POINT 1 A good definition of class in 2010's South-East England looks like this:
lower working class: will never buy property, because they cannot afford it upper working class: buys property via mortgage, pays own deposit lower middle class: buys property via mortgage, relatives pay for deposit upper middle class: buys property outright, relatives pay for house upper class: will never buy property, because they will inherit
Hmm. I don't buy property because I want someone else to look after the infrastructure while I spend my money on enjoying life. I like there being lots of BTL landlords as it gives me more choice. What class is that?
Not sure but I can deduce a few things
1) You most likely live in London - it has the lowest rental yields in the country. 2) You have no pets, or small ones if any. 3) You don't particularly have tonnes of material possessions (By weight & volume)
The fundamental problem is not BTL, or second homes or any such thing - it is a huge lack of housing supply to meet demand, particularly in certain areas. Address that and you solve the problem.
Yes, I know that it is an easy problem to state but by no means easy to solve. But it has been the case since the 1970s in the UK since I became a home owner there.
It's an amazing coincidence that house prices started to rocket at exactly the same time as Tennant's rights were weakened and BTL mortgages were introduced.
Tim is simply wrong. The housing unaffordability crisis owes at least as much to the financial and regulatory environment as it does to the amount of houses.
Mr. Sandpit, cheers for mentioning those. Think the Rosberg interview's been up on the website. Who presents the Channel 4 programme? May catch that later, unless it's the irksome one.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
You are not going to get to see what was agreed, I suspect. The aim will be to make it almost impossible to know how much the UK has agreed to pay and, I suspect, it will be very hard to get a clear answer on what has been given up in respect of the ECJ.
The ECJ is a key issue, because it actually makes no legal sense for the UKSC to be able to refer matters to the ECJ on citizens rights. The text of the agreement will be in the A50 treaty, and there is no reason that the UKSC will need to refer this to the ECJ for clarification UNLESS what is really happening is that the UK have conceded that exiting EU laws on citizens will continue to apply after Brexit (otherwise existing EU case law is not relevant to interpreting the treaty obligations so nothing would ever get referred to them). This is not a fudging of the red line, it is a massive breach. So I suspect we will get very little detail on what has actually been agreed.
If the public are asked to choose between a fudge on the ECJ / NI or the economic chaos of no deal, they will overwhelming choose the former. The unrealistic promises and untruths of the Leave campaign are coming home to roost.
It's strange, being so certain on British public opinion and yet being so far away. I'm just over the water, can watch Spotlight or BBC News in realtime and but don't feel that I can make sweeping judgements on "the people".
Mr. Sandpit, cheers for mentioning those. Think the Rosberg interview's been up on the website. Who presents the Channel 4 programme? May catch that later, unless it's the irksome one.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
They’ll make us bat again, or rattle off a quick 150 and put us back in for a few overs tonight?
Dire it might have been - but were you really shocked ?
Well not exactly, given all that's gone before. I emptied my Betfair account balance onto the hosts at 1.12 so I'll be happy either way!!
I think your money is probably safe...
It's quite telling that Australia didn't enforce the follow on. The lack of depth in their bowling attack might have been a weakness, had our top order shown a little more stickability.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I paid my £3 to be part of that 4%
Me too
Among registered supporters she only got 2.4% (2574) so we are in a really elite club
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I honestly wonder if Labour should have deselected Natascha Engel before the 2017 GE, she's on INEOS payroll now I think - my guess is Rowley will probably hold on in 2022 whereas if Engel hadn't fought the 17 GE Labour would have more of a chance. Definitely tainted the brand..
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I honestly wonder if Labour should have deselected Natascha Engel before the 2017 GE, she's on INEOS payroll now I think - my guess is Rowley will probably hold on in 2022 whereas if Engel hadn't fought the 17 GE Labour would have more of a chance. Definitely tainted the brand..
