Meanwhile, the eclipse is underway here. The partial eclipse has begun over Oregon.
We should have totality here in just over 2 hours. Highways north were gridlocked from dawn today with folks trying to get into the North georgia mountains, going to places with wonderful names like Hiawassee and Toccoa. If you saw Band of Brothers, Toccoa is where they did their basic training.
Awesome pictures coming through, how close are you to the line of totality?
My daughter is in Blue Ridge - 100%. According to NASA I apparently will have a 98.67% eclipse. 10-15 miles north will get totality. How will I tell a 1.33% difference between me and totality?
Very lucky, you’re right in the path of it. 98.67% you’ll see a slit of light to one side of the moon as it is nearly but not quite covered by the moon. Something like this:
The sky is completely clear - not a cloud in the sky. Hotter than hell, but a beautiful day.
Awesome! Take lots of photos
There is a cruise ship offshore of Charleston SC full of eclipse watchers. The added attraction -honest - is that Bonnie Tyler is on board and will sing "Total eclipse of the heart" during totality.
I heard about that one, well done to the entertainment booker!
Obviously I’m on the other side of the world for this one (it’s dark already), but I remember vividly the total eclipse the in the UK in August 1999. Unlikely we’ll ever see one again.
Spanish police do seem very effective. Gunning down 5 terrorists in a resort like cambrils before they got anyone was particularly so, as not a high profile area.
Finnish plod not slouches either. About time our boys in blue got firearms as a routine.
Meeting plod quite often in the line of duty, I'd have to disagree.
A lot of people would certainly get liquidated, but rather too many would be Brazilian electricians.
Perhaps you are right, we need EU migrant cops if we want crack shots. Our own bobbies are not up to the same standard.
Like the Spitfire pilots in the battle of Britain....
Meanwhile, the eclipse is underway here. The partial eclipse has begun over Oregon.
We should have totality here in just over 2 hours. Highways north were gridlocked from dawn today with folks trying to get into the North georgia mountains, going to places with wonderful names like Hiawassee and Toccoa. If you saw Band of Brothers, Toccoa is where they did their basic training.
Awesome pictures coming through, how close are you to the line of totality?
My daughter is in Blue Ridge - 100%. According to NASA I apparently will have a 98.67% eclipse. 10-15 miles north will get totality. How will I tell a 1.33% difference between me and totality?
Very lucky, you’re right in the path of it. 98.67% you’ll see a slit of light to one side of the moon as it is nearly but not quite covered by the moon. Something like this:
The sky is completely clear - not a cloud in the sky. Hotter than hell, but a beautiful day.
Awesome! Take lots of photos
There is a cruise ship offshore of Charleston SC full of eclipse watchers. The added attraction -honest - is that Bonnie Tyler is on board and will sing "Total eclipse of the heart" during totality.
Spanish police do seem very effective. Gunning down 5 terrorists in a resort like cambrils before they got anyone was particularly so, as not a high profile area.
Finnish plod not slouches either. About time our boys in blue got firearms as a routine.
Meeting plod quite often in the line of duty, I'd have to disagree.
A lot of people would certainly get liquidated, but rather too many would be Brazilian electricians.
Perhaps you are right, we need EU migrant cops if we want crack shots. Our own bobbies are not up to the same standard.
Like the Spitfire pilots in the battle of Britain....
Bloody Poles and Czechs, coming here and littering the country with downed Heinkels and Dorniers...
No, she can't turn it round, but she can salvage her reputation and depart with grace, if Brexit can be negotiated without total chaos. How big an 'if' that is remains to be seen.
Although many of her woes are self-inflicted, it's also the case that the media like to knock down those that they have built up. Before the election, she was getting an over-favourable press, and a correction was inevitable. What was surprising was the speed and ferocity of that correction.
Jeremy Corbyn has arguably followed the reverse trajectory, but Labour shouldn't kid themselves that the fundamentals have changed.
Maybe, but she needs to crack on really. Her not condemning Trump was a mis-step: that's a free hit on an unpopular president saying stupid things.
The President of our largest destination for exports who we need a trade deal or at least favourable trading terms with as soon as Brexit is completed, not a good idea to attack him
Exactly. Why the flip is virtue signaling to achieve nothing in particular more important than getting possibly the most important trade deal in our history?
Exactly, we need favourable trafing terms with the US (even under Trump) more than the US needs favourable trading terms with us
It's ironic that most of the things we need for Brexit to be a success can be best delivered by remaining in the EU.
That is the paradox. The best Brexit is no Brexit.
