Leo Varadkar is a new kind of Taoiseach — not just because he’s a gay child of an Indian immigrant. He’s worked out that Ireland holds the upper hand in negotiations with Britain because, without Irish consent, the other 26 EU nations won’t sign off that “sufficient progress” has been made in the negotiations. Mr Varadkar said the options for solving the border issue were clear: either Britain stays in the EU customs union, or forms a new customs union with the EU, or in effect rejoins the European Free Trade Association. The Cabinet is split on all these, with hard Brexiteers ruling out all of them.
This points to the larger row now coming. Once the rest of the EU does judge that we’ve made “sufficient progress” on the initial issues, it expects us to present our ideal plan for our long-term relationship with the EU. It is this moment that Whitehall now fears. For there is no agreement at all, in a divided Cabinet or hung Parliament, on that future status. When Europe turns to Brexit Britain this autumn and says “tell us what you want”, our reply will be “we don’t know”. It turns out that handing over the money is going to be easy part.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
You have the belief that they would confiscate. But it's not what they actually said - and it's not impossible for the UK government to borrow 70bn pounds or so.
It's not £70bn or so, it's hundreds of billions. £70bn or more would be needed for water nationalisation alone, in the unlikely event that they paid full market capitalisation.
Yes - 70bn for water companies. Another 25-30bn for national grid. Rail franchises as they expire so no cost. That's it I think?
Nationalising the rail franchises as they come up isn't cost-free, of course. £40bn a year for current spending. £100bn for cancelling student loans, although the plans were so vague that maybe Corbyn made a genuine mistake on that apparent promise - he's not exactly the sharpest mind in the Commons. Royal Mail £4bn. Some massive but rather vague infrastructure investment, although quite where the capacity for that was supposed to come from was never clarified.
£40bn here, £70bn there - it soon adds up to real money.
Leo Varadkar is a new kind of Taoiseach — not just because he’s a gay child of an Indian immigrant. He’s worked out that Ireland holds the upper hand in negotiations with Britain because, without Irish consent, the other 26 EU nations won’t sign off that “sufficient progress” has been made in the negotiations. Mr Varadkar said the options for solving the border issue were clear: either Britain stays in the EU customs union, or forms a new customs union with the EU, or in effect rejoins the European Free Trade Association. The Cabinet is split on all these, with hard Brexiteers ruling out all of them.
This points to the larger row now coming. Once the rest of the EU does judge that we’ve made “sufficient progress” on the initial issues, it expects us to present our ideal plan for our long-term relationship with the EU. It is this moment that Whitehall now fears. For there is no agreement at all, in a divided Cabinet or hung Parliament, on that future status. When Europe turns to Brexit Britain this autumn and says “tell us what you want”, our reply will be “we don’t know”. It turns out that handing over the money is going to be easy part.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
You have the belief that they would confiscate. But it's not what they actually said - and it's not impossible for the UK government to borrow 70bn pounds or so.
It's not £70bn or so, it's hundreds of billions. £70bn or more would be needed for water nationalisation alone, in the unlikely event that they paid full market capitalisation.
Yes - 70bn for water companies. Another 25-30bn for national grid. Rail franchises as they expire so no cost. That's it I think?
Nationalising the rail franchises as they come up isn't cost-free, of course. £40bn a year for current spending. £100bn for cancelling student loans, although the plans were so vague that maybe Corbyn made a genuine mistake on that apparent promise - he's not exactly the sharpest mind in the Commons. Royal Mail £4bn. Some massive but rather vague infrastructure investment, although quite where the capacity for that was supposed to come from was never clarified.
£40bn here, £70bn there - it soon adds up to real money.
The rail franchises make money as well - you can't just include the current spending and ignore the revenues! Cancelling student loans wasn't in the manifesto. Royal Mail should be included.
Infrastructure is a separate issue from nationalisation but would also be paid for with borrowing.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
I don't think he's quite right on that - if our EU friends agree to what we are asking for, i.e. a comprehensive free trade agreement, the Irish border issue becomes hugely simpler. It's the EU, not the UK, which wants to impose tariffs and border checks. The logic of the EU27's position on Ireland is exactly the kind of deal we want.
