We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
Whether it's good or not - it was a clear motivating factor in the referendum vote. FOM is not popular - it's misunderstood perhaps but not popular.
Ideally, UK citizens would have the right to go wherever they wanted whereas no such reciprocal right would accrue to citizens of other countries.
As that's not going to happen, whatever you allow in one of those directions, you must concede in the other.
European leaders should perhaps be worried more than they seem to be by what happens when the UK is no longer available as a place where young unskilled workers can easily get jobs. If they can't work here and they can't work over there, where will they work?
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Indeed, I have seen no reason to change my portfolio since my pre-Brexit hedge rebalance.
Meagre consolation; you have your bathrooms, I dipped my toe into the 2015s.
I think Nigel will find fault with whatever outcome the government manages to secure, even if it doesn't secure anything at all. Why wouldn't he? Nigel's position is to destroy the Tory party and replace it with himself. With whipped-out feelings of betrayal and disappointment behind him, he'll make easy meat of Theresa's already crippled Tory party. Theresa should be very afraid.
We now know most former ukip voters came from labour not the conservatives. Corbyn should be worried if nige makes a comeback.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
Whether it's good or not - it was a clear motivating factor in the referendum vote. FOM is not popular - it's misunderstood perhaps but not popular.
Hoondootedly. I am always reluctant to ascribe a motive to why people voted Leave, but I don't doubt that a significant element was anti-foreigner/immigration.
You must be the only one on here who doesn't ascribe motives for why people vote the way they do. I believe there has been some polling on the matter.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
(...)
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Congratulations. I'm guessing, though, that you are not entirely characteristic of the wider UK population.
I'm roughly as characteristic as Mr. Smithson, who imagines that because "£1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef", "We are all a lot poorer". The royal "we" perhaps.
Northern Ireland was always going to have some "slightly different" arrangements due to its unique history post Brexit.
You need to consider the counterfactual if we'd never joined the EEC in the seventies - a workround fudge would have been found for it in time with Ireland in that scenario too.
Having agreed to 'slightly different' arrangements for Northern Ireland, how do you argue against demands for 'slightly different' arrangements for Scotland?
Not even remotely comparable situations in terms of history, plus Scotland doesn't have a a land border with the EU
It has an elected government that doesn't want to leave the single market, and a larger democratic mandate for Remain from the referendum. Once the principle is established that different arrangements are possible, Scotland would have every right to demand a seat at the table.
in order not to make the classic Leaver mistake of saying, usually in the same breath: "this is what people voted for" together with "there was no XXX option on the ballot paper, they just voted to leave; the rest is up to the government."
I'm roughly as characteristic as Mr. Smithson, who imagines that because "£1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef", "We are all a lot poorer". The royal "we" perhaps.
Anyone who buys anything originally priced in Euros is paying more for it.
Seen Chapman's output since this thread went up this morning? If it was me I'd stick up a new thread double quick and pretend this one never happened. Perhaps something on the merits of the various rival electoral systems?
Changing the subject slightly, fascinating to hear Trump and May's differing perspectives on violence and the "extreme" Right.
The statues issue is hugely culturally symbolic in the southern United States and I get that - we are able to have statues of Charles I and Oliver Cromwell in London but then our Civil War was rather different to the American experience and occurred two centuries earlier.
We now seem to have a new phrase in the political vocabulary - "moral equivalence". It's an interesting term and like all good buzzwords can mean whatever you want it to mean.
May's comments about far Right groupings and our response to them were valid to a point - if someone (and it doesn't matter where they are on the spectrum) advocates the subversion of the democratic system and its overthrow through violence, all who purport to be supporters of democracy should stand four square in condemnation.
When the BNP were active, I heard Conservative (as well as Labour and Lib Dem) supporters and activists condemn them and even though I'm not a Conservative, I stand four square behind any Conservative (or indeed anyone) defending democracy against those advocating violence and subversion whether politically, racially or religiously-motivated.
Fascists (and indeed Marxists) despise democracy and for them it's the biggest obstacle to overcome - as they can't rule with the consent of the majority through the ballot box they are forced to use intimidation and violence to advance politically and that has to be resisted at all levels and especially within communities.
So May is right but I think Trump is also right - when the language of debate turns from words to violence, no one side can claim the higher moral ground. Using violence to defend democracy cannot be justified - there is a rule of law and those who are sworn to uphold that law alone have the privilege to defend democracy via force and must only do so within the constraints of that rule of law. Driving a car at a crowd of people is palpably wrong but so is beating up journalists - it's not a question of "moral equivalence", both are acts of violent criminality pure and simple and both need to be dealt with by and within the law of the land.
