Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6 Corbyn -6 Blair -42 Clegg -24 (the next worst) Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him. Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
Nope. I was quite happy for the likes of Michael Gove and Kate Hoey to be fronting the official campaign, although I don’t doubt that Farage played a part in getting certain demographics to the ballot box for the first time in decades.
That vital fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists demographic that got Leave over the line.
Morning all. Have we covered this yet - "General election turnout ‘far higher than thought’"?
[T]he study’s authors found there were more entries on the register than registered voters. This is partly because those with second homes and students are registered twice, and partly because of entries there by mistake or because of voter fraud. By overestimating the number of registered voters, official sources underestimated the proportion of the electorate that votes.
When the authors corrected for inaccuracies in the electoral register, they found that turnout was 6.8-11.5 percentage points higher, with a central estimate of about 9 per cent. Turnout in the election last year is likely to have been roughly 78 per cent.
Mr. Ace, it's documented that we've successfully hit terrorists in Syria who were planning atrocities here.
Yeah, that's what they tell you when they drop a £900k Storm Shadow on four raggy lads in a HiLux.
Asymmetrical warfare is an asymmetry of costs, as well as capabilities.
As bin Laden said:
"Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs," he said. "As for the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars.
As part of the "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan," bin Laden cited a British estimate that it cost al Qaeda about $500,000 to carry out the attacks of September 11, 2001, an amount that he said paled in comparison with the costs incurred by the United States.
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
I almost wish that the Sevco FC might get a wee bit of success not to mention some financial stability, their embittered fans have far too much time on their hands.
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcare
World BAnk has it as Switzerland at 11.7 and uk at 9.1. That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
I almost wish that the Sevco FC might get a wee bit of success not to mention some financial stability, their embittered fans have far too much time on their hands.
Wait - you believe the nonsense the dog is spouting ?
Morning all. Have we covered this yet - "General election turnout ‘far higher than thought’"?
[T]he study’s authors found there were more entries on the register than registered voters. This is partly because those with second homes and students are registered twice, and partly because of entries there by mistake or because of voter fraud. By overestimating the number of registered voters, official sources underestimated the proportion of the electorate that votes.
When the authors corrected for inaccuracies in the electoral register, they found that turnout was 6.8-11.5 percentage points higher, with a central estimate of about 9 per cent. Turnout in the election last year is likely to have been roughly 78 per cent.
'Though of course in much of the Middle East sex outside of heterosexual marriage is illegal too'
Straight people have the ability to get married to avoid jail - gay men have no choice at all in those nations. And even less on the 11 nations where it is a capital offence. When did we last hear the media attacking the 2022 hosts of the football World Cup for their gay laws (which include the death penalty for gay Muslims) - yet the media is all over the 2018 hosts where at least being gay is legal.
You might say why should we care. But we should when those values are brought here and are allowed to go unchallenged. If we believe polling 100 per cent of UK Muslims think being gay is morally unacceptable and 82 per cent would not explicitly disagree with the view that gay people should be locked up. They are more than ten times more likely to support gay men being jailed than the wider UK population.
Tim Farron is no threat to gay rights - but those attitudes could start to be in time as demographics change if they aren't challenged..
This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.
My guess is that they did little or no due diligence and whatever there was was of the tick-box variety.
You’d be amazed - and not a little worried -at how poor most due diligence still is in recruitment into finance, despite the well attested issues with hiring crooks or those with a less than optimal relationship with the truth.
Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6 Corbyn -6 Blair -42 Clegg -24 (the next worst) Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him. Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
Nope. I was quite happy for the likes of Michael Gove and Kate Hoey to be fronting the official campaign, although I don’t doubt that Farage played a part in getting certain demographics to the ballot box for the first time in decades.
That vital fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists demographic that got Leave over the line.
Not exactly the massive groundswell of opinion that would be needed for a second referendum to be a real possibility. And does anyone really listen to Farage now anyway ?