Still, think of all that cheap Australian iron ore that we could import if we were free of EU shackles.
You are ignoring the immigration issue, the referendum was immigration control and sovereignty v the economy and immigration control narrowly won
The referendum was about the NHS based on the big lie. The official campaign barely mentioned immigration which, of course, is central to a healthy economy.
.
That is nonsense. The polls heavily moved towards Leave when they started talking about immigration. It suits Remainers to blame it on the NHS thing. UKIP got 13% from nowhere in a GE by banging on about immigration, the public have never wanted it, and the first chance they got to have a say, they told the elite to poke it
Mike, there were lies, exaggerations and misrepresentation on both sides. To pick out the NHS bus and obsess about it, while ignoring the Project Fear threats of recession, punishment budgets and massive job losses, weakens your case.
No, she can't turn it round, but she can salvage her reputation and depart with grace, if Brexit can be negotiated without total chaos. How big an 'if' that is remains to be seen.
Although many of her woes are self-inflicted, it's also the case that the media like to knock down those that they have built up. Before the election, she was getting an over-favourable press, and a correction was inevitable. What was surprising was the speed and ferocity of that correction.
Jeremy Corbyn has arguably followed the reverse trajectory, but Labour shouldn't kid themselves that the fundamentals have changed.
Maybe, but she needs to crack on really. Her not condemning Trump was a mis-step: that's a free hit on an unpopular president saying stupid things.
The President of our largest destination for exports who we need a trade deal or at least favourable trading terms with as soon as Brexit is completed, not a good idea to attack him
Exactly. Why the flip is virtue signaling to achieve nothing in particular more important than getting possibly the most important trade deal in our history?
Exactly, we need favourable trafing terms with the US (even under Trump) more than the US needs favourable trading terms with us
It's ironic that most of the things we need for Brexit to be a success can be best delivered by remaining in the EU.
That is the paradox. The best Brexit is no Brexit.
Still, think of all that cheap Australian iron ore that we could import if we were free of EU shackles.
You are ignoring the immigration issue, the referendum was immigration control and sovereignty v the economy and immigration control narrowly won
The referendum was about the NHS based on the big lie. The official campaign barely mentioned immigration which, of course, is central to a healthy economy.
Why does your manly Valentine feel the need to tell us how clear and transparent he is? Could it be because there are two sides in this negotiation and he's coming to realise that UK's not planning to lie back and think of Brussels while he has his evil way with us?
That is nonsense. The polls heavily moved towards Leave when they started talking about immigration. It suits Remainers to blame it on the NHS thing. UKIP got 13% from nowhere in a GE by banging on about immigration, the public have never wanted it, and the first chance they got to have a say, they told the elite to poke it
Surely it can be both? I think most Leave voters were primarily voting on the basis of immigration, BUT I think there was a minority who voted based on extra money for the NHS - but, crucially, that minority (say, about 10-20% of Leave voters) was the difference between Brexit winning and losing the referendum.
Mike, there were lies, exaggerations and misrepresentation on both sides. To pick out the NHS bus and obsess about it, while ignoring the Project Fear threats of recession, punishment budgets and massive job losses, weakens your case.
No, she can't turn it round, but she can salvage her reputation and depart with grace, if Brexit can be negotiated without total chaos. How big an 'if' that is remains to be seen.
Although many of her woes are self-inflicted, it's also the case that the media like to knock down those that they have built up. Before the election, she was getting an over-favourable press, and a correction was inevitable. What was surprising was the speed and ferocity of that correction.
Jeremy Corbyn has arguably followed the reverse trajectory, but Labour shouldn't kid themselves that the fundamentals have changed.
Maybe, but she needs to crack on really. Her not condemning Trump was a mis-step: that's a free hit on an unpopular president saying stupid things.
The President of our largest destination for exports who we need a trade deal or at least favourable trading terms with as soon as Brexit is completed, not a good idea to attack him
Exactly. Why the flip is virtue signaling to achieve nothing in particular more important than getting possibly the most important trade deal in our history?
Exactly, we need favourable trafing terms with the US (even under Trump) more than the US needs favourable trading terms with us
It's ironic that most of the things we need for Brexit to be a success can be best delivered by remaining in the EU.
That is the paradox. The best Brexit is no Brexit.
Still, think of all that cheap Australian iron ore that we could import if we were free of EU shackles.
You are ignoring the immigration issue, the referendum was immigration control and sovereignty v the economy and immigration control narrowly won
The referendum was about the NHS based on the big lie. The official campaign barely mentioned immigration which, of course, is central to a healthy economy.