If Kessler or Cantwell came to London to debate, I'd be the first to defend their right to be heard as long as they didn't use that platform to incite violence or hatred which is against the law of the United Kingdom. They can argue their political case and have a right to do so just as those of us who are opposed to their thinking have a right to argue against them.
I'm roughly as characteristic as Mr. Smithson, who imagines that because "£1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef", "We are all a lot poorer". The royal "we" perhaps.
Anyone who buys anything originally priced in Euros is paying more for it.
That's a lot of people...
If they've got a tracker mortgage, they're paying less for it.
I'm roughly as characteristic as Mr. Smithson, who imagines that because "£1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef", "We are all a lot poorer". The royal "we" perhaps.
Quite. This is similar who pushed EU membership because of the elimination of roaming charges - what about all those who can't afford regular holidays?
I think Nigel will find fault with whatever outcome the government manages to secure, even if it doesn't secure anything at all. Why wouldn't he? Nigel's position is to destroy the Tory party and replace it with himself. With whipped-out feelings of betrayal and disappointment behind him, he'll make easy meat of Theresa's already crippled Tory party. Theresa should be very afraid.
We now know most former ukip voters came from labour not the conservatives. Corbyn should be worried if nige makes a comeback.
But that was when Theresa was dancing to Nigel's tune and acting as if he were her patron. If Nigel decides to turn upon his adopted daughter, as I suspect he will, then plenty of Tories will be happy to take his side (Tories prefer winners). This could get bloody.
To give her credit of sorts, May tried to get the ball rolling on this but her proposals weren't well received. The facts, according to that well known Lefty magazine The Lancet, tell a very different story.
It's not just about care home places but managing the care of elderly people at home and recognising how, for example, giving family members paid time off work to care and support elderly relatives might be the new norm for inter-generational workplaces.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
I think that all countries, not just us, should have full control of their own borders.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
No true, fair point. But I've put my future view forward at least.
When the BNP were active, I heard Conservative (as well as Labour and Lib Dem) supporters and activists condemn them and even though I'm not a Conservative, I stand four square behind any Conservative (or indeed anyone) defending democracy against those advocating violence and subversion whether politically, racially or religiously-motivated.
Did the BNP actually advocate violence? I wasn't aware that they did. I thought they just voiced opinions that made people want to do violence to them; like walking through a crowd of Millwall supporters wearing a Sheffield United scarf or whatever.
There were fellow travellers such as Combat 18 who certainly wanted a ruck. But IIRC they, and various "firms" of football thugs, had many members in common exactly because the point of gathering anywhere was the prospect of a ruck. The casus rucki was a mere detail.
I recall film of anti-BNP and anti-NF demonstrators shouting "smash the National Front". If you actually wanted to defeat the NF politically I am not sure that assembling a side for a ruck is the best way. This leads me to suppose that the anti-NF bodies existed because they too wanted a ruck.
Probably this should not be illegal. If mobs of consenting adult yobboes want to gather and fight, we should be taxing and regulating it, as some say we should do with drugs. The fights would at least make good TV and provide betting opportunities.
When the BNP were active, I heard Conservative (as well as Labour and Lib Dem) supporters and activists condemn them and even though I'm not a Conservative, I stand four square behind any Conservative (or indeed anyone) defending democracy against those advocating violence and subversion whether politically, racially or religiously-motivated.
Did the BNP actually advocate violence? I wasn't aware that they did. I thought they just voiced opinions that made people want to do violence to them; like walking through a crowd of Millwall supporters wearing a Sheffield United scarf or whatever.
There were fellow travellers such as Combat 18 who certainly wanted a ruck. But IIRC they, and various "firms" of football thugs, had many members in common exactly because the point of gathering anywhere was the prospect of a ruck. The casus rucki was a mere detail.
I recall film of anti-BNP and anti-NF demonstrators shouting "smash the National Front". If you actually wanted to defeat the NF politically I am not sure that assembling a side for a ruck is the best way. This leads me to suppose that the anti-NF bodies existed because they too wanted a ruck.
Probably this should not be illegal. If mobs of consenting adult yobboes want to gather and fight, we should be taxing and regulating it, as some say we should do with drugs. The fights would at least make good TV and provide betting opportunities.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
No true, fair point. But I've put my future view forward at least.
