I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
chortle
while youre at it see if you can find a confident articulation for remain
3 political parties couldnt find one last year and still cant
So, no argument then.
To an extent you're right my frustrations come from my rather limited and elderly social circle, many of whom, based on years of conditioning by the DM, voted out. When asked what they din't like about the EU it was because they told us kids could't play conkers any more, banannas had to be straight and there were too many brown faces in their home town.
You're just repeating yourself. Trump is a sideshow. The US "establishment" and China are both pro-Remain.
With the UK heading out, we undeniably lose some of our influence with the two superpowers of the 21st century.
Some on this board positively welcome that. I do not.
I would regret the loss of influence, if I thought we had any. In fact the closest we got with the US was that in the Iraq war Bush temporarily granted us Most Favoured Sycophant status, and China has probably scarcely heard of us. Quite simply, we are small beer.
Compare the relative international influence of May vs Merkel and Blair vs Schroeder.
Now it could be just my warped view of the world but I think it's fair to say that the pendulum has swung towards the German leader. The primary reason for our decline is our political estrangement from the EU since we opted out of the Euro.
No.
The primary reason is because of the slow and painful rebuilding of the German economy which has turned it into the world's second-largest exporter of manufactured goods while a certain Chancellor and PM ducked hard decisions and left our economy too far in debt and dependent on house prices and credit cards for prosperity. Neither course was inevitable or solely due to our choices on the Euro.
Indeed, if we had been in the Euro, the whole of Europe would surely have broken to pieces when RBS went under - it as near as toucher did for Ireland.
And to think I get accused of catastrophising by Brexiteers... (That scenario would have have been of the same order of magnitude as that crisis faced by the US in the same era and whatever it took would have been done.)
Imagine however an alternative history in which Brown had continued the rebalancing that had happened under Major and Clarke and not got out the national credit card, mortgage lending had been more tightly regulated, and on top of that we had joined the Euro.
Not only would we have been better prepared for the financial crisis but we would have permanently cemented the City's position as the financial capital of the Eurozone, we would have been more insulated from migration pressure due to wage differentials as our currency wouldn't have become overvalued as it was for too long. We would have been at the table when all the key decisions regarding the Eurozone had been taken. The dysfunctional semi-detached relationship with the EU that we ended with would have been avoided. The current crisis wouldn't have happened and we'd have been altogether more at ease with our successful and privileged position in Europe and the world.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
The argument is the same. We're a bad fit as members, because we don't support political and economic integration, and we wish to govern ourselves. Nothing that has happened since 23/06/16 has changed that.
You're just repeating yourself. Trump is a sideshow. The US "establishment" and China are both pro-Remain.
With the UK heading out, we undeniably lose some of our influence with the two superpowers of the 21st century.
Some on this board positively welcome that. I do not.
I would regret the loss of influence, if I thought we had any. In fact the closest we got with the US was that in the Iraq war Bush temporarily granted us Most Favoured Sycophant status, and China has probably scarcely heard of us. Quite simply, we are small beer.
Compare the relative international influence of May vs Merkel and Blair vs Schroeder.
Now it could be just my warped view of the world but I think it's fair to say that the pendulum has swung towards the German leader. The primary reason for our decline is our political estrangement from the EU since we opted out of the Euro.
No.
The primary reason is because of the slow and painful rebuilding of the German economy which has turned it into the world's second-largest exporter of manufactured goods while a certain Chancellor and PM ducked hard decisions and left our economy too far in debt and dependent on house prices and credit cards for prosperity. Neither course was inevitable or solely due to our choices on the Euro.
Indeed, if we had been in the Euro, the whole of Europe would surely have broken to pieces when RBS went under - it as near as toucher did for Ireland.
And to think I get accused of catastrophising by Brexiteers... (That scenario would have have been of the same order of magnitude as that crisis faced by the US in the same era and whatever it took would have been done.)
Imagine however an alternative history in which Brown had continued the rebalancing that had happened under Major and Clarke and not got out the national credit card, mortgage lending had been more tightly regulated, and on top of that we had joined the Euro.
Not only would we have been better prepared for the financial crisis but we would have permanently cemented the City's position as the financial capital of the Eurozone, we would have been more insulated from migration pressure due to wage differentials as our currency wouldn't have become overvalued as it was for too long. We would have been at the table when all the key decisions regarding the Eurozone had been taken. The dysfunctional semi-detached relationship with the EU that we ended with would have been avoided. The current crisis wouldn't have happened and we'd have been altogether more at ease with our successful and privileged position in Europe and the world.
No.Indeed, if we had been in the Euro, the whole of Europe would surely have broken to pieces when RBS went under - it as near as toucher did for Ireland.
And to think I get accused of catastrophising by Brexiteers... (That scenario would have have been of the same order of magnitude as that crisis faced by the US in the same era and whatever it took would have been done.)
Imagine however an alternative history in which Brown had continued the rebalancing that had happened under Major and Clarke and not got out the national credit card, mortgage lending had been more tightly regulated, and on top of that we had joined the Euro.
Not only would we have been better prepared for the financial crisis but we would have permanently cemented the City's position as the financial capital of the Eurozone, we would have been more insulated from migration pressure due to wage differentials as our currency wouldn't have become overvalued as it was for too long. We would have been at the table when all the key decisions regarding the Eurozone had been taken. The dysfunctional semi-detached relationship with the EU that we ended with would have been avoided. The current crisis wouldn't have happened and we'd have been altogether more at ease with our successful and privileged position in Europe and the world.
The US has a fiscal transfer system. The EU does not. The US has a tax authority that can raise money. The EU does not. The US has the ability to borrow. The EU did not.
Your imagination is a sheer fantasy. Ireland went bust because of government complacency. Our government was far worse. Our economy is similar, but many times larger. Ireland nearly broke the Euro over around £75 billion to rescue their banks. Do you honestly think it would have survived us? Because if so, answer me where the £260 billion to bail out the banks would have come from.
However, as you proved this morning you do not let facts however unarguable get in the way of your views. Or are you still arguing that because Churchill's views were anti-federalist at the time he would be pro-federalist now merely because I pointed out that you are wrong?