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcare
World BAnk has it as Switzerland at 11.7 and uk at 9.1. That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
Do you consider gay sex to be a sin?
Based on Christian teaching I would consider any sex before marriage, any sex by divorcees a sin too but I am also a sinner as much as the next person
Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6 Corbyn -6 Blair -42 Clegg -24 (the next worst) Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him. Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.
Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.
Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?
Nope. I was quite happy for the likes of Michael Gove and Kate Hoey to be fronting the official campaign, although I don’t doubt that Farage played a part in getting certain demographics to the ballot box for the first time in decades.
That vital fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists demographic that got Leave over the line.
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcare
World BAnk has it as Switzerland at 11.7 and uk at 9.1. That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
Fair enough they spend more per capita. But then again they can afford to more than us.
That’s as a share of their wealth. So they are wealthier - but also they choose to spend a higher proportion of their wealth on health. The NHS is actually a remarkably efficient system in many ways. It doesn’t even need the amount of money some countries spend on healthcare. It does need a bit more than what we currently give it though.
Mr. Ace, it's documented that we've successfully hit terrorists in Syria who were planning atrocities here.
Yeah, that's what they tell you when they drop a £900k Storm Shadow on four raggy lads in a HiLux.
Asymmetrical warfare is an asymmetry of costs, as well as capabilities.
As bin Laden said:
"Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs," he said. "As for the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars.
As part of the "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan," bin Laden cited a British estimate that it cost al Qaeda about $500,000 to carry out the attacks of September 11, 2001, an amount that he said paled in comparison with the costs incurred by the United States.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
It really is open season on any Christian these days. Yeah a lot probably don't like it, but they feel terrible about feeling that way and are never going to do anything about it.
Compare with the attitude of Muslims...100% of which surveyed think that homosexuality is wrong:
And then look at what happens to gay people in Islamic countries. But yeah let's all spend our time condemning wet lettuce Christians like Tim Farron as that is where the real danger lies.
Religionism's obsession with the sex lives of other people is bizarre.
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
Prosecutions for hate crimes actually fell in 2016-17 - which included more than 9 months post the Brexit vote. Presumably for a prosecution you need evidence and they need to be genuine.
Following the Brexit vote a lot of police forces on the instruction of pro remain politicians who didn't like the result actively set up websites to encourage people to report 'hate crimes' possibly to prove how nasty, wicked and racist all those Brexit voters were. Problem is of course the numbers don't differentiate between someone objecting to Katie Hopkins tweets or UKIP posters or comments someone made on Big Brother (what they thought they meant not what they actually said) with people who have actually genuinely been victims of Violent crimes or harassment.
Hate crime reporting stats are self selecting and there is no differentiation - but prosecutions which fell presumably have to have real basis?
Isn't all crime hateful - is an elderly white British lady being mugged and beaten to the ground and ending up in hospital less hateful than a 25 year old Polish man being verbally abused in the street in a drunken brawl outside a pub on a Friday night? The latter is deemed a hate crime - the former is not.
Interesting. Nigel loves to be the outsider and the maverick. As euro-scepticism and Trumpism are the now the mainstream (and not particularly successful at that), perhaps Nigel has calculated that it would be more fun to flip and embrace euro-philia.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
It's an interesting question. It's clearly not just biblical teaching, as they seem blithely unconcerned about (inter alia) charging interest, or mixing cotton and wool...
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
Perhaps, if you haven't any evidence, it might be best to keep unpleasant speculations to yourself ... or post on the kind of site in which they may be welcome.
Perhaps look up what former LibDem MP Lynne Featherstone said about Mrs May in the push for gay marriage. May was praised by Featherstone as an "unsung hero".
May has plenty of faults, but I don't think there is any evidence for the speculation you made.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honest
So should we differentiate between bigotry and bigotry based on religious belief?
No - if you believe in the teaching of the Catholic Church you will adhere to them yourself but you should respect other views as well.
