Yougov ask the question regularly including June this year when things should have started to become clearer
Do you think Britain will be economically better or worse off after we leave the European Union, or will it make no difference?
EU Ref 2016 Remain: (Better off): 3%(Worse off): 76% (Will make no real difference to the British economy): 12% (Don't know): 9%
EU Ref 2016 Leave: (Better off): 51%(Worse off): 7% (Will make no real difference to the British economy): 29% (Don't know): 12%
51% is "almost all"? Excellent. Almost all voters in the referendum voted to Leave.
Fair point. I am normally careful on language and facts. The key point is that only 7% of Leave voters think Britain will be economically worse off after Brexit. It means the sovereignty argument is irrelevant. Leavers might hypothetically think the pain is worth the gain in sovereignty terms but they don't actually think that, because they don't think there will be any pain. The same applies in reverse to Remain voters. They might think the EU is wonderful in principle but they are not going to pay for it with their purse.
In fact Leave voters are making a mistake - not in voting Leave but in thinking there will be no economic damage to Brexit. But that's an involved and unprofitable argument so I will accept that people disagree with me on that.
Theresa May: 'If I lose just six seats, I will lose this election'.
There's your objective measure.
She was wrong.
Actually, wasn't it "if I lose six seats, Corbyn becomes PM"? That was wrong too.
OK, let me ask it this was, you claim May lost the election. In that case, who won it?
'Won' implies too much finality
No it doesn't, it reflects the fact that the election had results from which a parliament was formed.
Yes, a parliament of a complexion that Theresa May desperately wanted to avoid, because it has left her in a worse position than if she had never called it.
But one in which she has most seats, having won most votes, and is the only plausible PM.
That's even more of a win in a PR mindset than an FPTP one!
Very few in a PR system either would see choosing to hold an election in order to increase a majority and then losing a majority as a 'win', regardless.
As I've said, the mistake here is in being willfully blind to the context and seeing it as a self-contained game of football. Theresa May did not go into June 8th on 0-0, and finish on 3-2, in which case there are clear winners and losers. She went in with clear political objectives and the expectation that they could be easily met. She failed to meet them catastrophically.
The whole mental framework you have built up for trying to justify June 8th as a 'win' for Theresa May is just silly. It requires ignoring all the things that make an election significant to any of the people involved, ignoring what they all could either hope to achieve or could reasonably expect to achieve. I think it's reasonable to say she's an election loser because she lost ground, her opponents gained ground at her expense, she emerges diminished from the whole episode.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
Mr. P, for "some"? You can find any example affecting "some" people or "some" firms. Osborne warned of a general, severe, and immediate decline in the UK economy.
The unwillingness of some (ahem) to criticise their own side is just odd. Osborne massively over-egged the cake, to the detriment rather than the benefit of his cause.
Mr. P, for "some"? You can find any example affecting "some" people or "some" firms. Osborne warned of a general, severe, and immediate decline in the UK economy.
And the decline in Sterling was general, severe and immediate.
The company invested heavily in 2014 to expand its production capability which put pressure on working capital and the expected increase in turnover never materialised.
"The sudden decline in sterling was not foreseen by the company.......With insufficient protection from its currency hedging arrangements, pressure increased on cash-flow as the business traded through to this spring.
Unfortunate, but there's quite a bit more to it than 'Brexit'......and its telling that Dunt describes it as a 'sad case study for Brexit'.....
The unwillingness of some (ahem) to criticise their own side is just odd. Osborne massively over-egged the cake, to the detriment rather than the benefit of his cause.
What I find odd is the determination of some to find equivalence between
Boris lied, knew it was a lie, repeated and defended the lie, promoted the lie, campaigned vigorously on the lie, and promptly abandoned, disowned and disavowed the lie after the result
It's a single example though. When you look at the overall picture - I think it's clear that Osborne overegged it.
That doesn't mean the gloom predictions won't turn out to be true though - the economists I trust all foresee a poor economic picture within 2 years or so. We may well get that recession, just a bit later than expected.
Mr. P, I agree entirely on the exchange rate. And that wasn't the whole story, as you well know, but for some reason you're unable to just agree that Osborne massively oversold the economic Armageddon line.
Anyway, I'll let it rest. I remain perplexed by your reluctance to acknowledge that.