The rail franchises make money as well - you can't just include the current spending and ignore the revenues! Cancelling student loans wasn't in the manifesto. Royal Mail should be included.
Infrastructure is a separate issue from nationalisation but would also be paid for with borrowing.
You're clearly much younger than me if you think nationalised industries make money!
The overall point is that the proposed increase in borrowing was absolutely massive, we are talking maybe £200bn on nationalisations and 'investment' plus £40bn a year ongoing.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
I suspect both the Tories and DUP would prefer a hard border between ROI and NI rather than customs border in the Irish Sea (which would also presumably have a negative economic impact).
The rail franchises make money as well - you can't just include the current spending and ignore the revenues! Cancelling student loans wasn't in the manifesto. Royal Mail should be included.
Infrastructure is a separate issue from nationalisation but would also be paid for with borrowing.
You're clearly much younger than me if you think nationalised industries make money!
Many of the rail franchises are state owned now. Just by foreign states.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
I don't think he's quite right on that - if our EU friends agree to what we are asking for, i.e. a comprehensive free trade agreement, the Irish border issue becomes hugely simpler. It's the EU, not the UK, which wants to impose tariffs and border checks. The logic of the EU27's position on Ireland is exactly the kind of deal we want.
If they agreed to that kind of arrangement then it would require the mythical 'frictionless' border that the Brexiteers have been positing for months. If they think this can work we need to see their detailed plans now and they need to be judged as workable by both sides, otherwise as far as the island of Ireland is concerned, there is no basis on which to discuss a future free trade agreement. The political requirements for the border constrain the design of the trade agreement and not vice versa.
Many of the rail franchises are state owned now. Just by foreign states.
Sure, but they are operating commercially. The explicit purpose of Corbynomics is to cut fares and - more importantly - pay bungs to employees in the nationalised industry. (The latter of course would rapidly become the primary goal, as the unions are not daft). You can't simultaneously cut fares, boost pay costs, and reduce efficiency whilst taking out profits.
If they agreed to that kind of arrangement then it would require the mythical 'frictionless' border that the Brexiteers have been positing for months. If they think this can work we need to see their detailed plans now and they need to be judged as workable by both sides, otherwise as far as the island of Ireland is concerned, there is no basis on which to discuss a future free trade agreement. The political requirements for the border constrain the design of the trade agreement and not vice versa.
I think you've got that the wrong way round. If Ireland were to veto a deal, they'd fall back into the hardest of hard Brexits and the worst of all possible worlds from their point of view.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
I suspect both the Tories and DUP would prefer a hard border between ROI and NI rather than customs border in the Irish Sea (which would also presumably have a negative economic impact).
Could be wrong though.
You're right, but if you were a hard Brexiteer in government faced with a choice between giving up on leaving the single market and customs union for the UK as a whole, or casting Northern Ireland adrift, which option would you chose?
If they agreed to that kind of arrangement then it would require the mythical 'frictionless' border that the Brexiteers have been positing for months. If they think this can work we need to see their detailed plans now and they need to be judged as workable by both sides, otherwise as far as the island of Ireland is concerned, there is no basis on which to discuss a future free trade agreement. The political requirements for the border constrain the design of the trade agreement and not vice versa.
I think you've got that the wrong way round. If Ireland were to veto a deal, they'd fall back into the hardest of hard Brexits and the worst of all possible worlds from their point of view.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Then: 1) pay the borrowing cost with the profits from the company you now own. 2) Return what is left over to consumers in the form of lower bills.
You can adjust between 1 and 2 as you please. The plan is simple.
'Simple' is the word, as in simpleton.
As you rightly said earlier, they actually hadn't the faintest clue how this would be financed, nor the other hundreds of billions they were saying they'd spend. The entire manifesto was complete fantasy from beginning to end, so it's reasonable to assume that what they meant (if anything) was what Corbyn and McDonnell actually believe in - which is confiscation.