.
Incorrect. The Leave campaign was officially told that the £350m figure was a lie but continued to use it. There was no similar action against Remain.
Incorrect. The Leave campaign was officially told that the £350m figure was a lie but continued to use it. There was no similar action against Remain.
More to the point, to claim that the Remain warnings about the future were 'lies' is completely ridiculous. They were forecasts, which may still come true of course. Even if they don't, they still wouldn't be lies.
I understand that Leavers are embarrassed about the Vote Leave campaign, and rightly so, but they do protest too much on this particular point.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
If his position is clear, would you like to tell what it is? What arrangements are they proposing for the Irish border, for example, or tariffs on EU-UK trade?
Lord only knows how Michel Barnier can claim that the EU position is 'clear and transparent'. Do they want a trade deal or not? Has anyone got a clue?
They've got a deal called the single market. Unless and until the UK succeeds in leaving it there's nothing to discuss. Brinkmanship is a game the EU knows how to play and wins every time.
Lord only knows how Michel Barnier can claim that the EU position is 'clear and transparent'. Do they want a trade deal or not? Has anyone got a clue?
They've got a deal called the single market. Unless and until the UK succeeds in leaving it there's nothing to discuss. Brinkmanship is a game the EU knows how to play and wins every time.
In that case we might as well not bother with the negotiations, apart from tidying up a few loose ends. That would give them time to work out how they are going to fill their budget black hole.
Mike, there were lies, exaggerations and misrepresentation on both sides. To pick out the NHS bus and obsess about it, while ignoring the Project Fear threats of recession, punishment budgets and massive job losses, weakens your case.
The problem with project fear is that a large proportion of those people who voted leave had little to fear - the things being threatened wouldn't impact them - and if they impacted others well at least those others would discover how the world really worked...
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
If his position is clear, would you like to tell what it is? What arrangements are they proposing for the Irish border, for example, or tariffs on EU-UK trade?
WTO terms hard Brexit.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Lord only knows how Michel Barnier can claim that the EU position is 'clear and transparent'. Do they want a trade deal or not? Has anyone got a clue?
They've got a deal called the single market. Unless and until the UK succeeds in leaving it there's nothing to discuss. Brinkmanship is a game the EU knows how to play and wins every time.
In that case we might as well not bother with the negotiations, apart from tidying up a few loose ends. That would give them time to work out how they are going to fill their budget black hole.
Indeed, but that would mean having capacities we do not have.
Incorrect. The Leave campaign was officially told that the £350m figure was a lie but continued to use it. There was no similar action against Remain.
More to the point, to claim that the Remain warnings about the future were 'lies' is completely ridiculous. They were forecasts, which may still come true of course. Even if they don't, they still wouldn't be lies.
I understand that Leavers are embarrassed about the Vote Leave campaign, and rightly so, but they do protest too much on this particular point.
I think what Osborne and others did was worse (not that it matters now). Saying that something will happen for sure and it not happening is a disgrace. No wonder the warnings about Jezza - such that there were any - fell on deaf ears.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time (and theirs) pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
If his position is clear, would you like to tell what it is? What arrangements are they proposing for the Irish border, for example, or tariffs on EU-UK trade?
WTO terms hard Brexit.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
It is amazing how many leavers have trouble with remembering that.
I can see why people say this site is turning into a place where people say the same things over and over again.
Yes leave lied but clearly so did remain (where was the punishment budget for example? Or Cameron staying on after the loss as promised?) and when it is pointed out they are quiet for an hour and then get all angry about leave lying in the campaign.
Even if the only lies that were told were on the leave side and remain was 100% honest, the referendum has finished and we are where we are. People just weren't convinced by the EU and a lot of people had waited years to tell them to stuff it.
Actually this site gives a good indication about the mindset of the political class. Still obsessed about the referendum and not really all that bothered about the rise of Islamic extremism even as the attacks seem to be happening weekly now somewhere in Europe. I have a feeling the average bloke on the street is much more concerned about the latter.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
It would seem wise to prepare for the default. The question is whether the hard border is on the Irish border or the Irish sea.
There are simply discussions to be had on the mechanisms of Brexit. The destination is clear. It is possible that a trade deal could be done in time, but not by Easter 2019.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time (and theirs) pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
And how do they expect us to agree either the money or the NI border, before we’ve even discussed what the trade and customs agreements will look like?
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
If his position is clear, would you like to tell what it is? What arrangements are they proposing for the Irish border, for example, or tariffs on EU-UK trade?