The reason you are criticised is because of your stubbornness, not your hyperbole. Indeed, arguably it is people like you that have made this mess - rudeness, arrogance and stubbornness that have led others to assume that because you will never admit when you are wrong, you must be wrong all the time, and in any case as you are insufferable on those occasions you are right you are not worth listening to anyway. That is exactly what led to the out vote - not the NHS millions, not even immigration, but the sense of being ignored.
PS - please remember this is from a Remainer. Think how you come across to everyone else.
maybe thats when you should have set your stall out
So again none.
In my case I was moderately Eurosceptic but realised during the campaign that Brexit would make us significantly poorer and less influential while not addressing any real issues the country faces.
I recognised Brexit would mean marginal improvements to sovereignty, particularly around the ECJ - which seemed to be increasingly overweening in aspects of domestic policy.
Immigration was also an issue for me (as the massive increases since 1997 seemed undemocratic to me), but I have not yet seen an argument to say we couldn't have addressed this with much tougher restrictions on benefits and indeed by raising the income threshold for non-Europeans. I noted that, after all, we had failed to control non-European immigration despite years of debate.
No.Indeed, if we had been in the Euro, the whole of Europe would surely have broken to pieces when RBS went under - it as near as toucher did for Ireland.
And to think I get accused of catastrophising by Brexiteers... (That scenario would have have been of the same order of magnitude as that crisis faced by the US in the same era and whatever it took would have been done.)
Imagine however an alternative history in which Brown had continued the rebalancing that had happened under Major and Clarke and not got out the national credit card, mortgage lending had been more tightly regulated, and on top of that we had joined the Euro.
Not only would we have been better prepared for the financial crisis but we would have permanently cemented the City's position as the financial capital of the Eurozone, we would have been more insulated from migration pressure due to wage differentials as our currency wouldn't have become overvalued as it was for too long. We would have been at the table when all the key decisions regarding the Eurozone had been taken. The dysfunctional semi-detached relationship with the EU that we ended with would have been avoided. The current crisis wouldn't have happened and we'd have been altogether more at ease with our successful and privileged position in Europe and the world.
The US has a fiscal transfer system. The EU does not. The US has a tax authority that can raise money. The EU does not. The US has the ability to borrow. The EU did not.
Your imagination is a sheer fantasy. Ireland went bust because of government complacency. Our government was far worse. Our economy is similar, but many times larger. Ireland nearly broke the Euro over around £75 billion to rescue their banks. Do you honestly think it would have survived us? Because if so, answer me where the £260 billion to bail out the banks would have come from.
However, as you proved this morning you do not let facts however unarguable get in the way of your views. Or are you still arguing that because Churchill's views were anti-federalist at the time he would be pro-federalist now merely because I pointed out that you are wrong?
The reason you are criticised is because of your stubbornness, not your hyperbole. Indeed, arguably it is people like you that have made this mess - rudeness, arrogance and stubbornness that have led others to assume that because you will never admit when you are wrong, you must be wrong all the time, and in any case as you are insufferable on those occasions you are right you are not worth listening to anyway. That is exactly what led to the out vote - not the NHS millions, not even immigration, but the sense of being ignored.
PS - pleas remember this is from a Remainer. Think how you come across to everyone else.
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
However, as you proved this morning you do not let facts however unarguable get in the way of your views. Or are you still arguing that because Churchill's views were anti-federalist at the time he would be pro-federalist now merely because I pointed out that you are wrong?
I'll just address this bit as you seem to have taken particular exception to it. The only reason for even mentioning Churchill is that he is so often invoked (frequently with false quotations) by the Brexiteer tendency and because there is such a rich vein of material which proves that his view were altogether more nuanced. Now, as you're well versed in those nuances you're perfectly within your rights to object to his name being invoked on either side of the debate but it should have been clear that this was only done in order to tease those who treat him as the poster child of British isolationism. FF43 was correct to say that we just don't know what Churchill would have thought in the present circumstances, and it's another debate entirely as to whether or not we should even care.
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Good for UK tourist trade. My son and wife (lives in Vancouver) have just booked two weeks in Scotland and Wales next year and the pound - canadian dollar rate is good for them
It's interesting that so far Vince doesn't seem to be attracting more support for the LibDems than Tim Farron managed, but I suspect that people aren't paying that much attention to politics at the moment,
So Tories and LDs now unchanged from the general election but Labour up 2%, presumably from the SNP? If so more bad news for Sturgeon
No need to make guesses about a subsample when you can actually look at the Yougov one.
Which I'm sure you already have.
I was talking about ICM but the yougov subsample still has the SNP below the 45% Yes got in 2014
You thicko , not everybody who voted yes was an SNP voter. How stupid can one person be. There is no correlation.
No correlation at all?
85% correlation between supporting independence and the SNP. The percentages supporting both fluctuate but mostly in step.
On topic, the sooner we leave, the sooner we rejoin.
I think that rejoining would be too bitter a pill to take. I imagine that there may be some groundswell of opinion that we should, but actually doing so - I think it's a step too far. That would change if the EU itself changed of course.
There won't be a need to do so anyway. It'll be hard for us to mess Brexit up - we have the jewel in the crown - London. As such Brexit or whatever fate the future might hold is pretty likely to be good for the UK. You'd have to try quite hard to derail that.
(As a peripheral, and political, point I do fear that Corbyn might just try hard enough)
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Markets can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent.
Nonetheless it is likely that Sterling will drop further. The Eurozone is growing strongly and inward investment to the UK looking fragile, while the current account deficit remains substantial.
what we could do, with those billions of foreign aid that we give to eu (you may not know the eu steals a helping of our aid budget too), is build some sea borne help for disasters. build them here, lease them out in quiet times like we do aircraft tankers.
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Markets can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent.
Nonetheless it is likely that Sterling will drop further. The Eurozone is growing strongly and inward investment to the UK looking fragile, while the current account deficit remains substantial.
It's all rather nice for companies that mostly bill in Euros and Dollars. Sadly, we do less than 5% of our business in Sterling ;-)
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Markets can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent.
Nonetheless it is likely that Sterling will drop further. The Eurozone is growing strongly and inward investment to the UK looking fragile, while the current account deficit remains substantial.
Not what the financial commentators were saying on Bloomberg. They expect a rally in the pound later this year
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Good for UK tourist trade. My son and wife (lives in Vancouver) have just booked two weeks in Scotland and Wales next year and the pound - canadian dollar rate is good for them
Yes, it’s a definite benefit for the British tourist industry.