There is nothing in the Credo or in the New Testament or in the 10 Commandments about gay sex. Jesus said not a word about it.
I don’t think gay sex is a sin. If man is made in the image of God then that applies to gay men and women too and they are loved by God.
Wherever the prejudice against homosexuality comes from, religion has - wrongly - been used to give it a veneer of respectability. The Christian church is just wrong on this issue.
However much one may want to value, cherish and support traditional marriage and parenthood and families, it has been utterly wrong to despise and persecute those who are not heterosexual. The Christian church’s understanding of sexuality has been skewed and mistaken and, therefore, its pronouncements on it have been wrong- headed and caused misery. Best to ignore.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
That's about on a par with claiming that a photo outside No 10 breaches the ministerial code.
Nigel's flirting with a second EU referendum puts enormous pressure on Theresa. Let's face it, Nigel says 'jump' and the Tory Right says 'how high?'.
What would be the question though for the referendum?
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
Interesting. Presumably Nigel's become disillusioned with how his careers going in the US.
Any word on the multi million $ Brexit blockbuster that was supposedly on the cards? As an executive producer, I assume Farage would be getting some of the disgraced Hollywood pussy grabbers involved as a matter of principle. Perhaps he could even find a spot for Toby.
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
No, too much has been expected of Defence. The one possible positive of Brexit is that it will finally dawn on the Colonel Blimps that a third of the world is no longer painted pink.
I think that's a silly thing to say.
That hasn't been the case since the 1957 Sandys review, which effectively ended Britain's desire to be a fully independent global military power and conscription.
UK defence policy then shifted to nuclear deterrence: maintaining an army in Germany as part of NATO and anti-submarine capability in the North Atlantic. We then subsequently withdrew East of Suez by the end of 1960s. It's hard to see how either weren't sensible decisions.
It then changed again at the end of the Cold War and the Troubles with a clear opportunity to cut spending, but also to shift what capability we had left into an expeditionary one, recognising that future conflicts could take place anywhere in the world, and would require multilateral solutions.
Just as with the UK Aid budget, the UK needs to maintain a decent, balanced, well-trained defence capability to maintain its interests (trade protection, overseas territories and defending allies) and have a voice in influencing global foreign policy where it matters. And prevention and deterrence is better than cure.
Anything else is naïve isolationism fraught with all sorts of risks. At the very least, with your approach, you'd be abdicating decision making about shaping the future of the world to others in accordance with their values, rather than ours, and crossing our fingers that it turns out ok for us.
Because of the uncertainty in the world and emergent risks I would actually looking to be increasing defence spending.
My understanding is that sin is defined by the doctrines of the church. So if you are not religious it does not matter. If you are, it depends on which church you belong to.
What do Church leaders say about it? I recall (?) the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that he was not certain?
It won't happen of course (Nigel Farage is just living up to his long term career as an attention whore) but if there were a second referendum campaign, who would lead for Leave and who would lead for Remain?
Nigel's flirting with a second EU referendum puts enormous pressure on Theresa. Let's face it, Nigel says 'jump' and the Tory Right says 'how high?'.
What would be the question though for the referendum?
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
I would have the following options:
Stay as if nothing had happened.
Leave on WTO terms without any deal with the EU.
Leave with whatever deal the government comes up with.
The option that gets the highest number of votes wins.
Anything else is naïve isolationism fraught with all sorts of risks. At the very least, with your approach, you'd be abdicating decision making about shaping the future of the world to others in accordance with their values, rather than ours, and crossing our fingers that it turns out ok for us.
You voted for Brexit. Naïve isolationism and abdicating decision making about shaping the future of the world to others is your schtick.
On the funding question, what they say is: " health spending would need to rise to approximately £153bn (from £123.8bn in 2017/18) by 2022/23 to maintain standards of care and meet rising demand." [I imagine that is in inflation adjusted terms]
That is 23.5% over 5 years, which is 4.3% per year. That's a biggish ask, but not perhaps beyond the possible, if further savings can be found elsewhere.
