the EU ref, as you claimed to be for several months in 2015?
And what sort of Leave case could ever have persuaded you?
The EU is a deeply dysfunctional organisation. A Leave campaign that was based explicitly around a conscious uncoupling from some of the deeper integration with the EU, probably around the EEA., with a clear idea of where it was headed, would probably have won me over.
When it became apparent to me that the Leave campaign was all going to be about Union Jack boxer shorts and being nasty to foreigners, with no clear idea of what it was for, I ran for the hills.
Ah, interesting!
I mean this sincerely: that's one of the most (if not the most) constructive engagement you and I have had on this subject for a long time.
Thank you.
None of that is new.
As it is, Britain is going through a disaster of epic proportions.
Heard today of a major (ex Government) research establishment laying off staff.
This has the smell of 2008 - went away on holiday, came back to a wailing and a gnashing of teeth.
QinetiQ, while a jewel of the British defence industry, is not of great macroeconomic importance.
The big risks at the moment appear to be a fall in house prices and rising consumer debt. The difference from 2007/8 is that the banks are much better capitalised, so there should be less contagion even if those sectors have difficulties.
My business is largely consumer facing; and entirely discretionary spending related. I've been quite bearish recently on predictions, but am having my strongest July on record. Already. By the 5th.
Beginning to think my consumer spending predictions were entirely Election related. I saw that happen in April 2015 too.
Well, he's got a very good point. Once the Tories found a magic money tree to give to the DUP it was always going to be difficult for them to then tell others 'no, no money for you.'
"There will be more in this vein, as the consequences of Brexit become more real. As people see the cost, and the meagre gains, of this massive upheaval, there will be more people who admit that they got it wrong. The question is whether that collective act of buyer’s remorse comes in time – or too late."
Well, he's got a very good point. Once the Tories found a magic money tree to give to the DUP it was always going to be difficult for them to then tell others 'no, no money for you.'
Great sound bite - excepted it was easily countered by the inconvenient fact that there are more Nurses and Teachers now than in 2010.
The way in which the referendum was won means that controlling immigration is a boundary condition. That excludes EEA-EFTA.
And if there's a rebound in political and public opinion, why would it stop just before the point at which it crosses over into thinking that remaining in the EU is the best option?
The way in which the referendum was won means that controlling immigration is a boundary condition. That excludes EEA-EFTA.
And if there's a rebound in political and public opinion, why would it stop just before the point at which it crosses over into thinking that remaining in the EU is the best option?
Largely because most people are democrats and accept the result of the referendum.
Heard today of a major (ex Government) research establishment laying off staff.
This has the smell of 2008 - went away on holiday, came back to a wailing and a gnashing of teeth.
QinetiQ, while a jewel of the British defence industry, is not of great macroeconomic importance.
The big risks at the moment appear to be a fall in house prices and rising consumer debt. The difference from 2007/8 is that the banks are much better capitalised, so there should be less contagion even if those sectors have difficulties.
It's not QinetiQ. And I'm not claiming it is of itself significant. But it's a surprise, and I don't like bad surprises.
Not QinetiQ? You've piqued my curiosity!
Growth is definitely slowing in the UK. Unfortunately, much of the growth we've had since 2002 has been poor quality, so in some sense better quality if slower growth if preferable. By poor quality I mean consumption funded by growing debt and asset sales rather than exports and investment. Sadly this is still the case!
Technical consultant to the planning and development industry.
You don't feel some of the EU environmental regulations are overly burdensome and couldn't be better crafted from Whitehall?
Some of the beneficial legislation wouldn't have appeared without the EU. The Drinking Water Directive for instance and related regulations. 1989, I think.
It resulted in cleaner drinking water in most counties. There was a huge fuss but today's UK tapwater is probably at least as clean as the EU average. It wasn't then.
Until the directive, coastal resorts had piped their raw sewage a short distance offshore. Surfers came into contact with far more turds than they wished to. Water authorities were forced to treat sewage to higher standards.
Fine - but I hardly think we will withdraw drinking water protection?
The way in which the referendum was won means that controlling immigration is a boundary condition. That excludes EEA-EFTA.
And if there's a rebound in political and public opinion, why would it stop just before the point at which it crosses over into thinking that remaining in the EU is the best option?
Largely because most people are democrats and accept the result of the referendum.
If people conclude that remaining in the EU is the best option, but feel that it would need a specific new mandate, there is an obvious course of action open to us.
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
Better than evens on Tories getting most seats would be the bet I'd go for. Doubt May will be leader though in 2022.
As an aside - I doubt the economy will bounce from Brexit. The short term risk is downside. A transitional deal would avoid that but it won't cause a bounce.
Just came from a really really downbeat economic briefing...
Do you share their assessment?
I feel gloomy about UK economy. Rising inflation, mediocre growth, Brexit challenges and uncertainty, and rates as low as they can go and a potential rise looming...
I try not to sweat the small stuff.
The issue is the entire western economy (but particularly the Anglo-Saxon ones) is an unreal fantasy propped up on cheap money.
At some point governments may try to end that & it's all going to go horribly wrong.
There's a humungous crash coming. I just don't know when
Technical consultant to the planning and development industry.
You don't feel some of the EU environmental regulations are overly burdensome and couldn't be better crafted from Whitehall?
Consultants exist because things are hard, not because they're easy. If things were easy our clients wouldn't need us.
Hahahahaha.
You've clearly never been a management consultant.
Appear to be hard might be more accurate.
Definition of a consultant - someone who borrows your watch to tell you the time.
And then walks off with your watch.
My lifetime experience of consultants was that they were usually employed by Boards that didn't have a clue how to run the business themselves. They also provided a form of inurance. If you followed the consultants' advice and things nevertheless went wrong you could always blame the consultant.
Comments
Edit to add - I think I should use President Kennedy to support my business case:
"We do these things because they are hard, not because they are easy".
Not. Going. To. Happen.
It resulted in cleaner drinking water in most counties. There was a huge fuss but today's UK tapwater is probably at least as clean as the EU average. It wasn't then.
Until the directive, coastal resorts had piped their raw sewage a short distance offshore. Surfers came into contact with far more turds than they wished to. Water authorities were forced to treat sewage to higher standards.
The big risks at the moment appear to be a fall in house prices and rising consumer debt. The difference from 2007/8 is that the banks are much better capitalised, so there should be less contagion even if those sectors have difficulties.
We didn't get a chance to vote on that, obviously.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/05/jeremy-corbyn-could-back-mandatory-reselection-labour-mps-amid/
Beginning to think my consumer spending predictions were entirely Election related. I saw that happen in April 2015 too.
NEW THREAD
Growth is definitely slowing in the UK. Unfortunately, much of the growth we've had since 2002 has been poor quality, so in some sense better quality if slower growth if preferable. By poor quality I mean consumption funded by growing debt and asset sales rather than exports and investment. Sadly this is still the case!
Unfortunately our media won't distinguish.
The issue is the entire western economy (but particularly the Anglo-Saxon ones) is an unreal fantasy propped up on cheap money.
At some point governments may try to end that & it's all going to go horribly wrong.
There's a humungous crash coming. I just don't know when
My lifetime experience of consultants was that they were usually employed by Boards that didn't have a clue how to run the business themselves. They also provided a form of inurance. If you followed the consultants' advice and things nevertheless went wrong you could always blame the consultant.