However, as you proved this morning you do not let facts however unarguable get in the way of your views. Or are you still arguing that because Churchill's views were anti-federalist at the time he would be pro-federalist now merely because I pointed out that you are wrong?
I'll just address this bit as you seem to have taken particular exception to it. The only reason for even mentioning Churchill is that he is so often invoked (frequently with false quotations) by the Brexiteer tendency and because there is such a rich vein of material which proves that his view were altogether more nuanced. Now, as you're well versed in those nuances you're perfectly within your rights to object to his name being invoked on either side of the debate but it should have been clear that this was only done in order to tease those who treat him as the poster child of British isolationism. FF43 was correct to say that we just don't know what Churchill would have thought in the present circumstances, and it's another debate entirely as to whether or not we should even care.
OK, I've calmed down a bit, so I'll answer straightforwardly.
You said that Churchill was in favour of a USE involving Britain. I pointed out you were wrong, and explained how and why you were wrong, confusing two points that were admittedly unclear to one who doesn't know the subject, which is why I thought it important to correct you.
You then said that if Churchill had been alive today, he would have been in favour of a federal Europe because he would have wanted influence in Europe. I was working at the time but I did see it. There are two things to say (1) that wasn't your original point and (2) arguing counterfactually is not making an argument, it is guessing. I could more validly point out there is ample evidence that he would never have thought of Britain's influence declining that far - indeed, even after Suez he did not. The first is goalpost moving, a sign of losing the argument. The second is not really relevant.
I get very fed up with people using historical figures for any cause, but particularly on the basis of selective quoting. What you were doing - and you are not by any means the first to do this - was trying to twist it the other way to make it look as if Churchill supported Britain being part of a federal Europe. Which he did not. The Duke of Windsor did, and had done since before the war. But not Churchill. So I felt that if made in error, you were foolish not to accept your mistake - we all make them and that would have been fine - and if it was not in error it was straightforward dishonesty.
Can you understand why I am irritated with you? Such behaviour hardens attitudes, not softens them.
@TSE - it looks very exciting but I imagine it must have been frustrating too?
Part of me was very happy for the Windies, but the other part of me was fearful, if that's the best we can bowl on a fifth day, then we're going to get absolutely mullered by the Aussies.
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
There was a discussion on Bloomberg a few days ago that came to the conclusion the pound is now undervalued and expectation is that it will bounce back. The US rate is quite good at present
Unhappily Berlin is not in the US.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
Markets can remain irrational far longer than you can remain solvent.
Nonetheless it is likely that Sterling will drop further. The Eurozone is growing strongly and inward investment to the UK looking fragile, while the current account deficit remains substantial.
That was my point, Dr! But thank you for articulating it so clearly.
You're just repeating yourself. Trump is a sideshow. The US "establishment" and China are both pro-Remain.
With the UK heading out, we undeniably lose some of our influence with the two superpowers of the 21st century.
Some on this board positively welcome that. I do not.
I would regret the loss of influence, if I thought we had any. In fact the closest we got with the US was that in the Iraq war Bush temporarily granted us Most Favoured Sycophant status, and China has probably scarcely heard of us. Quite simply, we are small beer.
Apart from China the US, Russia and maybe India there are not really that many bigger beers out of 190 global nations
That reminds me of William Gibson's gag about nations so backward that they still took the concept of nationhood seriously. From the US or China, we look like 3 or 4% (if that) of EMEA.
The US and China are big nations but still represent less than a fifth of the world's population combined, even if a bit more of the world's gdp
I wish I could have sey treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. e of Brexit today.
chortle
while y and still cant
So, no argument then.
I out
So again none.
In my case I was moderately Eurosceptic but realised during the campaign that Brexit would make us significantly poorer and less influential while not addressing any real issues the country faces.
I recog
Immigration was also an issue for me (as the massive increases since 1997 seemed undemocratic to me), but I have not yet seen an argument to say we couldn't have addressed this with much tougher restrictions on benefits and indeed by raising the income threshold for non-Europeans. I noted that, after all, we had failed to control non-European immigration despite years of debate.
Remain led an appalling campaign though.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
Well I froze my nuts off at Headingley to see history made.
Paging Liverpool fans, looks like we've accepted a €160 million bid for Judas Philippe 'Mark Reckless' Coutinho.
What a sporting shit show of a day.
We’ve just done what? Whatever happened to him not being for sale at any price?
Apparently Klopp's decided he doesn't want him to ever play for Liverpool again now that Coutinho is fit to play for Brazil on Thursday and that he was faking that back injury.
FSG will do whatever Klopp tells them to do.
Edit - The assumption is that the deal won't be announced until we've signed Van Dijk and Lemar.
@TSE - it looks very exciting but I imagine it must have been frustrating too?
Part of me was very happy for the Windies, but the other part of me was fearful, if that's the best we can bowl on a fifth day, then we're going to get absolutely mullered by the Aussies.
Yes. We need a cutting edge somewhere especially as Anderson will surely not run through sides in Oz.
Assuming the EU and member countries don't care what the UK public think about the money demands, the problem is that walking away without a deal doesn't resolve anything. Massively the opposite actually. There will be chaos and our government would have justify that chaos to the public. They are far better taking the hit on the money and moving on.
The problem with that analysis is the EU27 are not offering a deal in return for the money. If they were, we could have a sensible negotiation.
We can propose what we like with whatever conditionality we like just as the EU have done. We don't because the government is unwilling to justify any plausible figure to the British public. What the EU will offer is a degree of continuity. They won't offer a trade deal beyond an agreement to have one at some point. Brexit will be expensive because we will be going a la carte instead buying the package and because we will aim to buy influence as a substitute for membership and direct influence. It's pay to play basically.
Yes it is pay to play - sure. But what's on offer? Full tariff free access no holds barred just like now, with full control of borders without ECJ, and some technology Norway/Sweden style border betweeen Armagh and Dundalk, or no guarantee about tariffs, full ECJ control full immigration rights as now? Or something between the two? - the more likely one would think.