F1: just over a week until the next race weekend. No markets, win aside, up yet, but hopefully there will be on Monday.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
Mr. (Miss?) Dean, it seems remarkable how wrong that tweet appears to be, given it's from a political editor.
Mr.,thank you. And yes, it displays remarkable ignorance. It wasn't until the advent of radio that anyone expected anyone to speak with a particular accent other than local to them.
Steinbeck has a long diversion in "Travels with Charley" about how the advent of the wireless led to the decline of regional accents in the US....they then re-emerged, to an extent, with more local stations/programming.
I seem to recall there was some theory that at the time of the American Revolution both the "British" and "Americans" (for the difference was a bit more blurred up till then I guess) spoke with something more approaching what is the American accent now ie it's the Brits who've changed more. Certainly US English has persevered many "older" forms at least in non standard American such as varmint vs vermin gotten vs got etc.
That said English has itself preserved things that vanished long ago in Scandinavian and German/Dutch like "th". It constantly evolves, check out Prince Harry now against his grandma in the 40's.
Certainly, the "ah" sound for short a, as in Bahth and clahss was a Regency affectation, mocked at the time, which spread to become standard in the South of England.
As for it changing, I almost put Gladstone had a Scouse accent, but he didn't, cos what we think of as modern Scouse didn't really emerge till the 70's. Listen to how The Beatles spoke as young working-class Liverpudlians as an example. Equally, early Coronation Street Manchester does not have the nasality of the Gallagher Brothers.
Language constantly evolves, and accents often very quickly. You are right to say RP has changed too. Moira Stewart reading the news in the 80's sounds much posher than, say, JRM does now.
As to how quickly changes can spread, there is some (to me), fascinating stuff on rhoticity here.
Theresa May: 'If I lose just six seats, I will lose this election'.
There's your objective measure.
She was wrong.
Actually, wasn't it "if I lose six seats, Corbyn becomes PM"? That was wrong too.
OK, let me ask it this was, you claim May lost the election. In that case, who won it?
'Won' implies too much finality
No it doesn't, it reflects the fact that the election had results from which a parliament was formed.
Yes, a parliament of a complexion that Theresa May desperately wanted to avoid, because it has left her in a worse position than if she had never called it.
But one in which she has most seats, having won most votes, and is the only plausible PM.
That's even more of a win in a PR mindset than an FPTP one!
Very few in a PR system either would see choosing to hold an election in order to increase a majority and then losing a majority as a 'win', regardless.
As I've said, the mistake here is in being willfully blind to the context and seeing it as a self-contained game of football.
If the claim is that she lost the election, that is self-contained and doesn't say anything about context...
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
Certainly, the "ah" sound for short a, as in Bahth and clahss was a Regency affectation, mocked at the time, which spread to become standard in the South of England.
Mr. (Miss?) Dean, it seems remarkable how wrong that tweet appears to be, given it's from a political editor.
Mr.,thank you. And yes, it displays remarkable ignorance. It wasn't until the advent of radio that anyone expected anyone to speak with a particular accent other than local to them.
Steinbeck has a long diversion in "Travels with Charley" about how the advent of the wireless led to the decline of regional accents in the US....they then re-emerged, to an extent, with more local stations/programming.
I seem to recall there was some theory that at the time of the American Revolution both the "British" and "Americans" (for the difference was a bit more blurred up till then I guess) spoke with something more approaching what is the American accent now ie it's the Brits who've changed more. Certainly US English has persevered many "older" forms at least in non standard American such as varmint vs vermin gotten vs got etc.
That said English has itself preserved things that vanished long ago in Scandinavian and German/Dutch like "th". It constantly evolves, check out Prince Harry now against his grandma in the 40's.
Certainly, the "ah" sound for short a, as in Bahth and clahss was a Regency affectation, mocked at the time, which spread to become standard in the South of England.
As for it changing, I almost put Gladstone had a Scouse accent, but he didn't, cos what we think of as modern Scouse didn't really emerge till the 70's. Listen to how The Beatles spoke as young working-class Liverpudlians as an example. Equally, early Coronation Street Manchester does not have the nasality of the Gallagher Brothers.
Language constantly evolves, and accents often very quickly. You are right to say RP has changed too. Moira Stewart reading the news in the 80's sounds much posher than, say, JRM does now.
As to how quickly changes can spread, there is some (to me), fascinating stuff on rhoticity here.
Good read that. I think it's the "r" the Americans largely kept and standardised on (should that be with a "z"?!) that is a big part in making them sound " 'Merkun " to our ears.