What makes you say that? I haven't heard her name mentioned in that context before.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
Indeed, these figures seem like baloney. Would be good to know their definition of "immigrant" too - surely only someone who is eligible (eventually) for permanent residence. I wonder if they are counting tourists.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
If you read the methodology about half comes from fertility differentials between Muslims and non-Muslims and half from immigration. Religious switching is tiny. Apparently, 43% of migrants to the UK from 2010-2016 were Muslim. They say this is estimated by looking at countries of origin and religious share of that population. I guess India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria are the main sources.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
I imagine they calculated the 40% based on flows over a longer period. Net immigration from the EU was less than 50% over the last 5 years, and even less over the last 10 years.
The % of Muslim births is double the % in the general population. Of course forecasts won't be right to the percentage point, but the direction of travel is clear.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
On a point of fact, immigration is one half of the equation. The other is birth (And death) rates.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I honestly wonder if Labour should have deselected Natascha Engel before the 2017 GE, she's on INEOS payroll now I think - my guess is Rowley will probably hold on in 2022 whereas if Engel hadn't fought the 17 GE Labour would have more of a chance. Definitely tainted the brand..
What makes you say that? I haven't heard her name mentioned in that context before.
Mr. Sandpit, cheers for mentioning those. Think the Rosberg interview's been up on the website. Who presents the Channel 4 programme? May catch that later, unless it's the irksome one.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I honestly wonder if Labour should have deselected Natascha Engel before the 2017 GE, she's on INEOS payroll now I think - my guess is Rowley will probably hold on in 2022 whereas if Engel hadn't fought the 17 GE Labour would have more of a chance. Definitely tainted the brand..
What makes you say that? I haven't heard her name mentioned in that context before.
Local facebook forum chit chat.
Oh so you mean she damaged the brand in the constituency rather than more widely. She didn't have a national profile in the Party - seemed quite obscure really.
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
I honestly wonder if Labour should have deselected Natascha Engel before the 2017 GE, she's on INEOS payroll now I think - my guess is Rowley will probably hold on in 2022 whereas if Engel hadn't fought the 17 GE Labour would have more of a chance. Definitely tainted the brand..
What makes you say that? I haven't heard her name mentioned in that context before.
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
TBH, that’s not how I recall the debate in 1975. Admittedly I was all for joining, as I was for Remaining in 2016 and indeed still am.
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
Er, calm down. It's an organisation that we have benefited from and contributed to as an important member over the years. There have been some compromises because you know what? That's how trade and engagement works in the modern world (excepting Pyongyang, obvs). A club, if you like, with rules. Like your Pall Mall/Working Mens' Club (delete as appropriate).
We are and always were a sovereign and democratic nation.
Now of course, the EU is also a very useful bogeyman. All of our ills - productivity, lack of educational attainment, technical skills, languages can be blamed on the EU. Our lack of competitiveness, our trade deficit, the inequality and lack of social mobility in our nation. All the EU's fault. So in that sense it is an important part of our nation's fabric.
Mr. Topping, throwing away vetoes without democratic assent whilst simultaneously reneging upon a manifesto promise to hold a referendum doesn't exactly fill one with confidence that the political class was either being honest about it's dealings with the EU or that they were able/wanted to take the country with them.
Where's the democracy if all parties promise a referendum, the Government reneges, the Opposition supports and the Lib Dems have a three line whip to abstain?
I do agree that lots of things could be conveniently blamed on the EU that were either partially or wholly unrelated.
At midnight on referendum day, I conceded to a Remainer friend, thinking Leave had lost. It wasn't a big issue. The EU has good points and we'll survive anyway,
But as with the Ashe,s it's nice to win sometimes.
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
Any update on how the House of Lords fits with 'real democracy'?
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
Invasion?
And to think you used to chastise Remain for hyperbole.
I mentioned this a few days ago but was met with tumbleweed. I suppose it's the combination of a) being far in the future b) raising very fundamental questions about Britain's future as a nation and c) there being no easy solutions.
On a less disturbing but still interesting front, we are probably about 10 years away from White British births being a minority in England and Wales.