If I offer £50 without seeing the a la carte possibilities am I getting fine dining or baked potato with cheesy beans and a vertical fish finger sticking out of it? I'd like an idea before offering £50, or £40 or 99p,
If we don't think it's worth the price asked of us, we won't pay it, obviously. The problem is that Leave was sold on the premise that there would no cost, so the government finds it hard to suggest that paying more to get less than what we had before is still better than paying nothing and getting nothing. Nothing, which is the Article 50 default, means chaos and it doesn't resolve anything because when we reach out again to the EU, which inevitably we will, they won't have forgotten about the exit fee. There are lots of ways to skin a cat and €40 billion, or even €100 billion, isn't a huge amount in the scheme of things as long as you structure it advantageously. We should concentrate on the cat skinning. This isn't a good place for us to get hung up.
On topic, the sooner we leave, the sooner we rejoin.
I think that rejoining would be too bitter a pill to take. I imagine that there may be some groundswell of opinion that we should, but actually doing so - I think it's a step too far. That would change if the EU itself changed of course.
There won't be a need to do so anyway. It'll be hard for us to mess Brexit up - we have the jewel in the crown - London. As such Brexit or whatever fate the future might hold is pretty likely to be good for the UK. You'd have to try quite hard to derail that.
(As a peripheral, and political, point I do fear that Corbyn might just try hard enough)
The EU will likely split anyway in a decade or so with the non Eurozone nations, ie Sweden, Denmark and most of Eastern Europe joining ourselves and Norway and Switzerland in an enlarged EFTA
You're just repeating yourself. Trump is a sideshow. The US "establishment" and China are both pro-Remain.
With the UK heading out, we undeniably lose some of our influence with the two superpowers of the 21st century.
Some on this board positively welcome that. I do not.
I would regret the loss of influence, if I thought we had any. In fact the closest we got with the US was that in the Iraq war Bush temporarily granted us Most Favoured Sycophant status, and China has probably scarcely heard of us. Quite simply, we are small beer.
Apart from China the US, Russia and maybe India there are not really that many bigger beers out of 190 global nations
That reminds me of William Gibson's gag about nations so backward that they still took the concept of nationhood seriously. From the US or China, we look like 3 or 4% (if that) of EMEA.
The US and China are big nations but still represent less than a fifth of the world's population combined, even if a bit more of the world's gdp
1.7 is more than a fifth of 7.5.
Admittedly both are estimates but it isn't a close error.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
OK, I've calmed down a bit, so I'll answer straightforwardly.
You said that Churchill was in favour of a USE involving Britain. I pointed out you were wrong, and explained how and why you were wrong, confusing two points that were admittedly unclear to one who doesn't know the subject, which is why I thought it important to correct you.
You then said that if Churchill had been alive today, he would have been in favour of a federal Europe because he would have wanted influence in Europe. I was working at the time but I did see it. There are two things to say (1) that wasn't your original point and (2) arguing counterfactually is not making an argument, it is guessing. I could more validly point out there is ample evidence that he would never have thought of Britain's influence declining that far - indeed, even after Suez he did not. The first is goalpost moving, a sign of losing the argument. The second is not really relevant.
I get very fed up with people using historical figures for any cause, but particularly on the basis of selective quoting. What you were doing - and you are not by any means the first to do this - was trying to twist it the other way to make it look as if Churchill supported Britain being part of a federal Europe. Which he did not. The Duke of Windsor did, and had done since before the war. But not Churchill. So I felt that if made in error, you were foolish not to accept your mistake - we all make them and that would have been fine - and if it was not in error it was straightforward dishonesty.
Can you understand why I am irritated with you? Such behaviour hardens attitudes, not softens them.
Yes I do understand, however if you're going to put words in my mouth we should be accurate. This was the exchange that started the whole discussion. It seems to me that your response anticipated something I hadn't actually said and wasn't strictly accurate without a very specific understanding of the term 'Europe'.
Well I froze my nuts off at Headingley to see history made.
Paging Liverpool fans, looks like we've accepted a €160 million bid for Judas Philippe 'Mark Reckless' Coutinho.
What a sporting shit show of a day.
We’ve just done what? Whatever happened to him not being for sale at any price?
Apparently Klopp's decided he doesn't want him to ever play for Liverpool again now that Coutinho is fit to play for Brazil on Thursday and that he was faking that back injury.
FSG will do whatever Klopp tells them to do.
Edit - The assumption is that the deal won't be announced until we've signed Van Dijk and Lemar.
On topic, the sooner we leave, the sooner we rejoin.
I think that rejoining would be too bitter a pill to take. I imagine that there may be some groundswell of opinion that we should, but actually doing so - I think it's a step too far. That would change if the EU itself changed of course.
There won't be a need to do so anyway. It'll be hard for us to mess Brexit up - we have the jewel in the crown - London. As such Brexit or whatever fate the future might hold is pretty likely to be good for the UK. You'd have to try quite hard to derail that.
(As a peripheral, and political, point I do fear that Corbyn might just try hard enough)
The EU will likely split anyway in a decade or so with the non Eurozone nations, ie Sweden, Denmark and most of Eastern Europe joining ourselves and Norway and Switzerland in an enlarged EFTA
Candidly I would not be sorry to see that. But I think it will be hard to achieve. Brussels will now have to move towards full federation which will be easier to achieve without us, and the Eastern European states will be more reluctant to reject their demands.
One of Cameron's silliest errors was not to put together a reform block in the EU. It was the more bizarre because it already existed via that new party he put together.
Assuming the EU and member countries don't care what the UK public think about the money demands, the problem is that walking away without a deal doesn't resolve anything. Massively the opposite actually. There will be chaos and our government would have justify that chaos to the public. They are far better taking the hit on the money and moving on.
The problem with that analysis is the EU27 are not offering a deal in return for the money. If they were, we could have a sensible negotiation.
We can propose what we like with whatever conditionality we like just as the EU have done. We don't because the government is unwilling to justify any plausible figure to the British public. What the EU will offer is a degree of continuity. They won't offer a trade deal beyond an agreement to have one at some point. Brexit will be expensive because we will be going a la carte instead buying the package and because we will aim to buy influence as a substitute for membership and direct influence. It's pay to play basically.
Yes it is pay to play - sure. But what's on offer? Full tariff free access no holds barred just like now, with full control of borders without ECJ, and some technology Norway/Sweden style border betweeen Armagh and Dundalk, or no guarantee about tariffs, full ECJ control full immigration rights as now? Or something between the two? - the more likely one would think.