The voters with private pensions will clearly see they are being ripped off if shares are swapped for dodgy bonds. If they fully compensate the shareholders the only gain to consumers would be if the new management were able to run things much more efficiently and / or the employees were paid less. If under political pressure they only fully compensate deserving shareholders (small holdings pensions etc.) then it would rapidly dissolve into farce.
Part of the reason I have moved chunks of pension assets to foreign from UK equity. If Corbyn and McDonnell want to play innumerate silly buggers I wish to be financially elsewhere.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
Leo Varadkar is a new kind of Taoiseach — not just because he’s a gay child of an Indian immigrant. He’s worked out that Ireland holds the upper hand in negotiations with Britain because, without Irish consent, the other 26 EU nations won’t sign off that “sufficient progress” has been made in the negotiations. Mr Varadkar said the options for solving the border issue were clear: either Britain stays in the EU customs union, or forms a new customs union with the EU, or in effect rejoins the European Free Trade Association. The Cabinet is split on all these, with hard Brexiteers ruling out all of them.
This points to the larger row now coming. Once the rest of the EU does judge that we’ve made “sufficient progress” on the initial issues, it expects us to present our ideal plan for our long-term relationship with the EU. It is this moment that Whitehall now fears. For there is no agreement at all, in a divided Cabinet or hung Parliament, on that future status. When Europe turns to Brexit Britain this autumn and says “tell us what you want”, our reply will be “we don’t know”. It turns out that handing over the money is going to be easy part.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
The reason to have a frictionless border is almost nothing to do with Economics - it's about not creating a target for a resurgent IRA (who haven't gone away, they've just branched out in to more profitable enterprises I'm told). Border checkpoints are the issue.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
That would be completely mad, because progress on the Irish border is entirely bound up with trade talks. They are essentially the same issue.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
That would be completely mad, because progress on the Irish border is entirely bound up with trade talks. They are essentially the same issue.
This whole charade of "sufficient progress" is really just willy waving by the EU, as anything agreed to make "sufficient progress" is anyway going to be subject to the final outcome of any trade talks.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
That would be completely mad, because progress on the Irish border is entirely bound up with trade talks. They are essentially the same issue.
This whole charade of "sufficient progress" is really just willy waving by the EU, as anything agreed to make "sufficient progress" is anyway going to be subject to the final outcome of any trade talks.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
That would be completely mad, because progress on the Irish border is entirely bound up with trade talks. They are essentially the same issue.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
Not really. It's up to the EU27. The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. It's the EU27 which seems to want something else, except when it comes to the Irish border, where they seem to be insisting on exactly that. Their position makes no sense (not that that is any consolation to us, admittedly).
Leo Varadkar is a new kind of Taoiseach — not just because he’s a gay child of an Indian immigrant. He’s worked out that Ireland holds the upper hand in negotiations with Britain because, without Irish consent, the other 26 EU nations won’t sign off that “sufficient progress” has been made in the negotiations. Mr Varadkar said the options for solving the border issue were clear: either Britain stays in the EU customs union, or forms a new customs union with the EU, or in effect rejoins the European Free Trade Association. The Cabinet is split on all these, with hard Brexiteers ruling out all of them.
This points to the larger row now coming. Once the rest of the EU does judge that we’ve made “sufficient progress” on the initial issues, it expects us to present our ideal plan for our long-term relationship with the EU. It is this moment that Whitehall now fears. For there is no agreement at all, in a divided Cabinet or hung Parliament, on that future status. When Europe turns to Brexit Britain this autumn and says “tell us what you want”, our reply will be “we don’t know”. It turns out that handing over the money is going to be easy part.
It is a good article. I think it sums up the current situation rather well.
If the EU called our bluff on 'no deal', either the UK would fold immediately, or we'd go through with it and see the UK ripped apart in short order.
Well, the suggestion was that Ireland would veto the deal.
At this point the suggestion is merely that Ireland could veto the start of trade talks on the basis that 'sufficient progress' on the border had not been made.