WTO terms hard Brexit.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
It is amazing how many leavers have trouble with remembering that.
Incorrect. The Leave campaign was officially told that the £350m figure was a lie but continued to use it. There was no similar action against Remain.
"officially told" sounds a bit Ministry of Truth. But Remain screwed up here. Instead of saying It's only 280m (which is just a different, very big number), they should have said the whole lot would be eaten up by one-off exit costs and ongoing Norway-type payments, and that you generate real money for the NHS by continuing to thrive within the EU. Obv I say that with hindsight, but it is pretty bloody obvious and the people running the Remain campaign are paid to have foresight on these matters. The truth is, both sides were just phoning it in because both sides knew that a comfortable win for Remain was the only possible outcome. (This is what comes of having non-lawyers in politics; any halfway competent lawyer is permanently asking himself: what if I am wrong? What happens if this witness, whom I confidently expect will say A, says not-A? Whereas Cameron simply didn't have a plan for winning GE2015 or losing EUref).
So, yes, 350m was a lie and, yes, there was definite contact between Maradona's hand and the ball. Time to move on.
I can see why people say this site is turning into a place where people say the same things over and over again.
Yes leave lied but clearly so did remain (where was the punishment budget for example? Or Cameron staying on after the loss as promised?) and when it is pointed out they are quiet for an hour and then get all angry about leave lying in the campaign.
Even if the only lies that were told were on the leave side and remain was 100% honest, the referendum has finished and we are where we are. People just weren't convinced by the EU and a lot of people had waited years to tell them to stuff it.
Actually this site gives a good indication about the mindset of the political class. Still obsessed about the referendum and not really all that bothered about the rise of Islamic extremism even as the attacks seem to be happening weekly now somewhere in Europe. I have a feeling the average bloke on the street is much more concerned about the latter.
What betting markets have you seen on Islamic extremism?
And how do they expect us to agree either the money or the NI border, before we’ve even discussed what the trade and customs agreements will look like?
Money is a matter of settling past accounts and the NI border is a political imperative. Neither of them are dependent on a future trade agreement, although the latter may constrain its scope.
No, Brexit will be crushed by its own weight whether we have a second referendum to rubber-stamp the fact or not.
It really wont.
The reason it really will is that it's been brought about by people who, like you, have made the mistake of believing their own propaganda. Reality doesn't care what lies you've told yourself about the way the world works and our place in it.
The superiority of view that you constantly profess is very sad - I voted remain but accept we have to leave otherwise the democratic process is totally compromised.
Indeed, it is more than likely the majority will want out as this process comes towards it end in March 2019 unless the EU accept the position and act reasonably
I suppose the majority of EU countries think that emmigration is essential for the good of their economies? I think Branier rather gave the game away when he insisted the EU would not accept "social dumping of any EU citizens back to the EU" after Brexit.
There’s always a few nutcases anywhere in the USA. The ‘NASA Approved’ glasses are simply a standard to stop cheap imitations burning people’s eyes. The standard is the same as for welding masks, so if the country-boy conspiracy theorists have one of those to hand then they’re all good to go.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in installments over say 5 years? Does it include costs for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
Bev, we're all leavers now. We're leaving the EU in March 2019. That's what the vote was for.
Why tie ourselves up in knots about what happened last year? Shouldn't we be arguing about how to make the best exit?
I am not tying myself up in knots about anything. I have restructured my life so that if Brexit is a success then I can benefit from it and if it is a disaster then my family and I have an exit plan.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time (and theirs) pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
Quite.
It is quite clear that a deal is there to be done.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
I have to believe the grown ups will sort this out. No-one benefits from hard borders and tariffs, and the EU Commission are going to have a lot of explaining to do if they come out €10bn a year short of their budget.
Bev, we're all leavers now. We're leaving the EU in March 2019. That's what the vote was for.
Why tie ourselves up in knots about what happened last year? Shouldn't we be arguing about how to make the best exit?
I am not tying myself up in knots about anything. I have restructured my life so that if Brexit is a success then I can benefit from it and if it is a disaster then my family and I have an exit plan.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Point taken I'm just playing with notions to illustrate.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
He holds all the cards. He is not even hiding them.
OK. He is short sighted and can't see potential hole in the EU budget, or is that one of his cards?
There will be no hole in the EU budget. Under WTO, importers of British products will be paying duties on the imports. It will more than cover the budget "hole".
The eclipse was a total non-event. It got so it was like being slightly overcast for a couple of minutes and that was it.
damn weather getting in the way.