If I offer £50 without seeing the a la carte possibilities am I getting fine dining or baked potato with cheesy beans and a vertical fish finger sticking out of it? I'd like an idea before offering £50, or £40 or 99p,
If we don't think it's worth the price asked of us, we won't pay it, obviously. The problem is that Leave was sold on the premise that there would no cost, so the government finds it hard to suggest that paying more to get less than what we had before is still better than paying nothing and getting nothing. Nothing, which is the Article 50 default, means chaos and it doesn't resolve anything because when we reach out again to the EU, which inevitably we will, they won't have forgotten about the exit fee. There are lots of ways to skin a cat and €40 billion, or even €100 billion, isn't a huge amount in the scheme of things as long as you structure it advantageously. We should concentrate on the cat skinning. This isn't a good place for us to get hung up.
I agree but it takes two to tango and the EU are refusing to engage (publicly anyway). It's one of those things that needs sorting out behind the scenes outside the glare of publicity. Otherwise it doesn't look like it's going anywhere fast.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
I like the the idea of 60/40 becoming 90/10. It is so much more nuanced than the usual Brexit/Remain yah boo. I probably started 50/50 and became 80/20 remain.
Likewise the bus etc made no difference. Bullshit was spouted on both sides and continues to be.
It seems I agree with a lot of your premises, but end up drawing a different conclusion.
First, plaudits to the West Indies for a magnificent effort in the cricket. It's been a long time coming but the re-birth of cricket in the Caribbean is to be welcomed and the current team is developing a nucleus of real talent which in 3-5 years could be one of the best teams in the world.
The polls tell us nothing new - we are in a holding pattern as we have been since the GE with apparent polarisation between two blocs. It's clear some Conservatives (and particularly hyping up Boris) think there will be a window of opportunity in 2020-21 with the departure of May and some well-supported tax cuts to make us all think "Global Britain " is a wonderful place.
Churchill wasn't a Conservative but a Liberal Unionist. He had a strong perhaps romanticised notion of the role and significance of Britain but the fact was we were finished as a world power after WW1 let alone WW2. We were in hock to Washington and as soon as they turned off the financial tap, our true situation became painfully obvious.
One of Cameron's silliest errors was not to put together a reform block in the EU. It was the more bizarre because it already existed via that new party he put together.
I totally agree with this. It seems bizarre that he didn't appear to consider the European dimension of creating a new parliamentary grouping, as if it was purely a sop to his own Eurosceptics. From the perspective of the EPP dominated leaders it meant that he was already not 'one of us' when he came looking for something substantial from his renegotiation.
Can you understand why I am irritated with you? Such behaviour hardens attitudes, not softens them.>
Yes I do understand, however if you're going to put words in my mouth we should be accurate. This was the exchange that started the whole discussion. It seems to me that your response anticipated something I hadn't actually said and wasn't strictly accurate without a very specific understanding of the term 'Europe'.
Churchill certainly had different views on Europe to those expressed in the Remain campaign.
"We must aim at nothing less than the union of Europe as a whole, and we look forward with confidence to the day when that union will be achieved."
The problem with that quotation is of course that Churchill never counted Britain as part of Europe.
Well, that was not the way you came across and it was not the interpretation you seemed to put on it in future discussions. So although I admit I could have expressed my response more clearly I again suspect you of goalpost moving. That's not a question of words in your mouth. You evidently took that quotation as a sign Churchill wanted a USE as our further exchange made clear - you said he might have changed his mind on the subject when I pointed out the context? Are you now denying that you said that?
I do have to say that even if you mean what you are now saying, you at the very least often seem to pick a bad way of expressing yourself. Coupled with your patronising manner it does tend to make you unpopular.
Please do think over what I have said to you. It's great that somebody provides balance to the Leave-heavy discussions but I truly believe you would get further if you were more open minded.
I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow with a very early start, so I am off to bed. Have a good evening.
not sure how many eu contries will benefit after the UK leaves - is it a paying option for most countries now? Germany does pay of course, but it also gets a coercive means to enforce debt repayments, not sure it is now a payer in after its receipts from the rest of the EU. It is interesting to see how Greece is paying for submarines and tanks from Germany...
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
I like the the idea of 60/40 becoming 90/10. It is so much more nuanced than the usual Brexit/Remain yah boo. I probably started 50/50 and became 80/20 remain.
Likewise the bus etc made no difference. Bullshit was spouted on both sides and continues to be.
It seems I agree with a lot of your premises, but end up drawing a different conclusion.
I actually believe I may be long dead and gone before we know the eventual outcome, for the sake of my children and grandchildren I have to hope it is a good outcome but I see little evidence yest that it will be.
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU - I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP - I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate - the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
I like the the idea of 60/40 becoming 90/10. It is so much more nuanced than the usual Brexit/Remain yah boo. I probably started 50/50 and became 80/20 remain.
Likewise the bus etc made no difference. Bullshit was spouted on both sides and continues to be.
It seems I agree with a lot of your premises, but end up drawing a different conclusion.
yes I think so
the question really is what lessons are we to draw from it ?
I have no doubt there will be pain leaving the EU, how much ? Ive no idea, I still believe common sense will prevail at the end of the day and we;ll end up with a typical Euro\british fudge with all sides claiming victory but something workable will emerge
The bigger issue is what we do next. If we use the freedom of movement we have we can make a success of the place if not we will be on a slow decline. Personally Im an optimist but that is not to say I dont have moments of doubt.
More importantly for me however is that the political classes realise Brexit is a sympton of a system which does not work for the majority of our citizens. If the lead remainers could actually get round to asking themselves what went wrong - an it was more than the campaign - we may actually start to rebuild a new potical settlement which will take us through the rest of this century.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
First, plaudits to the West Indies for a magnificent effort in the cricket. It's been a long time coming but the re-birth of cricket in the Caribbean is to be welcomed and the current team is developing a nucleus of real talent which in 3-5 years could be one of the best teams in the world.
The polls tell us nothing new - we are in a holding pattern as we have been since the GE with apparent polarisation between two blocs. It's clear some Conservatives (and particularly hyping up Boris) think there will be a window of opportunity in 2020-21 with the departure of May and some well-supported tax cuts to make us all think "Global Britain " is a wonderful place.