17% seems like a big over-estimate to me, unless many non-Muslims convert.
I would like you to be right, but I don't think you are. The White British population is already in absolute decline; Pew estimate that over 40% of immigrants are Muslim, with a birth rate of nearly 3, which is higher than all non-Muslim groups.
It's like compound interest.
About half of immigrants come from the EU. It's unlikely that Muslims are more than 10% of their number. That means 70-80% of non EU immigrants would have to Muslims, which seems unlikely.
I imagine they calculated the 40% based on flows over a longer period. Net immigration from the EU was less than 50% over the last 5 years, and even less over the last 10 years.
The % of Muslim births is double the % in the general population. Of course forecasts won't be right to the percentage point, but the direction of travel is clear.
Pew do seem to assume that children of Muslims will automatically be Muslim. At present that is largely true, but there is a small but growing trickle who are converting to Christianity, and a probably larger trickle who are leaving Islam and becoming secularised. (Numbers are not easy to estimate because of the dangers involved in either of these courses.) If these trends continue to grow, and assuming that the children of these people are unlikely to be Muslims, that will reduce the "compound interest" effect. Pew's estimates don't seem to take account of that.
At midnight on referendum day, I conceded to a Remainer friend, thinking Leave had lost. It wasn't a big issue. The EU has good points and we'll survive anyway,
But as with the Ashe,s it's nice to win sometimes.
Of course - and there are several people, especially on PB, who I am very happy for, having won. I will add you to that list!
BREXIT secretary David Davis has happily paid over £50 million to cancel his contract at Fitness First.
Davis initially attempted to walk away from his gym membership without paying a penny, demanding that he still be allowed to use the showers and juice bar ‘on an ad hoc basis’, before being reminded that he had signed up to a 24-month contract.
Silly question...why does the host tv channel get to pick the ball tracking technology? Surely it should be standardised by icc. Virtual eye is technically inferior to Hawkeye, but cheaper so channel 9, the cheapskates go with that.
Even if we bowl the convict out for a 100, our batting is so crap we wouldn’t be able to chase the runs down.
(looks at book)
We're 267 behind now, no chance at all even if they declare overnight. Has anyone ever got 267 at Adelaide in a 4th innings to win?
Edit: Thanks to BT sport just putting up that very stat. It's been done once. In 1902.
Your money is probably still safe - but it does demonstrate that not much separates the two teams. Had we not bowled like drains in the first session of the test, we might have been in with a shout...
You're older than me so I'll happily concede we see things differently.
But as a Yes voter I did feel slightly embarrassed at the one-sided nature of the debate.
The major televised debate of that campaign had higher ratings than anything in the 2016 referendum and included Peter Shore making the sovereignist case with a huge amount of passion, as well as Heath unapologetically making the political case for European union.
Perfect PB Xmas day is surely wake up to some Radiohead, Hawaiian pizza for lunch, Die hard post lunch movie and late night drunken discussion of AV vs PR^2 with the relatives.
Just 18% for the front runner! What a mess they are in.
Though even Corbyn did not get more than 50% until the leadership campaign itself was well under way.
My MP was excitedly tweeting Liz 4% Kendall was the only realistic challenger to AB during the 1st week of the 2015 campaign. She was 2nd favourite at the time.
DESELECT HIM!
Glad you are around
My mate owes you an apology on MedicX
He's just raised £300m for Assura and it looks like a bunch of investors sold MedicX (driving shares down) to invest in his deal...
Incidentally, I'm remaking a comic I first did well over a decade ago, and, ironically, the first episode really fits today's political climate in this regard.
Mr. Eagles, The Empire Strikes Back is also excellent. To paraphrase Darth Vader: "There is no conflict [between liking Die Hard and Empire Strikes Back]".
They won't stop until Corbyn himself represents the right of the party.
I find it utterly scary.
The only way to stop Corbyn becoming PM is to stop Brexit, discuss.