I appreciate that. But unfortunately the EU isn't going to form its view of how Britain is going to proceed from posters on blogs. It is reasonably interpreting the mood music from Britain at present as one of surly insularity.
I agree with you that the EU should be looking further ahead and that Britain failing to do so is no excuse for it not doing so either. Psychologically, however, it is easy to see why they might fall back on an entirely transactional approach to the current negotiations at a time when Britain is apparently doing the same.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
I think that all countries, not just us, should have full control of their own borders.
A strict quota of Gibraltarians allowed residency in the UK?
When the BNP were active, I heard Conservative (as well as Labour and Lib Dem) supporters and activists condemn them and even though I'm not a Conservative, I stand four square behind any Conservative (or indeed anyone) defending democracy against those advocating violence and subversion whether politically, racially or religiously-motivated.
Did the BNP actually advocate violence? I wasn't aware that they did. I thought they just voiced opinions that made people want to do violence to them; like walking through a crowd of Millwall supporters wearing a Sheffield United scarf or whatever.
There were fellow travellers such as Combat 18 who certainly wanted a ruck. But IIRC they, and various "firms" of football thugs, had many members in common exactly because the point of gathering anywhere was the prospect of a ruck. The casus rucki was a mere detail.
I recall film of anti-BNP and anti-NF demonstrators shouting "smash the National Front". If you actually wanted to defeat the NF politically I am not sure that assembling a side for a ruck is the best way. This leads me to suppose that the anti-NF bodies existed because they too wanted a ruck.
Probably this should not be illegal. If mobs of consenting adult yobboes want to gather and fight, we should be taxing and regulating it, as some say we should do with drugs. The fights would at least make good TV and provide betting opportunities.
Can we please have the 'Like' button back for comments like this one? ^^^
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Bizarre response. You think inhibiting the movement of people, UK citizens, is a good thing?
I think that all countries, not just us, should have full control of their own borders.
A strict quota of Gibraltarians allowed residency in the UK?
Eh? What are you dribbling about? We're British with full British passports.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Hate to say it and I know I sound flouncy but I'm with you. I'd be interested to see the number of regular contributors compared to a couple of years ago.
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
When I said yesterday that Mr. Chapman was perhaps not doing himself any favours given he's out of a job, and our host corrected to me to say that he was in fact not out of a job, I now wonder if our host spoke too soon.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Did the BNP actually advocate violence? I wasn't aware that they did. I thought they just voiced opinions that made people want to do violence to them; like walking through a crowd of Millwall supporters wearing a Sheffield United scarf or whatever.
I didn't say the BNP themselves advocated violence and Nick Griffin was always trying to stay on the lawful side of the line.
There were, and I was living in SE London at the time, any number of the "fellow travellers" for whom the journey from democratic discourse to "putting the boot in" was quite short.
In the end, it was and is about provocation - I would contend a number of those who frequent social media are there less to debate and more to provoke. It is an invitation to and has created a generation of provocateurs who write to elicit a response rather than to discourse.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
And what makes you think that Paris, Berlin, etc. aren't generally supportive of how the EU is handling this? No credit given for wishful thinking, I'm afraid.
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
When I said yesterday that Mr. Chapman was perhaps not doing himself any favours given he's out of a job, and our host corrected to me to say that he was in fact not out of a job, I now wonder if our host spoke too soon.
I think JC is going to exit Bell Pottinger rather sooner than DD exits the cabinet.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
And what makes you think that Paris, Berlin, etc. aren't generally supportive of how the EU is handling this? No credit given for wishful thinking, I'm afraid.
One of the Brexit delusions is that everyone else must secretly feel the same way they do about the EU but is simply too cowed to be able to say so. Their expectation was that as soon as we pulled back the curtain, everyone would suddenly be free to express their true disdain.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
V strange response David, if I may say. Brexit is happening as we speak. Papers coming out, one today. All hugely important to us all and will shape our society for the next generation and beyond.
Now of course there will be some fallback to pre-EURef rhetoric, we are all guilty of that, but we are in a fast-moving, dynamic, unpredictable political environment right now. Not the time to leave PB.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
every day is now carpy diem
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
Blimmin heck imagine the inflationary pressures that will arise should they fuck off back home. Or be thrown out. Or not be replaced when they have had their fun living in the UK.