No, the sky cleared and you could see with the 'eclipse glasses'. There just wasn't much to see. The light looked like an overcast day but it didn't get dark, and the sky was clear.
YAY eclipse time (I think) - I have just projected the sun through a pair of binoculars onto a sheet of paper, and there is the tiniest possible curve taken out of the top of it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
If his position is clear, would you like to tell what it is? What arrangements are they proposing for the Irish border, for example, or tariffs on EU-UK trade?
WTO terms hard Brexit.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
It is amazing how many leavers have trouble with remembering that.
"As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position."
So why do most active REMAINers keep going on and on and on about the need for a soft Brexit, if it is an impossible arrangement with the EU?
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Even if it is WTO, are we going to renege on liabilities we have signed up for ? Will UK behave like a third world country ?
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Even if it is WTO, are we going to renege on liabilities we have signed up for ? Will UK behave like a third world country ?
I thought the UK had zero liabilities from a purely legal standpoint.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
He holds all the cards. He is not even hiding them.
OK. He is short sighted and can't see potential hole in the EU budget, or is that one of his cards?
There will be no hole in the EU budget. Under WTO, importers of British products will be paying duties on the imports. It will more than cover the budget "hole".
But what about the loss of a large part of the £280bn a year exports to the UK because UK people choose global and domestic alternatives which would become better value to the current EU imports?
The eclipse was a total non-event. It got so it was like being slightly overcast for a couple of minutes and that was it.
damn weather getting in the way.
I think Tim's referring to the dimming? It's surprising how much of the sun has to be obscured for a noticeable drop in brightness.
According to NASA I had a 98.67% total eclipse, yet you hardly noticed any darkness. Even the crickets weren't fooled. Bugger
That’s a bugger. I’m sure your daughter had a different experience, from what was shown on the NASA stream it got very dark in the area of totality, albeit only for a minute or two.
There’s always a few nutcases anywhere in the USA. The ‘NASA Approved’ glasses are simply a standard to stop cheap imitations burning people’s eyes. The standard is the same as for welding masks, so if the country-boy conspiracy theorists have one of those to hand then they’re all good to go.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Even if it is WTO, are we going to renege on liabilities we have signed up for ? Will UK behave like a third world country ?
I thought the UK had zero liabilities from a purely legal standpoint.
If there were no liabilities why is the British government talking about it. I thought £36bn was more or less agreed.
So you expect British national EU pensioners would receive their pensions ?
So why do most active REMAINers keep going on and on and on about the need for a soft Brexit, if it is an impossible arrangement with the EU?
The loudest advocate of soft Brexit on here so far was SeanT, who voted Leave then got worried
I am referring to the Remaining soft Brexit advocates of which they seem to number most of the vocal ones. I take it that you are not a soft Brexit advocate?
The eclipse was a total non-event. It got so it was like being slightly overcast for a couple of minutes and that was it.
damn weather getting in the way.
I think Tim's referring to the dimming? It's surprising how much of the sun has to be obscured for a noticeable drop in brightness.
According to NASA I had a 98.67% total eclipse, yet you hardly noticed any darkness. Even the crickets weren't fooled. Bugger
That’s a bugger. I’m sure your daughter had a different experience, from what was shown on the NASA stream it got very dark in the area of totality, albeit only for a minute or two.
I hope so. Bonnie Tyler has finished singing, I can report.
There’s always a few nutcases anywhere in the USA. The ‘NASA Approved’ glasses are simply a standard to stop cheap imitations burning people’s eyes. The standard is the same as for welding masks, so if the country-boy conspiracy theorists have one of those to hand then they’re all good to go.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Even if it is WTO, are we going to renege on liabilities we have signed up for ? Will UK behave like a third world country ?
I thought the UK had zero liabilities from a purely legal standpoint.
If there were no liabilities why is the British government talking about it. I thought £36bn was more or less agreed.
So you expect British national EU pensioners would receive their pensions ?
Because a payment in good faith might grease the wheels..
The eclipse was a total non-event. It got so it was like being slightly overcast for a couple of minutes and that was it.
damn weather getting in the way.
I think Tim's referring to the dimming? It's surprising how much of the sun has to be obscured for a noticeable drop in brightness.
According to NASA I had a 98.67% total eclipse, yet you hardly noticed any darkness. Even the crickets weren't fooled. Bugger
There's a stat about most of the reduction in light comes right at the very end. I was watching Sky News and at the end of totality you could see how quickly the light comes back.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
He holds all the cards. He is not even hiding them.
OK. He is short sighted and can't see potential hole in the EU budget, or is that one of his cards?