A sensible interpretation of the UK political scenario. Brexit is hurting the Tories, given that even if Brexit is a success, it won't be so for several years, after we've got past the current imbroglio. The mess is potentially so bad that the coalition will collapse and Labour will win a 2018 or 2019 election.
However, in the unlikely event that the Tory govt halts Brexit, it's likely that that would also precipitate an early election that Corbyn would win.
If the parliament can go its full term it's possible that Corbyn won't be Labour leader in 2022 - he'll be approaching his 73rd birthday so might have passed the baton on to one of his acolytes.
The DUP won’t like that. The chances of a 2018 general election have increased.
The sword of Damocles is being polished as we speak...
Does the DUP want a Labour government, one that will have even worse policies regarding Ireland?
I don't think the govt (or anyone else) can assume the DUP will blindly back the Tories on that basis and it'd be a significant error to think they would.
The trick the DUP would try to finesse if May and Davis put forward a divergence between GB and NI would be to block that proposal via Con backbenchers (who'd have no love for it anyway). But the threat of withdrawing support would have to be real to make it work.
However, as others have said, have the DUP ever been proven to have bluffed about anything?
Regulatory equivalence between ROI and NI. How does that work? There is currently regulatory divergence on issues like duties, VAT, and Corp tax anyway....
Comments
It's like compound interest.
It's strange, being so certain on British public opinion and yet being so far away. I'm just over the water, can watch Spotlight or BBC News in realtime and but don't feel that I can make sweeping judgements on "the people".
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/f1-2017-hamiltons-record-breaking-season
Somewhat more fun than watching the cricket right now...
Got to admit, I'm more thinking about next year than the season just gone.
It's quite telling that Australia didn't enforce the follow on. The lack of depth in their bowling attack might have been a weakness, had our top order shown a little more stickability.
Among registered supporters she only got 2.4% (2574) so we are in a really elite club
The % of Muslim births is double the % in the general population. Of course forecasts won't be right to the percentage point, but the direction of travel is clear.
Springtime for Aaron Rodgers I guess !
LAB: 28% (+1)
CON: 25% (-4)
via @Survation, 27 - 30 Nov
In 1975, we voted for the Common Market, the chorus being led enthusiastically by the media elite with the BBC in the vanguard. Even as a Europhile, as I was then, I was surprised by the partisan nature of the BBC. I was 25 and more politically engaged than I am now.
Any small protests from the hard left ‘loons’ were met with disdain. Their comments about being frogmarched into a European super-state were laughed at. They’re inventing phantoms for frightened children to clutch at. A theoretical risk only, as we will always have opt-outs if the Europeans wanted to go that way, let alone a referendum on any major change. A paper tiger only. As likely as Turkey contemplating membership today.
Of course, we never took on board the fact that most MPs tend to be part of the metropolitan elite, sharing supper parties with the BBC and confirmed Europhiles. Maastricht and Lisbon came and went. Tidying-up exercises only, The Eastern European “invasion” would never happen, said Blair. No need to worry, go back to sleep.
Now FOM, the ECJ, sovereignty, and plans for a European ‘defence force’ are integral to a common market and always were.
But the voters have been woken.
Labour will claim that a common trade area can be negotiated if only we negotiate better. That’s impossible if the EU is to survive.
What do the people who know better do now?
A politician will claim that keeping all the four freedoms is economically necessary and in line with the vote. Suppressed laughter, Keir.
The Guardian ... they’re thick Neanderthals and don’t count.
The elite … they’ve changed their mind, or will if we delay long enough. How long? As long as it takes. Long enough for the oldies who were there in 1975 to forget the lies.
That remains my major issue. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
We can stay in the EU if we’re willing to sacrifice real democracy. Some are.
And Australia 41-3!
You're older than me so I'll happily concede we see things differently.
But as a Yes voter I did feel slightly embarrassed at the one-sided nature of the debate.
We are and always were a sovereign and democratic nation.