I think wage inflation is not much affected by high employment levels in the globalised world, and not just in the UK. The jobs will either disappear to automation or be exported.
A self-making flat white extra hot?
You jest, but the historical link between high employment and wage inflation is at best much weaker than previously, and perhaps history.
I appreciate that. It comes down, however, to NAIRU (as famously imprecise as the Laffer curve), and what Mr Greenspan termed, the pool of available workers.
I thought econometrics had a good handle on NAIRU?
It changes from time to time and I think there are still some who dispute it.
That's a fairer way of putting it - it definitely changes with supply side reform(about 4% at the moment I believe).
Laffer is in a different league (my guess is around 46-49%) of precision...
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
every day is now carpy diem
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
The only tragedy being small children in Nantes, or Nantwich, could have told them that.
Well I'm very encouraged by the things we've heard from the government yesterday and today - It all sounds very sensible and (with negotiation) completely workable.
The fact the extremists on both sides (several of them from the Remain side are on here) are seeing nothing but problems and negativity tells me that the government is definitely on the right track.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
(...)
Which may well be possible.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
We are all a lot poorer. £1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef - now it's approaching parity.
My $400k of shares went from being worth £274k, at $1.46 to the £ on 22/6/16, to being worth £317k, at £1.26 to the £ a year later. So I'm better off by £43k just there.
Brexit bought me two completely refitted C P Hart bathrooms.
Congratulations. I'm guessing, though, that you are not entirely characteristic of the wider UK population.
I'm roughly as characteristic as Mr. Smithson, who imagines that because "£1 bought 1.35 euros before EURef", "We are all a lot poorer". The royal "we" perhaps.
I suspect the set of those whose overseas asset gains outweigh their relative currency impoverishment is a pretty small proportion of the population. Since the UK became a net overseas debtor rather than creditor (something which provided some cushion to previous devaluations), it's also true of the economy as a whole.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Nope, it's a bad thing. You are taking away rights. It might be a necessary trade-off, but that is different and not what you asked.
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
It's apparently difficult and complicated. Not what was advertised...
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
V strange response David, if I may say. Brexit is happening as we speak. Papers coming out, one today. All hugely important to us all and will shape our society for the next generation and beyond.
Now of course there will be some fallback to pre-EURef rhetoric, we are all guilty of that, but we are in a fast-moving, dynamic, unpredictable political environment right now. Not the time to leave PB.
Au contraire
3 years of the Indy ref was more open minded than today
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Nope, it's a bad thing. You are taking away rights. It might be a necessary trade-off, but that is different and not what you asked.
Rights change all the time you gain some you lose some
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
No true, fair point. But I've put my future view forward at least.
I appreciate that. But unfortunately the EU isn't going to form its view of how Britain is going to proceed from posters on blogs. It is reasonably interpreting the mood music from Britain at present as one of surly insularity.
I agree with you that the EU should be looking further ahead and that Britain failing to do so is no excuse for it not doing so either. Psychologically, however, it is easy to see why they might fall back on an entirely transactional approach to the current negotiations at a time when Britain is apparently doing the same.
In fairness, I think even Farage in his "you're not laughing now" speech post June 23rd in the European Parliament said something along the lines of "being friends, trading etc". And I think HMG's "deep and special relationship" is perfectly reasonable aim even if it needs fleshing out, clearly.
However, I take your point, and I too don't really see the EU as "in the right headspace", to actually take that at face value at present. They are still collectively sore at having been rebuffed. Understandable sure, but not smart long term. It's in their and our interests to have a Canada to their USA, rather than a Japan to their China if I may strain analogies (no I am not claiming the EU is like China from a human rights or democracy standpoint, just trying to find general strained geopolitical equivalents).
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
And what makes you think that Paris, Berlin, etc. aren't generally supportive of how the EU is handling this? No credit given for wishful thinking, I'm afraid.
Canada to the USA? NZ to Australia? That sort of thing. Friendly, cooperative, but separate.
Have you noticed much being said along those lines? The average Leaver is mostly being heard saying "thank goodness we have left the shackles of that evil empire". I haven't heard any talk about neighbourliness.
We can be happy neighbours with France, Germany Spain, etc. It is those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels that we want to divorce ourselves from.
An uncharacteristically silly post from you. Do you think "those arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels" are going to go away just because you wish them to? And if not, what kind of relationship do you want Britain to have with the EU?
If not friendly and co-operative, what do you have in mind?