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcare
World BAnk has it as Switzerland at 11.7 and uk at 9.1. That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
My partner lives in Switzerland and runs a medical company. The Swiss system is nowhere near perfect. Even children need insurance and the costs are astronomical. Her son is at uni in UK and prefers to use the NHS as easier and cheaper to use than Swiss doctors.
The Swiss critical care is average as most top surgeons run their own cabinets doing simple elective surgery and rarely enter the CHRUs.
On the good side it is great market for my company as they pay higher prices and faster than the NHS. As a supplier the NHS is really a pain to work with. The big PFI suppliers may make money but the little guys are squeezed to the bone.
It won't happen of course (Nigel Farage is just living up to his long term career as an attention whore) but if there were a second referendum campaign, who would lead for Leave and who would lead for Remain?
Nigel's flirting with a second EU referendum puts enormous pressure on Theresa. Let's face it, Nigel says 'jump' and the Tory Right says 'how high?'.
What would be the question though for the referendum?
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
I would have the following options:
Stay as if nothing had happened.
Leave on WTO terms without any deal with the EU.
Leave with whatever deal the government comes up with.
The option that gets the highest number of votes wins.
Lol, so two leave options and one remain option and FPTP, talk about stacking the deck!
On the funding question, what they say is: " health spending would need to rise to approximately £153bn (from £123.8bn in 2017/18) by 2022/23 to maintain standards of care and meet rising demand." [I imagine that is in inflation adjusted terms]
That is 23.5% over 5 years, which is 4.3% per year. That's a biggish ask, but not perhaps beyond the possible, if further savings can be found elsewhere.
But, does that include the costs for social care ?
The problem seems to me that the, whilst just about affordable, it increases intergenerational unfairness as the elderly are prime users of the NHS.
I am happy with tax increases, but for me the first call on any increased revenue should be for the young.
Nigel's flirting with a second EU referendum puts enormous pressure on Theresa. Let's face it, Nigel says 'jump' and the Tory Right says 'how high?'.
What would be the question though for the referendum?
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
I would have the following options:
Stay as if nothing had happened.
Leave on WTO terms without any deal with the EU.
Leave with whatever deal the government comes up with.
The option that gets the highest number of votes wins.
Lol, so two leave options and one remain option and FPTP, talk about stacking the deck!
Not a problem, if you use AV. Perhaps TSE could write a thread on how that would work ...
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcare
World BAnk has it as Switzerland at 11.7 and uk at 9.1. That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
My partner lives in Switzerland and runs a medical company. The Swiss system is nowhere near perfect. Even children need insurance and the costs are astronomical. Her son is at uni in UK and prefers to use the NHS as easier and cheaper to use than Swiss doctors.
The Swiss critical care is average as most top surgeons run their own cabinets doing simple elective surgery and rarely enter the CHRUs.
On the good side it is great market for my company as they pay higher prices and faster than the NHS. As a supplier the NHS is really a pain to work with. The big PFI suppliers may make money but the little guys are squeezed to the bone.
Whilst it probably isn’t a great consolation - the fact that you get squeeze does is evidence of the UK taxpayer gettinng a good deal - in large part because of the NHS’s monopsony power.
It won't happen of course (Nigel Farage is just living up to his long term career as an attention whore) but if there were a second referendum campaign, who would lead for Leave and who would lead for Remain?
Boris would lead Leave - he'd have no choice. The Remain leader is a bit trickier. Sadiq Khan might be an idea. He's probably the highest ranking Remain politician, and he doesn't appear to have flirted with Leave merely to bolster his own interests. So untainted in that regard.