Churchill wasn't a Conservative but a Liberal Unionist. He had a strong perhaps romanticised notion of the role and significance of Britain but the fact was we were finished as a world power after WW1 let alone WW2. We were in hock to Washington and as soon as they turned off the financial tap, our true situation became painfully obvious.
No, Stodge, he was a Conservative 1900-1903, a Liberal 1903-22 on the Lloyd George wing from 1916-22 (in theory again briefly in 23) an Independent 1922-25 and a Conservative from then on. He was never at any stage a Liberal Unionist or a Liberal National although in 1902 he toyed with the idea of joining a party led by Devonshire if Rosebery and Asquith would join too. That never happened so he defected instead.
Neville Chamberlain, of course, was a Liberal Unionist and refused to be called a Conservative (in the 1929 election he still used 'Unionist' and thereafter 'National') but not Churchill.
Also there could be questions asked about our lack of great power status simply because the US abdicated the responsibility they should have taken up. But that's a long conversation I have no energy for.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
The problem is, it's an unanswerable reason. If it were set aside, or even reversed, it would confirm every criticism of the EU as undemocratic and corrupt, determined to carry out the agenda of an elite - and let's face it, a pretty corrupt elite at that - contrary to the will of the people.
I look forward to Brexit without enthusiasm but the prospect of civil war worries me far more. And yes, that is a real possibility. I don't think Remainers leading comfortable lives in the South of England get the very real sense of alienation and even fury from those left behind. If their views are ignored, as they have been for 40 years, they will turn violent.
Until there is a material change - which means, until we have exited and people accept we are sufficiently worse off we have to go back in - we can't set this aside. We have therefore to play this one out.
I basically agree with this. If people vote for something that's the decision made, which incidentally is to leave the EU, nothing more, nothing less. I don't expect Brexit to be a disaster, although there's a real possibility of it being so. I don't expect to go back into the EU in the foreseeable future. But in avoiding disaster while being unwilling to rejoin, I confidently expect Brexit to be very compromised. We will be poorer for it in every way. We will be inward looking, more dependent on the goodwill or at least the indifference of the EU than we ever were as members and resentful because no-one voted for what we will end up getting. People who glibly refer to the opportunities of Brexit are like me thinking of the fortune I could make in what's left of my career. It could happen but it won't.
And I should add, Brexit won't remove the alienation felt by those left behind. It prevents us dealing with it.
You're just repeating yourself. Trump is a sideshow. The US "establishment" and China are both pro-Remain.
With the UK heading out, we undeniably lose some of our influence with the two superpowers of the 21st century.
Some on this board positively welcome that. I do not.
I would regret the loss of influence, if I thought we had any. In fact the closest we got with the US was that in the Iraq war Bush temporarily granted us Most Favoured Sycophant status, and China has probably scarcely heard of us. Quite simply, we are small beer.
Apart from China the US, Russia and maybe India there are not really that many bigger beers out of 190 global nations
That reminds me of William Gibson's gag about nations so backward that they still took the concept of nationhood seriously. From the US or China, we look like 3 or 4% (if that) of EMEA.
The US and China are big nations but still represent less than a fifth of the world's population combined, even if a bit more of the world's gdp
1.7 is more than a fifth of 7.5.
Admittedly both are estimates but it isn't a close error.
OK 22% then, still closer to a fifth than a quarter
On topic, the sooner we leave, the sooner we rejoin.
I think that rejoining would be too bitter a pill to take. I imagine that there may be some groundswell of opinion that we should, but actually doing so - I think it's a step too far. That would change if the EU itself changed of course.
There won't be a need to do so anyway. It'll be hard for us to mess Brexit up - we have the jewel in the crown - London. As such Brexit or whatever fate the future might hold is pretty likely to be good for the UK. You'd have to try quite hard to derail that.
(As a peripheral, and political, point I do fear that Corbyn might just try hard enough)
The EU will likely split anyway in a decade or so with the non Eurozone nations, ie Sweden, Denmark and most of Eastern Europe joining ourselves and Norway and Switzerland in an enlarged EFTA
Candidly I would not be sorry to see that. But I think it will be hard to achieve. Brussels will now have to move towards full federation which will be easier to achieve without us, and the Eastern European states will be more reluctant to reject their demands.
One of Cameron's silliest errors was not to put together a reform block in the EU. It was the more bizarre because it already existed via that new party he put together.
Sweden and Denmark have both each twice rejected the Euro in referendums, so it is likely with them if there were a forced choice of EU and Eurozone or neither, Hungary and Poland's governments are already being tarred as 'extremists' and 'nationalists' by the EU elite so it may not be that long before they start to have second thoughts too.
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
What a partisan response to a non partisan point. A shame.
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
Err, because employees rarely pay their employers to work?
And because we're continually told that we're not vassals of the EU; whereas you're suggesting we are?
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
What a partisan response to a non partisan point. A shame.
Could you please elaborate on how a Tory government post Brexit will redistribute the nations wealth away from London and the South East and towards the poorest people of Britain, and particularly in communities like the NE England or S Wales?
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
What a partisan response to a non partisan point. A shame.
Could you please elaborate on how a Tory government post Brexit will redistribute the nations wealth away from London and the South East and towards the poorest people of Britain, and particularly in communities like the NE England or S Wales?
Both Bake off and Brexit have proved popular with the punters though
Perhaps we no longer want to have our cake and eat it.
were holding out for a bigger slice of the pie
We shortly will be having a giant slice of humble pie...
more like a Barnier crumble
Aber bitte mit Sahne...
creme anglaise
I was in a German restaurant in Texas once, and asked the waitress if they did any German desserts. she apologised that they didn't, just having apple strudel or Black Forest gateaux.
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
But, would I, the employer be making demands of the ex -employee.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
What a partisan response to a non partisan point. A shame.
Could you please elaborate on how a Tory government post Brexit will redistribute the nations wealth away from London and the South East and towards the poorest people of Britain, and particularly in communities like the NE England or S Wales?
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
Is that because you are intrinsically a better person?
Both Bake off and Brexit have proved popular with the punters though
Perhaps we no longer want to have our cake and eat it.
were holding out for a bigger slice of the pie
We shortly will be having a giant slice of humble pie...
more like a Barnier crumble
Aber bitte mit Sahne...
creme anglaise
I was in a German restaurant in Texas once, and asked the waitress if they did any German desserts. she apologised that they didn't, just having apple strudel or Black Forest gateaux.