OK, so I was being deliberately OTT. However, I do believe that it is our relationships with our individual neighbours and partners that count, and that is the way to get enough of them on-side to change minds in Brussels towards a sensible, win-win position.
Now, tell me how you translate that into a communications strategy that's going to win hearts and minds with the negotiators on the other side of the table, who by an unhappy coincidence are being led by "arrogant unelected feckers overlording it in Brussels". I'm not sure that "we hate you, but don't worry we're going to try to bypass you to get the deal we want" is really going to produce the optimal result.
I think bypassing them is the only way to get a deal that all 28 want. The EU negotiators need to negotiate on behalf of the other 27, not for their own self importance. Pressure from Paris, Berlin, etc. is probably the only way to get them to see sense.
And what makes you think that Paris, Berlin, etc. aren't generally supportive of how the EU is handling this? No credit given for wishful thinking, I'm afraid.
Our government should be ascertaining which areas each of the 27 are most concerned about, and then magnifying those concerns so that they then feel obliged to persuade the EU negotiators to change tack. 27 such approaches, and the EU position will become much more agreeable to the UK, and a sensible deal can be done.
Yes, this is to an extent hope exceeding expectation. However, the alternative would be no deal, and other than Verhofstadt willy-waving for a couple of days, that would be to the detriment of all of europe.
Mr. Monkeys, social media echo chambers are also a significant factor. It's a little like a light version of the Peloponnesian War, where those who considered matters were seen as cowards of faint heart and those who charged in violently were seen as brave.
The fact that we do have serious disagreements on PB is a very healthy sign.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
V strange response David, if I may say. Brexit is happening as we speak. Papers coming out, one today. All hugely important to us all and will shape our society for the next generation and beyond.
Now of course there will be some fallback to pre-EURef rhetoric, we are all guilty of that, but we are in a fast-moving, dynamic, unpredictable political environment right now. Not the time to leave PB.
Au contraire
3 years of the Indy ref was more open minded than today
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
every day is now carpy diem
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
I rather doubt that
If you think a guy like DavidL is in it for the laughs there is no hope for you
I'd say rather it's the serious people who are drifting off since
1. there's more to life than Brexit 2. any mature person can see the spin is part of the negotiations so should be taken with a large pinch of salt and safely passed over 3. a site requires to be fresh and interesting to keep its reputation and attract new bloggers were 'about as free flowing as a WW1 trench system
I may go back to composing limericks to liven things up
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
It's apparently difficult and complicated. Not what was advertised...
While it was being "advertised" you had every opportunity to go out and do something about it: canvassing and manning phone banks were not illegal activities, and might have made more of a difference than sitting and playing with your dingaling on the internet. I feel mildly guilty that all I did for Remain was to cast my vote for it. I wouldn't die of surprise to learn that you didn't even do that. And if internet dingalinging was ineffective then, it's sure as feck even less effective now.
Are we really going to have another 18 months of this? It is beyond tedious. This site used to be my relaxation and an education but this is just boring and repetitive.
Time for a break I think.
Yes
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
This is what you both voted for.
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
chortle
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
every day is now carpy diem
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
Not really. Campaigning for it was fun, now we have won it's a case of waiting and seeing what the government come up with. The people who lost and can't take it have taken upon themselves to come up with dozens of different ways to make it look like they didn't really lose, fair enough if it helps but it is painful to watch. Hence Leavers seem to leave PB!
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no one on this earth suggesting that the Common Travel Area arrangement needs to be changed at all, so why is there a need for discussions about how it should be 'protected'? It pre-dates the EU by many decades anyway.
The EU should focus on the real point, which is blindingly obvious: the Irish border issue is inseparable from the UK/EU trade deal and customs deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeing it in black and white and then we can move swiftly on to discussing trade, including technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copy of Adrian Harper with your comedic hagiographies about the work of the Brexit department.
If we are to leave the EU without an agreement and all the economic harm that will entail over a sustained period of time, then the only hope of political survival the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Nope, it's a bad thing. You are taking away rights. It might be a necessary trade-off, but that is different and not what you asked.
Rights change all the time you gain some you lose some
You do, but that doesn't make it OK. Of course, you'll be fine as you have an Irish passport or at least the opportunity to acquire one. So that's good news, at least.
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
I believe we touched on it in the context of the potential inflationary pressure once the foreigners have been sent home.
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
It's apparently difficult and complicated. Not what was advertised...