Theresa May: 'If I lose just six seats, I will lose this election'.
There's your objective measure.
She was wrong.
Actually, wasn't it "if I lose six seats, Corbyn becomes PM"? That was wrong too.
OK, let me ask it this was, you claim May lost the election. In that case, who won it?
'Won' implies too much finality
No it doesn't, it reflects the fact that the election had results from which a parliament was formed.
Yes, a parliament of a complexion that Theresa May desperately wanted to avoid, because it has left her in a worse position than if she had never called it.
But one in which she has most seats, having won most votes, and is the only plausible PM.
That's even more of a win in a PR mindset than an FPTP one!
Very few in a PR system either would see choosing to hold an election in order to increase a majority and then losing a majority as a 'win', regardless.
As I've said, the mistake here is in being willfully blind to the context and seeing it as a self-contained game of football.
If the claim is that she lost the election, that is self-contained and doesn't say anything about context...
Of course it isn't, the context is always important for judging the results of an election. If one wanted to be pedantic enough that all political meaning is stripped away from it, even then winning would be a majority in parliament and nothing less. This is going nowhere, continue to believe what you want after the fact, but look back to your predictions from before the election. Look at the reasonable expectations for what the different parties could achieve, and what their own objectives were. That is the only way of judging who has gained or lost out of the election.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Theresa May: 'If I lose just six seats, I will lose this election'.
There's your objective measure.
She was wrong.
Actually, wasn't it "if I lose six seats, Corbyn becomes PM"? That was wrong too.
OK, let me ask it this was, you claim May lost the election. In that case, who won it?
'Won' implies too much finality
No it doesn't, it reflects the fact that the election had results from which a parliament was formed.
Yes, a parliament of a complexion that Theresa May desperately wanted to avoid, because it has left her in a worse position than if she had never called it.
But one in which she has most seats, having won most votes, and is the only plausible PM.
That's even more of a win in a PR mindset than an FPTP one!
Very few in a PR system either would see choosing to hold an election in order to increase a majority and then losing a majority as a 'win', regardless.
As I've said, the mistake here is in being willfully blind to the context and seeing it as a self-contained game of football.
If the claim is that she lost the election, that is self-contained and doesn't say anything about context...
Of course it isn't, the context is always important for judging the results of an election. If one wanted to be pedantic enough that all political meaning is stripped away from it, even then winning would be a majority in parliament and nothing less. This is going nowhere, continue to believe what you want after the fact, but look back to your predictions from before the election. Look at the reasonable expectations for what the different parties could achieve, and what their own objectives were. That is the only way of judging who has gained or lost out of the election.
I'm not talking about who has "gained or lost out", I'm talking about who won or lost. Because that was Smithson's original claim.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Not only states, but cities and counties. The minimum wage in San Francisco for example is $14. Tax policies also vary enormously based on state and county.
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
Mr. Sandpit, yes. I was in Anglesey, on holiday, at the time. It didn't get totally dark but it was like the back end of dusk. The dog (the first and finest of hounds) was perturbed.
Mr. (Miss?) Dean, it seems remarkable how wrong that tweet appears to be, given it's from a political editor.
Mr.,thank you. And yes, it displays remarkable ignorance. It wasn't until the advent of radio that anyone expected anyone to speak with a particular accent other than local to them.
Steinbeck has a long diversion in "Travels with Charley" about how the advent of the wireless led to the decline of regional accents in the US....they then re-emerged, to an extent, with more local stations/programming.
I seem to recall there was some theory that at the time of the American Revolution both the "British" and "Americans" (for the difference was a bit more blurred up till then I guess) spoke with something more approaching what is the American accent now ie it's the Brits who've changed more. Certainly US English has persevered many "older" forms at least in non standard American such as varmint vs vermin gotten vs got etc.
That said English has itself preserved things that vanished long ago in Scandinavian and German/Dutch like "th". It constantly evolves, check out Prince Harry now against his grandma in the 40's.
Certainly, the "ah" sound for short a, as in Bahth and clahss was a Regency affectation, mocked at the time, which spread to become standard in the South of England.
As for it changing, I almost put Gladstone had a Scouse accent, but he didn't, cos what we think of as modern Scouse didn't really emerge till the 70's. Listen to how The Beatles spoke as young working-class Liverpudlians as an example. Equally, early Coronation Street Manchester does not have the nasality of the Gallagher Brothers.