There will be no hole in the EU budget. Under WTO, importers of British products will be paying duties on the imports. It will more than cover the budget "hole".
But what about the loss of a large part of the £280bn a year exports to the UK because UK people choose global and domestic alternatives which would become better value to the current EU imports?
What about all our exports to the EU ?
Any export from the EU today already costs 15% more than it did on 23rd June 2016 because the pound has become a banana republic currency. Have exports from the EU stopped ? I am having a new car delivered in October.
Don't worry BMW, Mercedes, Audi etc. will still be sold in the UK. I am not sure how many Qashqais will be sold.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Fair enough, in that case why are they wasting our time (and theirs) pretending there is something to discuss about payments and the Irish border? It would be much more sensible for both sides to concentrate on setting up the customs controls.
And how do they expect us to agree either the money or the NI border, before we’ve even discussed what the trade and customs agreements will look like?
I have some sympathy with that complaint in principle. The real issue however is that the government is unwilling or unable to say what it wants. On customs the choice for us is between remaining in the EU "customs union" or hard borders with much more red tape. The government rejects customs union, which would be the logical conclusion of everything else it says its positionless "position" papers, while not acknowledging that no customs union means hard borders. Either way it has no implication for the money issue and no customs union means a hard border in Ireland, or just possibly a united Ireland. The government's "creative ambiguity" is simply denial of reality combined with wishful thinking and time wasting waffle.
No, she can't turn it round, but she can salvage her reputation and depart with grace, if Brexit can be negotiated without total chaos. How big an 'if' that is remains to be seen.
Although many of her woes are self-inflicted, it's also the case that the media like to knock down those that they have built up. Before the election, she was getting an over-favourable press, and a correction was inevitable. What was surprising was the speed and ferocity of that correction.
Jeremy Corbyn has arguably followed the reverse trajectory, but Labour shouldn't kid themselves that the fundamentals have changed.
Maybe, but she needs to crack on really. Her not condemning Trump was a mis-step: that's a free hit on an unpopular president saying stupid things.
The President of our largest destination for exports who we need a trade deal or at least favourable trading terms with as soon as Brexit is completed, not a good idea to attack him
Exactly. Why the flip is virtue signaling to achieve nothing in particular more important than getting possibly the most important trade deal in our history?
Exactly, we need favourable trafing terms with the US (even under Trump) more than the US needs favourable trading terms with us
It's ironic that most of the things we need for Brexit to be a success can be best delivered by remaining in the EU.
That is the paradox. The best Brexit is no Brexit.
Still, think of all that cheap Australian iron ore that we could import if we were free of EU shackles.
You are ignoring the immigration issue, the referendum was immigration control and sovereignty v the economy and immigration control narrowly won
The referendum was about the NHS based on the big lie. The official campaign barely mentioned immigration which, of course, is central to a healthy economy.
.
In bradford it was all about immigration,even from the Asian community,you don't see what is happening on the ground mike.
If this were a divorce, then we'd have some obligations for child maintenance 'till they left school. How many EU 'kids' are there still in school? Four, five?
Do we have obligations to the EU 'kids' beyond the budgets agreed to 2020? It's clear there is no legal provision to force us to pay beyond that date.
If the Commission wants some more money, it's going to have to put something on the table in return... ooh, I know. How about a comprehensive free trade deal?
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in stallmentd over say 5 years? Does it include CNN for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
I don't think a Brexit bill of anything like that figure will be paid. It would be political suicide. It is yet another reason that WTO hard Brexit is nailed on.
Even if it is WTO, are we going to renege on liabilities we have signed up for ? Will UK behave like a third world country ?
I thought the UK had zero liabilities from a purely legal standpoint.
If there were no liabilities why is the British government talking about it. I thought £36bn was more or less agreed.
So you expect British national EU pensioners would receive their pensions ?
I was in Devon in 1999 and I'd forgotten just how dark it goes at the end. These people on the Lizard were really unlucky but they did get to see the diamond ring:
The eclipse was a total non-event. It got so it was like being slightly overcast for a couple of minutes and that was it.
damn weather getting in the way.
I think Tim's referring to the dimming? It's surprising how much of the sun has to be obscured for a noticeable drop in brightness.
According to NASA I had a 98.67% total eclipse, yet you hardly noticed any darkness. Even the crickets weren't fooled. Bugger
That’s a bugger. I’m sure your daughter had a different experience, from what was shown on the NASA stream it got very dark in the area of totality, albeit only for a minute or two.