While it was being "advertised" you had every opportunity to go out and do something about it: canvassing and manning phone banks were not illegal activities, and might have made more of a difference than sitting and playing with your dingaling on the internet. I feel mildly guilty that all I did for Remain was to cast my vote for it. I wouldn't die of surprise to learn that you didn't even do that. And if internet dingalinging was ineffective then, it's sure as feck even less effective now.
Did Mr Scott post more than 10,000 times on here rather than go out door knocking?
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
I believe we touched on it in the context of the potential inflationary pressure once the foreigners have been sent home.
Inflationary on wages, deflationary on housing costs.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no ontoms deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeig technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copypartment.
If we are to leave the EU w the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Nope, it's a bad thing. You are taking away rights. It might be a necessary trade-off, but that is different and not what you asked.
Rights change all the time you gain some you lose some
You do, but that doesn't make it OK. Of course, you'll be fine as you have an Irish passport or at least the opportunity to acquire one. So that's good news, at least.
Ive had an Irish passport for over 20 years, Brexit has nothing to do with it.
Brexit was totally avoidable if the Westminster politicians had done their job right and I dont single out any one party in that, They all ignored the signs underneath them with that old mantra "theyve nowhere else to go". Probably the worst piece of politcal brinkmanship of the modern era.
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
I believe we touched on it in the context of the potential inflationary pressure once the foreigners have been sent home.
Inflationary on wages, deflationary on housing costs.
I thought all immigrants were supposed to be living 10 to a room?
Mr. Brooke, indeed. Blair threw away half the rebate, Brown threw away vetoes whilst simultaneously discarding a manifesto promise, and Cameron ran a campaign that was the referendum equivalent of May's electioneering.
It's noteworthy that it's the Leavers who thought that Brexit would be jolly good fun who have got bored with the subject. Evidently it wasn't as jolly good fun as they thought it was going to be.
It's apparently difficult and complicated. Not what was advertised...
While it was being "advertised" you had every opportunity to go out and do something about it: canvassing and manning phone banks were not illegal activities, and might have made more of a difference than sitting and playing with your dingaling on the internet. I feel mildly guilty that all I did for Remain was to cast my vote for it. I wouldn't die of surprise to learn that you didn't even do that. And if internet dingalinging was ineffective then, it's sure as feck even less effective now.
Did Mr Scott post more than 10,000 times on here rather than go out door knocking?
Very possibly, I am afraid. The only people here who claim (perfectly credibly) to have canvassed are invariably Leavers.
What a bizarre thing to say. There is literally no ontoms deal.
If this is self-evident, there should be no problem in agreeig technical solutions if necessary.
We have agreed it in black and white, in multiple statements, and no doubt it will be reiterated again in the paper which is about to be published.
The EU27's position is looking more bizarre by the day.
I'm afraid to say you are morphing into a poor copypartment.
If we are to leave the EU w the Tories have is to be able to blame it all on the EU.
Which may well be possible. 52% voted Leave because they thought the EU was a bad thing. Bad things happening as we leave could as easily confirm that view as undermine it, I would think.
They voted Leave for many reasons, one of which was there would be no downsides to it.
Name one downside.
Significant restrictions on the rights of UK citizens to live and work in three G8 economies and a number of other G20 ones.
That's a good thing. Yes, they should be controlling their borders and their immigration properly/better, as should we.
Nope, it's a bad thing. You are taking away rights. It might be a necessary trade-off, but that is different and not what you asked.
Rights change all the time you gain some you lose some
You do, but that doesn't make it OK. Of course, you'll be fine as you have an Irish passport or at least the opportunity to acquire one. So that's good news, at least.
Ive had an Irish passport for over 20 years, Brexit has nothing to do with it.
Brexit was totally avoidable if the Westminster politicians had done their job right and I dont single out any one party in that, They all ignored the signs underneath them with that old mantra "theyve nowhere else to go". Probably the worst piece of politcal brinkmanship of the modern era.
Good news you don't lose any rights as a result of Brexit. Totally agree we're leaving because our politicians are gutless tacticians.
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
I believe we touched on it in the context of the potential inflationary pressure once the foreigners have been sent home.
Inflationary on wages, deflationary on housing costs.
I thought all immigrants were supposed to be living 10 to a room?
Does that matter? Unless they are each paying less than 10% of the going rate for single occupancy of the room they are still pushing housing costs up, surely.