On the funding question, what they say is: " health spending would need to rise to approximately £153bn (from £123.8bn in 2017/18) by 2022/23 to maintain standards of care and meet rising demand." [I imagine that is in inflation adjusted terms]
That is 23.5% over 5 years, which is 4.3% per year. That's a biggish ask, but not perhaps beyond the possible, if further savings can be found elsewhere.
But, does that include the costs for social care ?
The problem seems to me that the, whilst just about affordable, it increases intergenerational unfairness as the elderly are prime users of the NHS.
I am happy with tax increases, but for me the first call on any increased revenue should be for the young.
Nah the NHS needs it more. If we continue to underfund it - the service will have collapsed/fallen to a very low standard and we will all be buying private insurance by the time I am old.
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
On the funding question, what they say is: " health spending would need to rise to approximately £153bn (from £123.8bn in 2017/18) by 2022/23 to maintain standards of care and meet rising demand." [I imagine that is in inflation adjusted terms]
That is 23.5% over 5 years, which is 4.3% per year. That's a biggish ask, but not perhaps beyond the possible, if further savings can be found elsewhere.
But, does that include the costs for social care ?
The problem seems to me that the, whilst just about affordable, it increases intergenerational unfairness as the elderly are prime users of the NHS.
I am happy with tax increases, but for me the first call on any increased revenue should be for the young.
But there would need to be another 23.5% over the next 5 years, and ...
Perhaps they will end up with something looking very like the Tory Manifesto 2017 proposals .
Nigel's flirting with a second EU referendum puts enormous pressure on Theresa. Let's face it, Nigel says 'jump' and the Tory Right says 'how high?'.
What would be the question though for the referendum?
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
I would have the following options:
Stay as if nothing had happened.
Leave on WTO terms without any deal with the EU.
Leave with whatever deal the government comes up with.
The option that gets the highest number of votes wins.
Lol, so two leave options and one remain option and FPTP, talk about stacking the deck!
Fair enough. Let's add a Remain option then: Remain but with full EU integration (euro, Schengen etc.).
Good Lord, Theresa May has just made a rather good off-the-cuff joke:
Q: [From the Daily Mail] What impact has the Mail’s campaign on plastics had? And do you and your husband plan to change your plastic use habits?
May says the Daily Mail has done a good job on this.
She says she and her husband try to recycle as much as possible. She says she is proud of the fact that she has a barn owl box and a bat box in her garden.
She likes walking in the countryside, she says. But don’t worry - she is not about to go walking in Wales
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honest
So should we differentiate between bigotry and bigotry based on religious belief?
No - if you believe in the teaching of the Catholic Church you will adhere to them yourself but you should respect other views as well.
There is nothing in the Credo or in the New Testament or in the 10 Commandments about gay sex. Jesus said not a word about it.
I don’t think gay sex is a sin. If man is made in the image of God then that applies to gay men and women too and they are loved by God.
Wherever the prejudice against homosexuality comes from, religion has - wrongly - been used to give it a veneer of respectability. The Christian church is just wrong on this issue.
However much one may want to value, cherish and support traditional marriage and parenthood and families, it has been utterly wrong to despise and persecute those who are not heterosexual. The Christian church’s understanding of sexuality has been skewed and mistaken and, therefore, its pronouncements on it have been wrong- headed and caused misery. Best to ignore.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
No, you're making all sorts of errors in your thinking.
Plus if Mrs May thinks gay sex is a sin then she would have done everything in her power to stop same sex marriage becoming law.
She was a prime driver of it.
L ynne Featherston said to her back it, she did, and Mrs May took it to David Cameron
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
No, you're making all sorts of errors in your thinking.
Plus if Mrs May thinks gay sex is a sin then she would have done everything in her power to stop same sex marriage becoming law.
She was a prime driver of it.
Liz Featherstone persuaded her, and Mrs May took it to David Cameron
The point was I didn't know. I do now. Thanks. Good to hear.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
You are unbelievable. Why is the fact she is a practising Christian upset you so much and Hyufd does not think gay sex is a sin, and by the way neither do I.