Language constantly evolves, and accents often very quickly. You are right to say RP has changed too. Moira Stewart reading the news in the 80's sounds much posher than, say, JRM does now.
As to how quickly changes can spread, there is some (to me), fascinating stuff on rhoticity here.
Good read that. I think it's the "r" the Americans largely kept and standardised on (should that be with a "z"?!) that is a big part in making them sound " 'Merkun " to our ears.
Always gratifying when someone else shows an interest in one's geekier enjoyments!
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
Well, at least Primark have settled the Primark pronunciation kerfuffle. It is, of course, Pry-mark, not Pree-mark.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
They call them scones in French too, pronounced like "gone" with a French accent.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Not only states, but cities and counties. The minimum wage in San Francisco for example is $14. Tax policies also vary enormously based on state and county.
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
Apologies that shouldn't have read as Moldova, that figure is actually Bulgaria - misread the table.
Yes, they can vary by town as well as state but there is still a federal minimum. Even including the example of San Francisco the difference between the minimum and the highest is smaller than that between the UK and many other EU states.
Oh, and areas in the US with higher minimum wages have the same pull factor as the UK, I'm not claiming this to be a problem exclusive to the EU. It's basic economics.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Not only states, but cities and counties. The minimum wage in San Francisco for example is $14. Tax policies also vary enormously based on state and county.
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
Apologies that shouldn't have read as Moldova, that figure is actually Bulgaria - misread the table.
Yes, they can vary by town as well as state but there is still a federal minimum. Even including the example of San Francisco the difference between the minimum and the highest is smaller than that between the UK and many other EU states.
Oh, and areas in the US with higher minimum wages have the same pull factor as the UK, I'm not claiming this to be a problem exclusive to the EU. It's basic economics.
A minimum wage alone doesn't create a pull factor if there are no jobs to go to, and is offset by a higher cost of living.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
This is my issue with freedom of movement, not the number, the lack of control - who knows what our demand will be in a couple of years time?
You could always balance this using something called a free market. Movement of labour doesn't only happen in one direction and trends don't last forever in spite of other factors.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Not only states, but cities and counties. The minimum wage in San Francisco for example is $14. Tax policies also vary enormously based on state and county.
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
Apologies that shouldn't have read as Moldova, that figure is actually Bulgaria - misread the table.
Yes, they can vary by town as well as state but there is still a federal minimum. Even including the example of San Francisco the difference between the minimum and the highest is smaller than that between the UK and many other EU states.
Oh, and areas in the US with higher minimum wages have the same pull factor as the UK, I'm not claiming this to be a problem exclusive to the EU. It's basic economics.
A minimum wage alone doesn't create a pull factor if there are no jobs to go to, and is offset by a higher cost of living.
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
PB Poll..
Who's more British; Mary Berry or Les Aigles Hurlant?
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
If you're advocating that the EU integrate further and harmonise minimum wages then you can make that argument, otherwise it's nonsense. You can't talk about the power of the free market across a single market when different parts of it have different levels and types of intervention.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
The USA has many different and wildly varying minimum wages, some operating at county level. Do you think they need to integrate further to make their economy sustainable?
There is a federal minimum wage of $7.25 that states can then increase if they choose, topping out at $11.25
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25 Greece Min Wage €4.90 Spain Min Wage €4.76 Romania Min Wage €1.83 Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Not only states, but cities and counties. The minimum wage in San Francisco for example is $14. Tax policies also vary enormously based on state and county.
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
Apologies that shouldn't have read as Moldova, that figure is actually Bulgaria - misread the table.
Yes, they can vary by town as well as state but there is still a federal minimum. Even including the example of San Francisco the difference between the minimum and the highest is smaller than that between the UK and many other EU states.
Oh, and areas in the US with higher minimum wages have the same pull factor as the UK, I'm not claiming this to be a problem exclusive to the EU. It's basic economics.
A minimum wage alone doesn't create a pull factor if there are no jobs to go to, and is offset by a higher cost of living.
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
Lord Rose let that particular cat out of the bag in his early pro-remain speech. He wasn't allowed to say much more during the rest of the campaign.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
PB Poll..
Who's more British; Mary Berry or Les Aigles Hurlant?
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
That can't be right. If it were, the joke wouldn't work.