Yes. I saw the 1999 total eclipse from a clear site in France. Totality is a qualitatively different experience to even a high-coverage partial eclipse (so long as it's not cloudy). Everyone should witness at least one total solar eclipse in their lifetime!
I can see why people say this site is turning into a place where people say the same things over and over again.
Yes leave lied but clearly so did remain (where was the punishment budget for example? Or Cameron staying on after the loss as promised?) and when it is pointed out they are quiet for an hour and then get all angry about leave lying in the campaign.
Even if the only lies that were told were on the leave side and remain was 100% honest, the referendum has finished and we are where we are. People just weren't convinced by the EU and a lot of people had waited years to tell them to stuff it.
Actually this site gives a good indication about the mindset of the political class. Still obsessed about the referendum and not really all that bothered about the rise of Islamic extremism even as the attacks seem to be happening weekly now somewhere in Europe. I have a feeling the average bloke on the street is much more concerned about the latter.
What betting markets have you seen on Islamic extremism?
Where's the betting markets for whether leave lied more than remain in the referendum last year?
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
He holds all the cards. He is not even hiding them.
OK. He is short sighted and can't see potential hole in the EU budget, or is that one of his cards?
There will be no hole in the EU budget. Under WTO, importers of British products will be paying duties on the imports. It will more than cover the budget "hole".
But what about the loss of a large part of the £280bn a year exports to the UK because UK people choose global and domestic alternatives which would become better value to the current EU imports?
What about all our exports to the EU ?
Any export from the EU today already costs 15% more than it did on 23rd June 2016 because the pound has become a banana republic currency. Have exports from the EU stopped ? I am having a new car delivered in October.
Don't worry BMW, Mercedes, Audi etc. will still be sold in the UK. I am not sure how many Qashqais will be sold.
You claimed that "Under WTO, importers of British products will be paying duties on the imports. It will more than cover the budget "hole"." But you assume that financially the EU will suffer no loss. I gave you examples of how they will lose under WTO rules and lose most of the circa £12bn nett we pay into the EU each year.
This argument is becoming sterile, i doubt many people will change their views but if wevare talking about falsehoods and lies the the letter from my leaver MP telling me that my expat rights would be garuntted because we would never leave EFTA/EEA was a blatent lieto which he wont respond. Time I think to leave it for six months until there is something concrete to discuss.
Does. M. Barnier understand negotiation? I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
On the contrary, he is rather good at it.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
However, the truth is it is all inextricably linked.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in installments over say 5 years? Does it include costs for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
Yes, that's true. But we don't have to pay a penny without the full deal. Round 1 is about saying "We're prepared to pay £50bn (or whatever) if everything else is OK". Round 2 is about what we'd get. If Round 2 fails, Round 1 is inoperative, although there will be some binding commitments that we can't renege on without going all banana republic.
Personally I think there will be a cobbled-together deal in the end. It's in the EU's DNA to fudge, and we have no snsible choice but to fudge.
If this were a divorce, then we'd have some obligations for child maintenance 'till they left school. How many EU 'kids' are there still in school? Four, five?
Do we have obligations to the EU 'kids' beyond the budgets agreed to 2020? It's clear there is no legal provision to force us to pay beyond that date.
If the Commission wants some more money, it's going to have to put something on the table in return... ooh, I know. How about a comprehensive free trade deal?
Job done.
That's roughly how it works, though I suspect you are overestimating the benefits delivered, compared with now, and underestimating the payments. Brexit will be poor value for money compared with the membership package. But that's sort of OK. The EU maintains the value of its membership, which is what it wants above all, while we get something too, even if that something is much less than what we had before.
An interesting article. "British families are putting aside more money than was previously thought, indicating that the savings crisis may not be as acute as feared. The average household saved 8.4pc of their income in 2015, new estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate, substantially higher than the 6.5pc previously estimated."
An interesting article. "British families are putting aside more money than was previously thought, indicating that the savings crisis may not be as acute as feared. The average household saved 8.4pc of their income in 2015, new estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate, substantially higher than the 6.5pc previously estimated."
An interesting article. "British families are putting aside more money than was previously thought, indicating that the savings crisis may not be as acute as feared. The average household saved 8.4pc of their income in 2015, new estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate, substantially higher than the 6.5pc previously estimated."
An interesting article. "British families are putting aside more money than was previously thought, indicating that the savings crisis may not be as acute as feared. The average household saved 8.4pc of their income in 2015, new estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate, substantially higher than the 6.5pc previously estimated."
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsgWUq0fdKk
Edit: NSFW.