On holiday last week in Austria I drove past the delightfully named accommodation site Camping Hell
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
Hmm. Perhaps because they want us to buy from them afterwards?
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
But, would I, the employer be making demands of the ex -employee.
If the employee still wanted a relationship with you, yes. Which is where we are with Brexit. If we are happy to be a Tokugawa "closed country" it would be simpler. But we are supposed to be"Britain open for business" and if that means anything we have to deal with the world we live in. Above all we have to deal with the EU.
I wish I could have such unwavering beief in a viewpoit that some leavers have. Their desire to leave is beyond question and yet I have still not seen an argument that tells how in the short or medium term it will make "things better". They treat people who try to explain their concerns with disdain and contempt.
Indeed. The arguments for Brexit have collapsed. The only thing left is "well, we voted for it".
I know Remainers are guilty of a world of guff too, but I search in vain for a confident articulation of Brexit today.
Brexit is the assertion by the majority* that the current social settlement isn't working for them, and the demand that their political servants become more accountable and thus responsive to their needs.
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
My irony meter just explodes off the scale every time a partisan Tory starts talking about the need for redistribution.
Is that because you are intrinsically a better person?
Voting Labour automatically gets you +5 Angelic Points.
No, Stodge, he was a Conservative 1900-1903, a Liberal 1903-22 on the Lloyd George wing from 1916-22 (in theory again briefly in 23) an Independent 1922-25 and a Conservative from then on. He was never at any stage a Liberal Unionist or a Liberal National although in 1902 he toyed with the idea of joining a party led by Devonshire if Rosebery and Asquith would join too. That never happened so he defected instead.
Neville Chamberlain, of course, was a Liberal Unionist and refused to be called a Conservative (in the 1929 election he still used 'Unionist' and thereafter 'National') but not Churchill.
Also there could be questions asked about our lack of great power status simply because the US abdicated the responsibility they should have taken up. But that's a long conversation I have no energy for.
Agree with the rest.
Good night.
If you're going to argue political history with me, you're going to have to do much better than that.
I never said he was a member of a party called Liberal Unionist, there was no such party. If you prefer, he was a liberal unionist. He was so much a loyal Conservative the party tried to de-select him in his Wanstead & Woodford seat before the war.
He was also supposedly going to join a King's Party to fight for Edward VIII to continue on the throne.
Churchill was a Liberal Unionist - he happened to be in the Conservative Party and fortunately for us all was in the right place at the right time when the Conservative appeasers ran out of time and support in the spring of 1940.
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
But, would I, the employer be making demands of the ex -employee.
If the employee still wanted a relationship with you, yes. Which is where we are with Brexit. If we are happy to be a Tokugawa "closed country" it would be simpler. But we are supposed to be"Britain open for business" and if that means anything we have to deal with the world we live in. Above all we have to deal with the EU.
We would be happy to have an economic/business settlement with them. They don't want one. They want political control.
Let's see now, if you, the atypical PB employer had an employee come up to you, and told you they were leaving but wanted to discuss the terms and conditions of their resignation, then you would probably suggest that they depart immediately, any outstanding pay or request for the return of excess will be forwarded, as per the contract signed in good faith by both sides. The employee, no matter how senior or junior they may be has no right to try and dictate how the organisation operates.
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
If, however - as happens frequently in my line of business - there were leaving to join an organisation in which they might become a significant customer then you might be open to a deal that is mutually beneficial (usually related to allowing them to keep unvested stock units)
Comments
Mind you the way Liverpool played Arsenal he won't be missed - and this a genuine comment from a lifelong Man U supporter
Your imagination is a sheer fantasy. Ireland went bust because of government complacency. Our government was far worse. Our economy is similar, but many times larger. Ireland nearly broke the Euro over around £75 billion to rescue their banks. Do you honestly think it would have survived us? Because if so, answer me where the £260 billion to bail out the banks would have come from.
However, as you proved this morning you do not let facts however unarguable get in the way of your views. Or are you still arguing that because Churchill's views were anti-federalist at the time he would be pro-federalist now merely because I pointed out that you are wrong?
The reason you are criticised is because of your stubbornness, not your hyperbole. Indeed, arguably it is people like you that have made this mess - rudeness, arrogance and stubbornness that have led others to assume that because you will never admit when you are wrong, you must be wrong all the time, and in any case as you are insufferable on those occasions you are right you are not worth listening to anyway. That is exactly what led to the out vote - not the NHS millions, not even immigration, but the sense of being ignored.
PS - please remember this is from a Remainer. Think how you come across to everyone else.
In my case I was moderately Eurosceptic but realised during the campaign that Brexit would make us significantly poorer and less influential while not addressing any real issues the country faces.
I recognised Brexit would mean marginal improvements to sovereignty, particularly around the ECJ - which seemed to be increasingly overweening in aspects of domestic policy.
Immigration was also an issue for me (as the massive increases since 1997 seemed undemocratic to me), but I have not yet seen an argument to say we couldn't have addressed this with much tougher restrictions on benefits and indeed by raising the income threshold for non-Europeans. I noted that, after all, we had failed to control non-European immigration despite years of debate.
Remain led an appalling campaign though.
Or was that just the tourist rate?
I'm leading a trip to Berlin this Christmas. It's going to be expensive buying prezzies unless things improve, which seems unlikely.
Well, unhappily from my point of view. I imagine Berliners are quite happy about that.
Thing is currency markets don't seem to be rational, certainly not at the moment. Look at the graph from results night last year.
@TSE - it looks very exciting but I imagine it must have been frustrating too?
There won't be a need to do so anyway. It'll be hard for us to mess Brexit up - we have the jewel in the crown - London. As such Brexit or whatever fate the future might hold is pretty likely to be good for the UK. You'd have to try quite hard to derail that.
(As a peripheral, and political, point I do fear that Corbyn might just try hard enough)
As with pretty much all constitutional reform in this country, it is a perfect demonstration of the error correction inherent within our system that puts elites on notice that the spoils of the day (be they power, money, culture) need to be more evenly shared and not become ever more remote.
*who could be bothered to vote, which in my mind is significant
Nonetheless it is likely that Sterling will drop further. The Eurozone is growing strongly and inward investment to the UK looking fragile, while the current account deficit remains substantial.