...and you know the same people insisting on the retention of cheap EU labour are the same people hand wringing about the need for wages to increase - you don't get to have both!
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Mr. P, for "some"? You can find any example affecting "some" people or "some" firms. Osborne warned of a general, severe, and immediate decline in the UK economy.
And the decline in Sterling was general, severe and immediate.
Once again - wrong - the decline preceded the vote by around 3-6 months and continued after - I should know my monthly pension is paid in Euros. Anyone with modest business knowledge should have been prepared for the storm. As I hinted earlier maybe your 'disdain' should start with a long look in the mirror.
...and you know the same people insisting on the retention of cheap EU labour are the same people hand wringing about the need for wages to increase - you don't get to have both!
Some people are more concerned with corporate profit growth and the price of lunch for businessmen than the people at the bottom of the chain. They only support rising wages at the bottom as long as they won't have to pay for it.
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Hence McDonalds in California investing in robots to work in their restaurants, minimum wages having risen so far that it's cheaper for them to raise efficiency rather than just throw more people at the problem of fast food service. That's a good thing for everyone.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Hey now guys - let's all chill out and give peace a chance. There's enough hate in the world without reigniting the old scone/gone vs scone/stone wars. It's important to live and let live, and not sweat the small stuff.
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
cream first, jam second,
Only for people who put sugar, not salt, on their porridge.....
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Hey now guys - let's all chill out and give peace a chance. There's enough hate in the world without reigniting the old scone/gone vs scone/stone wars. It's important to live and let live, and not sweat the small stuff.
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
Of course it's cream first, we're not all savages like the Cornish
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Hey now guys - let's all chill out and give peace a chance. There's enough hate in the world without reigniting the old scone/gone vs scone/stone wars. It's important to live and let live, and not sweat the small stuff.
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
What about if you apply the condiments as you suggest then turn the scone upside down to eat it?
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
cream first, jam second,
Only for people who put sugar, not salt, on their porridge.....
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Hence McDonalds in California investing in robots to work in their restaurants, minimum wages having risen so far that it's cheaper for them to raise efficiency rather than just throw more people at the problem of fast food service. That's a good thing for everyone.
'Capital itself is the moving contradiction, in that it presses to reduce labour time to a minimum, while it posits labour time, on the other side, as sole measure and source of wealth ... Capital ... quite unintentionally - reduces human labour, expenditure of energy, to a minimum. This will redound to the benefit of emancipated labour, and is the condition of its emancipation'.
There are some good bits in Das Kapital too on how successful wage struggles meant it was economically rational for capital investment in machinery etc. and helped to drive the industrial revolution...
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Hence McDonalds in California investing in robots to work in their restaurants, minimum wages having risen so far that it's cheaper for them to raise efficiency rather than just throw more people at the problem of fast food service. That's a good thing for everyone.
'Capital itself is the moving contradiction, in that it presses to reduce labour time to a minimum, while it posits labour time, on the other side, as sole measure and source of wealth ... Capital ... quite unintentionally - reduces human labour, expenditure of energy, to a minimum. This will redound to the benefit of emancipated labour, and is the condition of its emancipation'.
There are some good bits in Das Kapital too on how successful wage struggles meant it was economically rational for capital investment in machinery etc. and helped to drive the industrial revolution...
The rise in automation really brings the provision of a universal living wage closer or we'll be having hoards of homeless unemployed people on the streets
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Hey now guys - let's all chill out and give peace a chance. There's enough hate in the world without reigniting the old scone/gone vs scone/stone wars. It's important to live and let live, and not sweat the small stuff.
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
What about if you apply the condiments as you suggest then turn the scone upside down to eat it?
As long as you've applied the cream and jam in the correct order, how you get it into your body is your business. Orally, as a suppository, as a pessary, or injected directly into the eyeballs - all are absolutely acceptable.
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Hence McDonalds in California investing in robots to work in their restaurants, minimum wages having risen so far that it's cheaper for them to raise efficiency rather than just throw more people at the problem of fast food service. That's a good thing for everyone.
'Capital itself is the moving contradiction, in that it presses to reduce labour time to a minimum, while it posits labour time, on the other side, as sole measure and source of wealth ... Capital ... quite unintentionally - reduces human labour, expenditure of energy, to a minimum. This will redound to the benefit of emancipated labour, and is the condition of its emancipation'.