And while on the subject do Muslims accept gay sex
Here is the apparent source of the 150 per cent rise in homophobic hate crimes. Of course when you see it is only in fact just over 100 extra cases compared to the millions of LGBT Brits you don't get the context. While all genuine cases are regrettable the percentages make a better headline than the actual numbers.
Apparently there was a 100 per cent rise in Brits applying for French passports last year - but that was only 1500 extra applications compared to the more than 400,000 French people who live in London alone many of whom will be married to Brits and have kids who will be eligible for French passports even though they are 'British'. Beware headlines quoting percentages on small samples!
London is seeing very large spikes in homophobic attacks relative to other regions - it also has the lowest proportion of Brexit voters. If it's down to Brexit voters why are the biggest rises in remain voting areas? Perhaps blaming Brexit is a bit too simplistic.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
You are unbelievable. Why is the fact she is a practising Christian upset you so much and Hyufd does not think gay sex is a sin, and by the way neither do I.
And while on the subject do Muslims accept gay sex
Some do, but it depends how much you pay 'em.
To be serious for a moment (why?), it'd be interesting to see any poling or studies about acceptance of lifestyles such as living out of wedlock or having children whilst unmarried, or homosexuality, in the different religions and amongst atheists / agnostics.
So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to Christ
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.
You have no evidence to make that accusation
I haven't made an accusation. I was speculating.
On the basis of no data. Some might call that smearing.....
I have the data that she is a bible botherer. HYUFD assures us that such people think gay sex is a sin.
No, you're making all sorts of errors in your thinking.
Plus if Mrs May thinks gay sex is a sin then she would have done everything in her power to stop same sex marriage becoming law.
She was a prime driver of it.
L ynne Featherston said to her back it, she did, and Mrs May took it to David Cameron
There is a difference between civil law and religious teaching
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?
Comments
As with most things, I am the voice of middle England.
Just like this
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/930510982698463233
[T]he study’s authors found there were more entries on the register than registered voters. This is partly because those with second homes and students are registered twice, and partly because of entries there by mistake or because of voter fraud. By overestimating the number of registered voters, official sources underestimated the proportion of the electorate that votes.
When the authors corrected for inaccuracies in the electoral register, they found that turnout was 6.8-11.5 percentage points higher, with a central estimate of about 9 per cent. Turnout in the election last year is likely to have been roughly 78 per cent.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1192e5fc-f65d-11e7-9cfd-f28094b4d5ce
As bin Laden said:
"Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs," he said. "As for the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars.
As part of the "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan," bin Laden cited a British estimate that it cost al Qaeda about $500,000 to carry out the attacks of September 11, 2001, an amount that he said paled in comparison with the costs incurred by the United States.
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/
That’s a big difference. Edit - back of the envelop suggests we would need o spend 65-70bn extra/year on NHS to reach their levels.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS
https://twitter.com/5WrightStuff/status/951394851811221510
You know it's not a real dog don't you ?
'Though of course in much of the Middle East sex outside of heterosexual marriage is illegal too'
Straight people have the ability to get married to avoid jail - gay men have no choice at all in those nations. And even less on the 11 nations where it is a capital offence. When did we last hear the media attacking the 2022 hosts of the football World Cup for their gay laws (which include the death penalty for gay Muslims) - yet the media is all over the 2018 hosts where at least being gay is legal.
You might say why should we care. But we should when those values are brought here and are allowed to go unchallenged. If we believe polling 100 per cent of UK Muslims think being gay is morally unacceptable and 82 per cent would not explicitly disagree with the view that gay people should be locked up. They are more than ten times more likely to support gay men being jailed than the wider UK population.
Tim Farron is no threat to gay rights - but those attitudes could start to be in time as demographics change if they aren't challenged..
You’d be amazed - and not a little worried -at how poor most due diligence still is in recruitment into finance, despite the well attested issues with hiring crooks or those with a less than optimal relationship with the truth.