You said that Churchill was in favour of a USE involving Britain. I pointed out you were wrong, and explained how and why you were wrong, confusing two points that were admittedly unclear to one who doesn't know the subject, which is why I thought it important to correct you.
You then said that if Churchill had been alive today, he would have been in favour of a federal Europe because he would have wanted influence in Europe. I was working at the time but I did see it. There are two things to say (1) that wasn't your original point and (2) arguing counterfactually is not making an argument, it is guessing. I could more validly point out there is ample evidence that he would never have thought of Britain's influence declining that far - indeed, even after Suez he did not. The first is goalpost moving, a sign of losing the argument. The second is not really relevant.
I get very fed up with people using historical figures for any cause, but particularly on the basis of selective quoting. What you were doing - and you are not by any means the first to do this - was trying to twist it the other way to make it look as if Churchill supported Britain being part of a federal Europe. Which he did not. The Duke of Windsor did, and had done since before the war. But not Churchill. So I felt that if made in error, you were foolish not to accept your mistake - we all make them and that would have been fine - and if it was not in error it was straightforward dishonesty.
Can you understand why I am irritated with you? Such behaviour hardens attitudes, not softens them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
FSG will do whatever Klopp tells them to do.
Edit - The assumption is that the deal won't be announced until we've signed Van Dijk and Lemar.
Admittedly both are estimates but it isn't a close error.
@Gardenwalker
thread getting too long so reposted
In simple terms I started as a 60-40 outer and finished at 90 - 10, I still have some regrets but compromises have to be made.
Bus painting, name calling and all the other guff didnt influence me in the slightest.
I moved becasue
- I work in british manufacturing and believe we will do better outside the EU
- I am happy that the UK can make its own way in the world and that we should be focussing on GDP per head rather than raw GDP
- I prefer to have our politicans held accountable to their electorate
- the british establishment had no coherent argument on the benefits of staying in
I started as eurosceptic because the EU will only work for the UK if we adopt european norms on employment law and this country has no appetite to do so
I believe the EU is fundamentally undemocratic and ignores the wishes of its voters.
The EU bureaucracy wishes to form a unitary state, one I have very little affiliation with. But If the others want to form such a state why should we block them
The treatment of the PIGS in 2008 was by a state I didnt want to be a part of
I have no faith in the british political class who have consistently lied about the EU to the electorate. European politicians have been totally upfront on where they are going our guys arent and need a drubbing to get their act together, They have had 2 of them in the last 15 months,
It will have some pain but ultimately I believe we will come back with a better stronger country when the clock has been reset.
One of Cameron's silliest errors was not to put together a reform block in the EU. It was the more bizarre because it already existed via that new party he put together.
Likewise the bus etc made no difference. Bullshit was spouted on both sides and continues to be.
It seems I agree with a lot of your premises, but end up drawing a different conclusion.
First, plaudits to the West Indies for a magnificent effort in the cricket. It's been a long time coming but the re-birth of cricket in the Caribbean is to be welcomed and the current team is developing a nucleus of real talent which in 3-5 years could be one of the best teams in the world.
The polls tell us nothing new - we are in a holding pattern as we have been since the GE with apparent polarisation between two blocs. It's clear some Conservatives (and particularly hyping up Boris) think there will be a window of opportunity in 2020-21 with the departure of May and some well-supported tax cuts to make us all think "Global Britain " is a wonderful place.
Churchill wasn't a Conservative but a Liberal Unionist. He had a strong perhaps romanticised notion of the role and significance of Britain but the fact was we were finished as a world power after WW1 let alone WW2. We were in hock to Washington and as soon as they turned off the financial tap, our true situation became painfully obvious.
I do have to say that even if you mean what you are now saying, you at the very least often seem to pick a bad way of expressing yourself. Coupled with your patronising manner it does tend to make you unpopular.
Please do think over what I have said to you. It's great that somebody provides balance to the Leave-heavy discussions but I truly believe you would get further if you were more open minded.
I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow with a very early start, so I am off to bed. Have a good evening.
the question really is what lessons are we to draw from it ?
I have no doubt there will be pain leaving the EU, how much ? Ive no idea, I still believe common sense will prevail at the end of the day and we;ll end up with a typical Euro\british fudge with all sides claiming victory but something workable will emerge
The bigger issue is what we do next. If we use the freedom of movement we have we can make a success of the place if not we will be on a slow decline. Personally Im an optimist but that is not to say I dont have moments of doubt.
More importantly for me however is that the political classes realise Brexit is a sympton of a system which does not work for the majority of our citizens. If the lead remainers could actually get round to asking themselves what went wrong - an it was more than the campaign - we may actually start to rebuild a new potical settlement which will take us through the rest of this century.
Neville Chamberlain, of course, was a Liberal Unionist and refused to be called a Conservative (in the 1929 election he still used 'Unionist' and thereafter 'National') but not Churchill.
Also there could be questions asked about our lack of great power status simply because the US abdicated the responsibility they should have taken up. But that's a long conversation I have no energy for.
Agree with the rest.
Good night.
And I should add, Brexit won't remove the alienation felt by those left behind. It prevents us dealing with it.
I agree on Cameron
heres Emily Ratajkowski at least people will have heard of her
We were not even a good member of the community, we refused to take part in many things, we were always moaning and trying to change things to our own benefit and no one else.
Then why do so many believe that just because we are British, the other EU27 should dance to our tune?
https://twitter.com/ellewoodsruns/status/902536119710920704
And because we're continually told that we're not vassals of the EU; whereas you're suggesting we are?
Unbeaten in last 3 premier league games!
Just like CON unbeaten in last 3 big tournaments 2010-2015-2017!
In what way is this different to Corbynism?
Hmm. Perhaps because they want us to buy from them afterwards?
Voting Labour automatically gets you +5 Angelic Points.
I never said he was a member of a party called Liberal Unionist, there was no such party. If you prefer, he was a liberal unionist. He was so much a loyal Conservative the party tried to de-select him in his Wanstead & Woodford seat before the war.
He was also supposedly going to join a King's Party to fight for Edward VIII to continue on the throne.
Churchill was a Liberal Unionist - he happened to be in the Conservative Party and fortunately for us all was in the right place at the right time when the Conservative appeasers ran out of time and support in the spring of 1940.
We would be happy to have an economic/business settlement with them. They don't want one. They want political control.
I expect it's all built now