That would be completely mad, because progress on the Irish border is entirely bound up with trade talks. They are essentially the same issue.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
The problem here is that there are assumptions being made based on what have been purely 'political' comments, not real information from the negotiation. If we reach (or aim to reach) a trade agreement which relies on harmonisation of most industrial and trade standards, based on ISO recognition, then the Single Market issue is not particularly significant for NI. If we negotiate an extension to the Customs Union through transition, then the TIR system should be ready by 2022, allowing large shipments, trucks etc to register customs movements in seconds. For individuals and travel across the border, the issue will be where the hard border lies - and that will almost certainly be at the water. ROI isn't part of Schengen, you cannot travel to the island of Ireland from Mainland Britain or anywhere else without identification (UK drivers licence currently suffices I believe). Retaining the CTA, which existed before EU membership, should not be difficult to administer.
None of this stuff is insurmountable, and some solutions have already been proposed to the Select committee I understand, which I'm sure the EU negotiators are watching more closely than the noises off.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
Not really. It's up to the EU27. The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. It's the EU27 which seems to want something else, except when it comes to the Irish border, where they seem to be insisting on exactly that. Their position makes no sense (not that that is any consolation to us, admittedly).
You're firmly in the camp that hasn't yet comprehended the realities that Osborne has set out very clearly today.
Then: 1) pay the borrowing cost with the profits from the company you now own. 2) Return what is left over to consumers in the form of lower bills.
You can adjust between 1 and 2 as you please. The plan is simple.
'Simple' is the word, as in simpleton.
As you rightly said earlier, they actually hadn't the faintest clue how this would be financed, nor the other hundreds of billions they were saying they'd spend. The entire manifesto was complete fantasy from beginning to end, so it's reasonable to assume that what they meant (if anything) was what Corbyn and McDonnell actually believe in - which is confiscation.
The voters with private pensions will clearly see they are being ripped off if shares are swapped for dodgy bonds. If they fully compensate the shareholders the only gain to consumers would be if the new management were able to run things much more efficiently and / or the employees were paid less. If under political pressure they only fully compensate deserving shareholders (small holdings pensions etc.) then it would rapidly dissolve into farce.
Part of the reason I have moved chunks of pension assets to foreign from UK equity. If Corbyn and McDonnell want to play innumerate silly buggers I wish to be financially elsewhere.
And if the Tories flatline the economy once more, well, it's win/win. Three wins if the Brexiteers crash sterling again.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
Not really. It's up to the EU27. The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. It's the EU27 which seems to want something else, except when it comes to the Irish border, where they seem to be insisting on exactly that. Their position makes no sense (not that that is any consolation to us, admittedly).
You're firmly in the camp that hasn't yet comprehended the realities that Osborne has set out very clearly today.
Poppycock. Whilst I'm a great admirer of Osborne (and I agree that that article is very good on a number of points), on the specific point about Ireland he's wrong, for the reasons I've laid out. Ireland is our best ally in the quest to get a good deal with the EU27, and the Irish border problem is a strong argument in our favour, given the EU's stated position on it.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
Not really. It's up to the EU27. The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. It's the EU27 which seems to want something else, except when it comes to the Irish border, where they seem to be insisting on exactly that. Their position makes no sense (not that that is any consolation to us, admittedly).
You're firmly in the camp that hasn't yet comprehended the realities that Osborne has set out very clearly today.
Poppycock. Whilst I'm a great admirer of Osborne (and I agree that that article is very good on a number of points), on the specific point about Ireland he's wrong, for the reasons I've laid out. Ireland is our best ally in the quest to get a good deal with the EU27.
Ireland is not on our side. Ireland is our worst nightmare in these negotiations.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. ).
The UK might want those things but it's whether we're willing to pay the price the EU set (not just in cash) to have them.
Which leads back to the developing schism within the Brexit camp. If they are the same issue then we need a customs union and need to stay in the single market. If the Brexiteers don't want that, they need to accept that there will be a differentiated approach across the territory of the United Kingdom.
The UK has made it abundantly clear that it wants zero tariffs and as hassle-free customs formalities as possible. ).