And does anyone really listen to Farage now anyway ?
So they are wealthier - but also they choose to spend a higher proportion of their wealth on health.
The NHS is actually a remarkably efficient system in many ways. It doesn’t even need the amount of money some countries spend on healthcare. It does need a bit more than what we currently give it though.
A scrimmage at a border station
A canter down a dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a one rupee jezail.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/brexit-hate-crime-prosecutions-fall-attack-report-spike--report-statistics-islamophobia-racist-a8003716.html
Following the Brexit vote a lot of police forces on the instruction of pro remain politicians who didn't like the result actively set up websites to encourage people to report 'hate crimes' possibly to prove how nasty, wicked and racist all those Brexit voters were. Problem is of course the numbers don't differentiate between someone objecting to Katie Hopkins tweets or UKIP posters or comments someone made on Big Brother (what they thought they meant not what they actually said) with people who have actually genuinely been victims of Violent crimes or harassment.
Hate crime reporting stats are self selecting and there is no differentiation - but prosecutions which fell presumably have to have real basis?
Isn't all crime hateful - is an elderly white British lady being mugged and beaten to the ground and ending up in hospital less hateful than a 25 year old Polish man being verbally abused in the street in a drunken brawl outside a pub on a Friday night? The latter is deemed a hate crime - the former is not.
It's clearly not just biblical teaching, as they seem blithely unconcerned about (inter alia) charging interest, or mixing cotton and wool...
Perhaps look up what former LibDem MP Lynne Featherstone said about Mrs May in the push for gay marriage. May was praised by Featherstone as an "unsung hero".
May has plenty of faults, but I don't think there is any evidence for the speculation you made.
I don’t think gay sex is a sin. If man is made in the image of God then that applies to gay men and women too and they are loved by God.
Wherever the prejudice against homosexuality comes from, religion has - wrongly - been used to give it a veneer of respectability. The Christian church is just wrong on this issue.
However much one may want to value, cherish and support traditional marriage and parenthood and families, it has been utterly wrong to despise and persecute those who are not heterosexual. The Christian church’s understanding of sexuality has been skewed and mistaken and, therefore, its pronouncements on it have been wrong- headed and caused misery. Best to ignore.
Junior doctor caught drunk at the wheel TWICE spared jail after blaming stress of job
The 25-year-old claimed she had an alcohol addiction because of the stress of studying at one of the world's top universities
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/junior-doctor-caught-drunk-wheel-11829939
I assume this is to do with Farage losing his MEP salary soon. Given his serial failures to become an MP.
Should we really leave the European Union
Or Should we accept the deal the government has agreed and leave the EU name only staying in the single market, customs union, still having ECJ oversight over our laws indefinitely, not controlling our borders and not being free to negotiate our own trade deal.
Just joking - but before we talk about a second referendum perhaps we need to decide what the question should be. I expect Farage's questions might differ from Cable's..
It can't be leave or remain - we already voted on that. So what is the question?
That hasn't been the case since the 1957 Sandys review, which effectively ended Britain's desire to be a fully independent global military power and conscription.
UK defence policy then shifted to nuclear deterrence: maintaining an army in Germany as part of NATO and anti-submarine capability in the North Atlantic. We then subsequently withdrew East of Suez by the end of 1960s. It's hard to see how either weren't sensible decisions.
It then changed again at the end of the Cold War and the Troubles with a clear opportunity to cut spending, but also to shift what capability we had left into an expeditionary one, recognising that future conflicts could take place anywhere in the world, and would require multilateral solutions.
Just as with the UK Aid budget, the UK needs to maintain a decent, balanced, well-trained defence capability to maintain its interests (trade protection, overseas territories and defending allies) and have a voice in influencing global foreign policy where it matters. And prevention and deterrence is better than cure.