Now of course, the EU is also a very useful bogeyman. All of our ills - productivity, lack of educational attainment, technical skills, languages can be blamed on the EU. Our lack of competitiveness, our trade deficit, the inequality and lack of social mobility in our nation. All the EU's fault. So in that sense it is an important part of our nation's fabric.
Where's the democracy if all parties promise a referendum, the Government reneges, the Opposition supports and the Lib Dems have a three line whip to abstain?
I do agree that lots of things could be conveniently blamed on the EU that were either partially or wholly unrelated.
At midnight on referendum day, I conceded to a Remainer friend, thinking Leave had lost. It wasn't a big issue. The EU has good points and we'll survive anyway,
But as with the Ashe,s it's nice to win sometimes.
https://order-order.com/2017/12/04/corbynistas-turn-rayner-thornberry/
And to think you used to chastise Remain for hyperbole.
Edit: not just possibly
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/42207929
Not a huge surprise, to be honest.
At the driver announcement did he say ‘It is I, Leclerc’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-42217798
Davis initially attempted to walk away from his gym membership without paying a penny, demanding that he still be allowed to use the showers and juice bar ‘on an ad hoc basis’, before being reminded that he had signed up to a 24-month contract.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/david-davis-pays-50m-to-get-out-of-gym-contract-20171204140271
We're 267 behind now, no chance at all even if they declare overnight. Has anyone ever got 267 at Adelaide in a 4th innings to win?
Edit: Thanks to BT sport just putting up that very stat. It's been done once. In 1902.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2jUYryRYII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtAkPw_mdc8
Do you consider a movie that takes place at Christmas time, but is not about Christmas itself, to be a Christmas movie?
Yes I do - 27%
No I do not - 55%
Don't know - 18%
Clearly the public agree with me, Die Hard is NOT a Christmas movie.
https://yougov.co.uk/opi/surveys/results#/survey/e3a2d592-d8e1-11e7-ab3c-6bdc80d71212
Perfect PB Xmas day is surely wake up to some Radiohead, Hawaiian pizza for lunch, Die hard post lunch movie and late night drunken discussion of AV vs PR^2 with the relatives.
https://order-order.com/2017/12/04/spineless-pizza-hut-cave-to-press-hating-twitter-trolls/
My mate owes you an apology on MedicX
He's just raised £300m for Assura and it looks like a bunch of investors sold MedicX (driving shares down) to invest in his deal...
Incidentally, I'm remaking a comic I first did well over a decade ago, and, ironically, the first episode really fits today's political climate in this regard.
Mr. Eagles, The Empire Strikes Back is also excellent. To paraphrase Darth Vader: "There is no conflict [between liking Die Hard and Empire Strikes Back]".
Looks like the EU have won every one of their negotiating points.
Of course, we don't know that it's true or that the UK will go to the summit agreeing to those terms but if they do, May's government falls.
However, in the unlikely event that the Tory govt halts Brexit, it's likely that that would also precipitate an early election that Corbyn would win.
If the parliament can go its full term it's possible that Corbyn won't be Labour leader in 2022 - he'll be approaching his 73rd birthday so might have passed the baton on to one of his acolytes.
thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/it-took-six-months-and-a-lot-of-work-but-weve-caved-completely-says-david-davis-20171129140020
May might be best simply pulling the plug on the talks and taking the €55bn back off the table.
Does the DUP want a Labour government, one that will have even worse policies regarding Ireland?
The public, as has become depressingly predictable, haven't got a clue.
Die Hard is of course a Christmas movie, and a very good movie - just not a very good Christmas movie.
Corbs for PM, strap in lads, this is going to hurt.
If Corbyn became PM and stopped Brexit though that would give the Tories an opening with Labour Leavers.
The trick the DUP would try to finesse if May and Davis put forward a divergence between GB and NI would be to block that proposal via Con backbenchers (who'd have no love for it anyway). But the threat of withdrawing support would have to be real to make it work.
However, as others have said, have the DUP ever been proven to have bluffed about anything?