The UK might want those things but it's whether we're willing to pay the price the EU set (not just in cash) to have them.
The EU has to be careful that it doesn't cut off its nose to spite its face a little. If it fails to reach agreement with the UK that will show a very poor face to the rest of the world, the negotiations would be seen as a failure. That's not good for the image of the EU.
So it can push hard, and will, to get as much as possible - but it cannot afford to get that judgement wrong about how far it can push. While the UK has a great deal to lose from a poor deal (about 3% GDP was the original forecast by PWC, growth then to target, 2030 to return to projected line), the EU has a great deal to lost too.
Let's not argue about who trolled who. This is meant to be a happy website.
As an aside, I'm reading The Wonder Book of Aircraft (from 1919), which is rather good. It's also got a small amount on the mechanics of flight, which I've just realised can apply in reverse to F1 quite nicely.
Unless you are Mark Webber in the Le Mans 24 hour race, when the mechanics memorably forgot to apply the aerodynamic principles in reverse.
That was an epic crash, and Webber was very a lucky man to walk away from it.
Indeed, racing cars and planes use exactly the same technology, it's just that cars use it to create downforce and planes to create upforce Engineers often transfer between the two industries.
Leo Varadkar is a new kind of Taoiseach — not just because he’s a gay child of an Indian immigrant. He’s worked out that Ireland holds the upper hand in negotiations with Britain because, without Irish consent, the other 26 EU nations won’t sign off that “sufficient progress” has been made in the negotiations. Mr Varadkar said the options for solving the border issue were clear: either Britain stays in the EU customs union, or forms a new customs union with the EU, or in effect rejoins the European Free Trade Association. The Cabinet is split on all these, with hard Brexiteers ruling out all of them.
This points to the larger row now coming. Once the rest of the EU does judge that we’ve made “sufficient progress” on the initial issues, it expects us to present our ideal plan for our long-term relationship with the EU. It is this moment that Whitehall now fears. For there is no agreement at all, in a divided Cabinet or hung Parliament, on that future status. When Europe turns to Brexit Britain this autumn and says “tell us what you want”, our reply will be “we don’t know”. It turns out that handing over the money is going to be easy part.
The Irish border issue is really tricky. Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
I think this issue is hugely overdone, so long as we're relaxed about the continuation of the CTA. Switzerland, for example, is not a member of the EEA and doesn't have a "hard" border with the EU.
But if that line doesn't hold, then the only way the hard Brexiteers can keep the dream alive is to concede to a customs border in the Irish sea. This is the remorseless logic that risks leaving the DUP completely isolated.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
I don't think he's quite right on that - if our EU friends agree to what we are asking for, i.e. a comprehensive free trade agreement, the Irish border issue becomes hugely simpler. It's the EU, not the UK, which wants to impose tariffs and border checks. The logic of the EU27's position on Ireland is exactly the kind of deal we want.
The EU wants a comprehensive FTA with the UK.
The biggest issues are (1) the dispute resolution mechanism, (2) regulatory equivalence in services. Neither of these impact the border in Ireland.
Let's not argue about who trolled who. This is meant to be a happy website.
As an aside, I'm reading The Wonder Book of Aircraft (from 1919), which is rather good. It's also got a small amount on the mechanics of flight, which I've just realised can apply in reverse to F1 quite nicely.
Unless you are Mark Webber in the Le Mans 24 hour race, when the mechanics memorably forgot to apply the aerodynamic principles in reverse.
That was an epic crash, and Webber was very a lucky man to walk away from it.
Indeed, racing cars and planes use exactly the same technology, it's just that cars use it to create downforce and planes to create upforce Engineers often transfer between the two industries.
There is a lot of pop sci on the internet as to whether a F1 car could drive on the ceiling. Answer seems to be yes if you make some minor mods to stop all the oil falling out.
I have seen a caterham super 7 doing the wall of death at a french fun fair. That was cool,
Let's not argue about who trolled who. This is meant to be a happy website.
As an aside, I'm reading The Wonder Book of Aircraft (from 1919), which is rather good. It's also got a small amount on the mechanics of flight, which I've just realised can apply in reverse to F1 quite nicely.