Scrap that, James Chapman is out-Trumping Trump, at least in terms of pace. Channel 4 News has just been added to the rapidly-increasing list of bogeymen.
Chapman is the alt-centre.
About time he control-alt-deleted his Twitter account.
Mr. Observer, partly agree, but there is/was a genuine problem with the ever increasing integration of the EU. Not unlike foreign aid spending, it was something the cosy political class all agreed was a good idea, and the electorate did not. That shouldn't be dismissed because recent PMs have all shown themselves more interested in giving things away to the EU than taking things back for Britain.
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
Low unemployment combined with below-inflation pay rises does not compute. All my PPE economics* graphs indicate that the two are mutually exclusive. It suggests that real levels of unemployment/underemployment are much higher than the official figures say.
*Maybe in a full-fat economics degree you get to see more complicated graphs?
I am amazed at how little chat there has been on here today about the unempolyment figures released today. |It is a truly remarkable achievement by the Government to acheive such low unemployment and they are getiing no credit for it. If the figure was 9.8% unemployed they would be getting murdered. It just shows in this modern world you never get any credit for good news just hammered for bad news. In fact today the figures have been disected in an attempt to find some bad news in them.
Yes, it is truly remarkable, especially given the big increase in the minimum wage and Brexit uncertainties.
"I know where every Bell Pottinger body is buried and I shall exhume them all one by one" is what I would be thinking if I were a BP partner, and BP bodies are legion (little local difficulty in ZA at the moment). Plus Chappers thinks people's drink and adultery habits are fair game, and I see no reason to think BP partners underperform their cohort in those departments.
Comments
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/ignore-the-posturing-and-concentrate-on-the-realpolitik-that-will-underpin-brexit-fnc02p2rb
As that's not going to happen, whatever you allow in one of those directions, you must concede in the other.
European leaders should perhaps be worried more than they seem to be by what happens when the UK is no longer available as a place where young unskilled workers can easily get jobs. If they can't work here and they can't work over there, where will they work?
Meagre consolation; you have your bathrooms, I dipped my toe into the 2015s.
in order not to make the classic Leaver mistake of saying, usually in the same breath: "this is what people voted for" together with "there was no XXX option on the ballot paper, they just voted to leave; the rest is up to the government."
That's a lot of people...
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/frankreichs-praesident-emmanuel-macron-verliert-an-popularitaet-15151033.html
Changing the subject slightly, fascinating to hear Trump and May's differing perspectives on violence and the "extreme" Right.
The statues issue is hugely culturally symbolic in the southern United States and I get that - we are able to have statues of Charles I and Oliver Cromwell in London but then our Civil War was rather different to the American experience and occurred two centuries earlier.
We now seem to have a new phrase in the political vocabulary - "moral equivalence". It's an interesting term and like all good buzzwords can mean whatever you want it to mean.
May's comments about far Right groupings and our response to them were valid to a point - if someone (and it doesn't matter where they are on the spectrum) advocates the subversion of the democratic system and its overthrow through violence, all who purport to be supporters of democracy should stand four square in condemnation.
When the BNP were active, I heard Conservative (as well as Labour and Lib Dem) supporters and activists condemn them and even though I'm not a Conservative, I stand four square behind any Conservative (or indeed anyone) defending democracy against those advocating violence and subversion whether politically, racially or religiously-motivated.
Fascists (and indeed Marxists) despise democracy and for them it's the biggest obstacle to overcome - as they can't rule with the consent of the majority through the ballot box they are forced to use intimidation and violence to advance politically and that has to be resisted at all levels and especially within communities.
So May is right but I think Trump is also right - when the language of debate turns from words to violence, no one side can claim the higher moral ground. Using violence to defend democracy cannot be justified - there is a rule of law and those who are sworn to uphold that law alone have the privilege to defend democracy via force and must only do so within the constraints of that rule of law. Driving a car at a crowd of people is palpably wrong but so is beating up journalists - it's not a question of "moral equivalence", both are acts of violent criminality pure and simple and both need to be dealt with by and within the law of the land.
If Kessler or Cantwell came to London to debate, I'd be the first to defend their right to be heard as long as they didn't use that platform to incite violence or hatred which is against the law of the United Kingdom. They can argue their political case and have a right to do so just as those of us who are opposed to their thinking have a right to argue against them.