There are some good bits in Das Kapital too on how successful wage struggles meant it was economically rational for capital investment in machinery etc. and helped to drive the industrial revolution...
The rise in automation really brings the provision of a universal living wage closer or we'll be having hoards of homeless unemployed people on the streets
I'm skeptical of that, precisely because people like Marx were attacking the same idea in the 1860s. Every generation since Adam Smith have seen the next wave of technological change as the Big One. Keynes' predictions in 'Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren' is a case in point.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
As the only bona fide working class Northerner on PB, it's 'baaath'
We are but a hair's breadth away from scone as in "gone" vs scone as in "stone" debate. A clash of worlds that makes Brexit look like a village cricket knockabout on a Sunday afternoon.
It is scone as in stone.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Dear heavens, my world is rocked. It's scone as in gone of course.
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Hey now guys - let's all chill out and give peace a chance. There's enough hate in the world without reigniting the old scone/gone vs scone/stone wars. It's important to live and let live, and not sweat the small stuff.
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
What about if you apply the condiments as you suggest then turn the scone upside down to eat it?
As long as you've applied the cream and jam in the correct order, how you get it into your body is your business. Orally, as a suppository, as a pessary, or injected directly into the eyeballs - all are absolutely acceptable.
The tour of the West Country featuring The Jam and Cream has been cancelled, as nobody could agree who should go on first...
There are always jobs available, especially if you're willing to undercut the traditional market rate. Look at Pret a Manger bleating about how they might have to offer staff better remuneration - should I cry for the guys in head office or be happy for people getting a pay rise? My conscience feels clearer with the latter thank you very much.
There are not 'always jobs available'. The lump of labour can get smaller as well as larger and if it becomes uneconomic to operate a business or an outlet it will simply close.
If that happens because you have artificially fixed the wage level too high, despite being an unused supply of workers, that's a problem. If it happens because the wages have risen above the company's productivity levels as all their potential workers have got better paid jobs elsewhere, that's a sign of economic development.
Hence McDonalds in California investing in robots to work in their restaurants, minimum wages having risen so far that it's cheaper for them to raise efficiency rather than just throw more people at the problem of fast food service. That's a good thing for everyone.
'Capital itself is the moving contradiction, in that it presses to reduce labour time to a minimum, while it posits labour time, on the other side, as sole measure and source of wealth ... Capital ... quite unintentionally - reduces human labour, expenditure of energy, to a minimum. This will redound to the benefit of emancipated labour, and is the condition of its emancipation'.
There are some good bits in Das Kapital too on how successful wage struggles meant it was economically rational for capital investment in machinery etc. and helped to drive the industrial revolution...
The rise in automation really brings the provision of a universal living wage closer or we'll be having hoards of homeless unemployed people on the streets
I'm skeptical of that, precisely because people like Marx were attacking the same idea in the 1860s. Every generation since Adam Smith have seen the next wave of technological change as the Big One. Keynes' predictions in 'Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren' is a case in point.
I think all the studies done have shown that it would turn everyone but the well off into serfs. I'm not sure modern day feudalism is what its advocates envision.
Questions have been raised over the general election expenses of Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson in East Dunbartonshire. Ms Swinson's campaign spending came in £210 below the legal limit, but reports say this was only after almost £7,000 of costs were disregarded.
The city mayors Sadiq Khan and Andy Burnham could lose their speech slots at the Labour party conference this year under a stripped-back speaking programme which will prioritise party member debates.
Comments
In fact Leave voters are making a mistake - not in voting Leave but in thinking there will be no economic damage to Brexit. But that's an involved and unprofitable argument so I will accept that people disagree with me on that.
As I've said, the mistake here is in being willfully blind to the context and seeing it as a self-contained game of football. Theresa May did not go into June 8th on 0-0, and finish on 3-2, in which case there are clear winners and losers. She went in with clear political objectives and the expectation that they could be easily met. She failed to meet them catastrophically.
The whole mental framework you have built up for trying to justify June 8th as a 'win' for Theresa May is just silly. It requires ignoring all the things that make an election significant to any of the people involved, ignoring what they all could either hope to achieve or could reasonably expect to achieve. I think it's reasonable to say she's an election loser because she lost ground, her opponents gained ground at her expense, she emerges diminished from the whole episode.
https://twitter.com/eurocrat/status/898106311359037442
But still the other distinction is there. There are no voters who have spent their life in an EU as it is today.