Unless you are Mark Webber in the Le Mans 24 hour race, when the mechanics memorably forgot to apply the aerodynamic principles in reverse.
That was an epic crash, and Webber was very a lucky man to walk away from it.
Indeed, racing cars and planes use exactly the same technology, it's just that cars use it to create downforce and planes to create upforce Engineers often transfer between the two industries.
There is a lot of pop sci on the internet as to whether a F1 car could drive on the ceiling. Answer seems to be yes if you make some minor mods to stop all the oil falling out.
I have seen a caterham super 7 doing the wall of death at a french fun fair. That was cool,
That's cool. Caterham 7 is a great car, it's basically a go-kart with number plates, about as raw a driving experience as it's possible to get.
Yes an F1 car will drive on the ceiling at any speed over c.150km/h, at which point the downforce generated exceeds its own weight. Adam Savage from Mythbusters said that it was his #1 myth they never got to do, as they couldn't find someone to lend them an F1 car and didn't have the budget to build the track required! They needed to take into account things like how a slightly curved roadway as it inverts would affect airflow under the car - answer, massively!
Not quite the same (using centripetal force rather then downforce) but Hot Wheels in the US have built full size versions of their toy car track that included loops. ttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jVS4ts1A-ao
Comments
Perhaps in the end we will just have a hard border between ROI and Northern Ireland and look for ways to mitigate the economic and political impact.
£40bn here, £70bn there - it soon adds up to real money.
As Osborne says, the Irish have the upper hand and this is something not many on the UK side have woken up to.
Royal Mail should be included.
Infrastructure is a separate issue from nationalisation but would also be paid for with borrowing.
The overall point is that the proposed increase in borrowing was absolutely massive, we are talking maybe £200bn on nationalisations and 'investment' plus £40bn a year ongoing.
Could be wrong though.
What Corbyn and McDonnell don't seem to have grasped is that there is no such thing as government borrowing - it's simply deferred taxation.
IFS figures: £3k on average, £6k for the median-earning plan2 graduate.
Tory theft.
Nothing is agreed till everything is.
If we negotiate an extension to the Customs Union through transition, then the TIR system should be ready by 2022, allowing large shipments, trucks etc to register customs movements in seconds.
For individuals and travel across the border, the issue will be where the hard border lies - and that will almost certainly be at the water. ROI isn't part of Schengen, you cannot travel to the island of Ireland from Mainland Britain or anywhere else without identification (UK drivers licence currently suffices I believe). Retaining the CTA, which existed before EU membership, should not be difficult to administer.
None of this stuff is insurmountable, and some solutions have already been proposed to the Select committee I understand, which I'm sure the EU negotiators are watching more closely than the noises off.
They shot themselves in the foot there, imo.
The UK might want those things but it's whether we're willing to pay the price the EU set (not just in cash) to have them.
So it can push hard, and will, to get as much as possible - but it cannot afford to get that judgement wrong about how far it can push. While the UK has a great deal to lose from a poor deal (about 3% GDP was the original forecast by PWC, growth then to target, 2030 to return to projected line), the EU has a great deal to lost too.
Indeed, racing cars and planes use exactly the same technology, it's just that cars use it to create downforce and planes to create upforce
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40853378
The biggest issues are (1) the dispute resolution mechanism, (2) regulatory equivalence in services. Neither of these impact the border in Ireland.
I have seen a caterham super 7 doing the wall of death at a french fun fair. That was cool,
Yes an F1 car will drive on the ceiling at any speed over c.150km/h, at which point the downforce generated exceeds its own weight. Adam Savage from Mythbusters said that it was his #1 myth they never got to do, as they couldn't find someone to lend them an F1 car and didn't have the budget to build the track required! They needed to take into account things like how a slightly curved roadway as it inverts would affect airflow under the car - answer, massively!
Not quite the same (using centripetal force rather then downforce) but Hot Wheels in the US have built full size versions of their toy car track that included loops.
ttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jVS4ts1A-ao