Etc.
taken back controlimpoverished ourselves for no gain...https://twitter.com/civilrightsorg/status/897806238909693953
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4795400/Adriana-Lima-flashes-derriere-Victoria-s-Secret-shoot.html
http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/08/more-70k-care-homes-places-needed-2025-says-report?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_term=
To give her credit of sorts, May tried to get the ball rolling on this but her proposals weren't well received. The facts, according to that well known Lefty magazine The Lancet, tell a very different story.
It's not just about care home places but managing the care of elderly people at home and recognising how, for example, giving family members paid time off work to care and support elderly relatives might be the new norm for inter-generational workplaces.
Time for a break I think.
There were fellow travellers such as Combat 18 who certainly wanted a ruck. But IIRC they, and various "firms" of football thugs, had many members in common exactly because the point of gathering anywhere was the prospect of a ruck. The casus rucki was a mere detail.
I recall film of anti-BNP and anti-NF demonstrators shouting "smash the National Front". If you actually wanted to defeat the NF politically I am not sure that assembling a side for a ruck is the best way. This leads me to suppose that the anti-NF bodies existed because they too wanted a ruck.
Probably this should not be illegal. If mobs of consenting adult yobboes want to gather and fight, we should be taxing and regulating it, as some say we should do with drugs. The fights would at least make good TV and provide betting opportunities.
I agree with you that the EU should be looking further ahead and that Britain failing to do so is no excuse for it not doing so either. Psychologically, however, it is easy to see why they might fall back on an entirely transactional approach to the current negotiations at a time when Britain is apparently doing the same.
5 years minimum
were getting staler than a 1 year old loaf
you can pop back in 6 months and the thread wont have changed much
We're British with full British passports.
Infantile, tedious and moronic.
Only fair you accept the same restrictions, right?
Meanwhile, there are many important things happening in the world but Britain is far too absorbed with Brexit to be addressing them.
Thanks chaps.
There were, and I was living in SE London at the time, any number of the "fellow travellers" for whom the journey from democratic discourse to "putting the boot in" was quite short.
In the end, it was and is about provocation - I would contend a number of those who frequent social media are there less to debate and more to provoke. It is an invitation to and has created a generation of provocateurs who write to elicit a response rather than to discourse.
I dont recall Remain standing on a "vote stay or we'll bore the tits off everyone"
there are certainly more important things worldwide - 100,000 premature deaths from diesel fumes for instance - but PB has just become fixated with it's own internal squabble
its daft since nobody on this board can do anything bar carping
every day is now carpy diem
Now of course there will be some fallback to pre-EURef rhetoric, we are all guilty of that, but we are in a fast-moving, dynamic, unpredictable political environment right now. Not the time to leave PB.
Laffer is in a different league (my guess is around 46-49%) of precision...
Since the UK became a net overseas debtor rather than creditor (something which provided some cushion to previous devaluations), it's also true of the economy as a whole.
So roughly, you and your bathroom(s) aren't.
3 years of the Indy ref was more open minded than today
at least the Nats had a sense of humour
However, I take your point, and I too don't really see the EU as "in the right headspace", to actually take that at face value at present. They are still collectively sore at having been rebuffed. Understandable sure, but not smart long term. It's in their and our interests to have a Canada to their USA, rather than a Japan to their China if I may strain analogies (no I am not claiming the EU is like China from a human rights or democracy standpoint, just trying to find general strained geopolitical equivalents).
Yes, this is to an extent hope exceeding expectation. However, the alternative would be no deal, and other than Verhofstadt willy-waving for a couple of days, that would be to the detriment of all of europe.
Those who self-identify as EU citizens (in emotional rather than legal terms) are unfathomable to many people in this country.
As I wrote earlier, I do think jargon is one of the reasons that political polarisation is occurring.
Centrism is finished?
The fact that we do have serious disagreements on PB is a very healthy sign.
If you think a guy like DavidL is in it for the laughs there is no hope for you
I'd say rather it's the serious people who are drifting off since
1. there's more to life than Brexit
2. any mature person can see the spin is part of the negotiations so should be taken with a large pinch of salt and safely passed over
3. a site requires to be fresh and interesting to keep its reputation and attract new bloggers were 'about as free flowing as a WW1 trench system
I may go back to composing limericks to liven things up
Brexit was totally avoidable if the Westminster politicians had done their job right and I dont single out any one party in that, They all ignored the signs underneath them with that old mantra "theyve nowhere else to go". Probably the worst piece of politcal brinkmanship of the modern era.
https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/897822699476668417
*Maybe in a full-fat economics degree you get to see more complicated graphs?