I rather doubt it from the way he behaves.
A clear position discussed and agreed with all parties on his side of the table. The contrast with DD's deliberate ambiguity is marked.
I understand that Leavers are embarrassed about the Vote Leave campaign, and rightly so, but they do protest too much on this particular point.
As Tusk said last October, there is only Hard Brexit or no Brexit. This is the EU position and the A50 default position.
Yes leave lied but clearly so did remain (where was the punishment budget for example? Or Cameron staying on after the loss as promised?) and when it is pointed out they are quiet for an hour and then get all angry about leave lying in the campaign.
Even if the only lies that were told were on the leave side and remain was 100% honest, the referendum has finished and we are where we are. People just weren't convinced by the EU and a lot of people had waited years to tell them to stuff it.
Actually this site gives a good indication about the mindset of the political class. Still obsessed about the referendum and not really all that bothered about the rise of Islamic extremism even as the attacks seem to be happening weekly now somewhere in Europe.
I have a feeling the average bloke on the street is much more concerned about the latter.
There are simply discussions to be had on the mechanisms of Brexit. The destination is clear. It is possible that a trade deal could be done in time, but not by Easter 2019.
https://twitter.com/LeaveHQ/status/899677331370934273
https://twitter.com/LeaveHQ/status/899678216184623104
https://twitter.com/LeaveHQ/status/899678603188809728
Why tie ourselves up in knots about what happened last year? Shouldn't we be arguing about how to make the best exit?
So, yes, 350m was a lie and, yes, there was definite contact between Maradona's hand and the ball. Time to move on.
The UK really is facing an existential crisis.
Let's say they eventually say the "bill" they want is 50bn. More than we want but not necessarily utterly bonkers depending on how it's sliced up ( does that include 20bn for the normal stuff till March 2019? Is the rest in installments over say 5 years? Does it include costs for pensions? Can we offset some against the notional assets we presumably own 12.5% of etc etc etc) and say it came with full fat caffeinated access as now including the City, no tariffs etc. Well that would be one thing we'd probably make a reluctant show of but actually think "ok" reasonable deal let's be best buddies.
If 50 bn however, came with loads of strings, full fat ECJ, a commitment to open door EU migration, and they wanted it paid upfront in one hit. Well to put it mildly, that would be another thing.
£50 might be a reasonable restaurant bill if you've eaten grandly with three courses and decent plonk. It's not if it's baked potato with cheesy beans. You can't actually know the value of one part of the deal without the other.
FFS
It is quite clear that a deal is there to be done.
I have to believe the grown ups will sort this out. No-one benefits from hard borders and tariffs, and the EU Commission are going to have a lot of explaining to do if they come out €10bn a year short of their budget.
At least UK politicians can blame the voters!
Oh, wait. They did need to care. Because they lost.
Only actually Brexiting will begin shake the metropolitan liberal elite out of their complacency....
I think Bonnie Tyler is about to sing....
So why do most active REMAINers keep going on and on and on about the need for a soft Brexit, if it is an impossible arrangement with the EU?
So you expect British national EU pensioners would receive their pensions ?
On pensions, that's not a liability to the EU.
Any export from the EU today already costs 15% more than it did on 23rd June 2016 because the pound has become a banana republic currency. Have exports from the EU stopped ? I am having a new car delivered in October.
Don't worry BMW, Mercedes, Audi etc. will still be sold in the UK. I am not sure how many Qashqais will be sold.
https://twitter.com/iansco/status/899692562222649345
Do we have obligations to the EU 'kids' beyond the budgets agreed to 2020? It's clear there is no legal provision to force us to pay beyond that date.
If the Commission wants some more money, it's going to have to put something on the table in return... ooh, I know. How about a comprehensive free trade deal?
Job done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3z3TeSww90
But you assume that financially the EU will suffer no loss. I gave you examples of how they will lose under WTO rules and lose most of the circa £12bn nett we pay into the EU each year.
Personally I think there will be a cobbled-together deal in the end. It's in the EU's DNA to fudge, and we have no snsible choice but to fudge.
Seriously, it does rather seem like someone doesn't want him to be heard. And God knows Twitter is usually a fairly broad church.
"British families are putting aside more money than was previously thought, indicating that the savings crisis may not be as acute as feared.
The average household saved 8.4pc of their income in 2015, new estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate, substantially higher than the 6.5pc previously estimated."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/21/savings-crisis-might-britons-put-away-money-thought/
£530,000 cash have been found by police during raids at three properties in Merseyside.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-40986373