The unwillingness of some (ahem) to criticise their own side is just odd. Osborne massively over-egged the cake, to the detriment rather than the benefit of his cause.
"The sudden decline in sterling was not foreseen by the company.......With insufficient protection from its currency hedging arrangements, pressure increased on cash-flow as the business traded through to this spring.
Unfortunate, but there's quite a bit more to it than 'Brexit'......and its telling that Dunt describes it as a 'sad case study for Brexit'.....
https://twitter.com/MBrundleF1/status/897801462578860032
Boris lied, knew it was a lie, repeated and defended the lie, promoted the lie, campaigned vigorously on the lie, and promptly abandoned, disowned and disavowed the lie after the result
Osborne over-egged the cake
When you look at the overall picture - I think it's clear that Osborne overegged it.
That doesn't mean the gloom predictions won't turn out to be true though - the economists I trust all foresee a poor economic picture within 2 years or so. We may well get that recession, just a bit later than expected.
Anyway, I'll let it rest. I remain perplexed by your reluctance to acknowledge that.
F1: just over a week until the next race weekend. No markets, win aside, up yet, but hopefully there will be on Monday.
My stance on this has always been the same. Jump in with both feet or leave, anything else is not sustainable.
As for it changing, I almost put Gladstone had a Scouse accent, but he didn't, cos what we think of as modern Scouse didn't really emerge till the 70's. Listen to how The Beatles spoke as young working-class Liverpudlians as an example. Equally, early Coronation Street Manchester does not have the nasality of the Gallagher Brothers.
Language constantly evolves, and accents often very quickly. You are right to say RP has changed too. Moira Stewart reading the news in the 80's sounds much posher than, say, JRM does now.
As to how quickly changes can spread, there is some (to me), fascinating stuff on rhoticity here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhoticity_in_English
https://twitter.com/bbcr4today/status/898088814362624000
Do some people really say "Bor-th" or "B-ow-th"? [I'm familiar with the Southernist nonsense of pronouncing it "Barth"].
It is brimming with knowing deceptions.
Champion is the Labour MP for Rotherham.
Chapman is the nutter on the bus.
Only Momentum will get them mixed up now.
If you look at just a small subsample of the EU you can see that the differences are enormous in comparison.
UK Min Wage €8.25
Greece Min Wage €4.90
Spain Min Wage €4.76
Romania Min Wage €1.83
Moldova Min Wage €1.36
Moldova is not in the EU, but I'm sure you knew that.
The eclipse is going to be the story that finally kicks all the divisive politics and unrest of the US front pages for a couple of days.
Anyone remember that day in August 1999 when it went eerily dark over Britain?
Yes, they can vary by town as well as state but there is still a federal minimum. Even including the example of San Francisco the difference between the minimum and the highest is smaller than that between the UK and many other EU states.
Oh, and areas in the US with higher minimum wages have the same pull factor as the UK, I'm not claiming this to be a problem exclusive to the EU. It's basic economics.
Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly isn't British.
Who's more British; Mary Berry or Les Aigles Hurlant?
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/mary-berry-cooks-bbc2-tv-review-now-we-know-how-to-cook-and-pronounce-scones-courtesy-of-m-bez-9166689.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12181385/Wages-for-British-workers-will-rise-in-the-event-of-a-Brexit-head-of-in-campaign-says.html
I'll raise you a pineapple chunk on a pizza slice....
Ergo I'm as British as The Queen whereas Mary Berry is as British as Asterix the Gaul.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2013/03/how-do-you-say-scone/
As long as we can all agree that it's cream first, jam second, and that anyone who does it the wrong way should be executed along with their families, that their houses should be burned down, and that we should all dance on their graves singing comic songs, then it's all fine.
There are some good bits in Das Kapital too on how successful wage struggles meant it was economically rational for capital investment in machinery etc. and helped to drive the industrial revolution...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/basic-income-pilots-scotland-ubi-glasgow-finland-canada-ontario-switzerland-referendum-refuses-to-a7505561.html
I think all the studies done have shown that it would turn everyone but the well off into serfs. I'm not sure modern day feudalism is what its advocates envision.
Ms Swinson's campaign spending came in £210 below the legal limit, but reports say this was only after almost £7,000 of costs were disregarded.
Row over Jo Swinson election spending in East Dunbartonshire
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40959614
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/17/khan-and-burnham-face-cut-from-labour-conference-lineup
NEW THREAD