Anything else is naïve isolationism fraught with all sorts of risks. At the very least, with your approach, you'd be abdicating decision making about shaping the future of the world to others in accordance with their values, rather than ours, and crossing our fingers that it turns out ok for us.
Because of the uncertainty in the world and emergent risks I would actually looking to be increasing defence spending.
What do Church leaders say about it? I recall (?) the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that he was not certain?
Stay as if nothing had happened.
Leave on WTO terms without any deal with the EU.
Leave with whatever deal the government comes up with.
The option that gets the highest number of votes wins.
approximately £153bn (from £123.8bn in 2017/18) by 2022/23 to maintain standards of
care and meet rising demand." [I imagine that is in inflation adjusted terms]
That is 23.5% over 5 years, which is 4.3% per year. That's a biggish ask, but not perhaps beyond the possible, if further savings can be found elsewhere.
My partner lives in Switzerland and runs a medical company. The Swiss system is nowhere near perfect. Even children need insurance and the costs are astronomical. Her son is at uni in UK and prefers to use the NHS as easier and cheaper to use than Swiss doctors.
The Swiss critical care is average as most top surgeons run their own cabinets doing simple elective surgery and rarely enter the CHRUs.
On the good side it is great market for my company as they pay higher prices and faster than the NHS. As a supplier the NHS is really a pain to work with. The big PFI suppliers may make money but the little guys are squeezed to the bone.
The problem seems to me that the, whilst just about affordable, it increases intergenerational unfairness as the elderly are prime users of the NHS.
I am happy with tax increases, but for me the first call on any increased revenue should be for the young.
The PFI stuff was reallly dumb though.
If we continue to underfund it - the service will have collapsed/fallen to a very low standard and we will all be buying private insurance by the time I am old.
http://www.thenational.scot/news/15660904.Wee_Ginger_Dug__How_British_nationalism_fuels_Scottish_sectarianism/
Perhaps they will end up with something looking very like the Tory Manifesto 2017 proposals
Q: [From the Daily Mail] What impact has the Mail’s campaign on plastics had? And do you and your husband plan to change your plastic use habits?
May says the Daily Mail has done a good job on this.
She says she and her husband try to recycle as much as possible. She says she is proud of the fact that she has a barn owl box and a bat box in her garden.
She likes walking in the countryside, she says. But don’t worry - she is not about to go walking in Wales
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/jan/11/theresa-may-environment-speech-plastics-brexit-speech-dubbed-missed-opportunity-as-campaigners-call-for-tighter-plastics-crackdown-politics-live
Plus if Mrs May thinks gay sex is a sin then she would have done everything in her power to stop same sex marriage becoming law.
She was a prime driver of it.
L ynne Featherston said to her back it, she did, and Mrs May took it to David Cameron
Perhaps she might have learnt that in politics, it's best to stick to your promises.
And while on the subject do Muslims accept gay sex
Apparently there was a 100 per cent rise in Brits applying for French passports last year - but that was only 1500 extra applications compared to the more than 400,000 French people who live in London alone many of whom will be married to Brits and have kids who will be eligible for French passports even though they are 'British'. Beware headlines quoting percentages on small samples!
London is seeing very large spikes in homophobic attacks relative to other regions - it also has the lowest proportion of Brexit voters. If it's down to Brexit voters why are the biggest rises in remain voting areas? Perhaps blaming Brexit is a bit too simplistic.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/08/homophobic-attacks-double-after-brexit-vote
NEW THREAD
To be serious for a moment (why?), it'd be interesting to see any poling or studies about acceptance of lifestyles such as living out of wedlock or having children whilst unmarried, or homosexuality, in the different religions and amongst atheists / agnostics.
It must surely have been done?
27% increase in one year, 63% increase over two years, without taking transgender hate crime into account (which has increased even more).
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjYoZ60gNDYAhULB8AKHUBaBPgQFggtMAE&url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0jIYKBZF5COZ0Bt3-Zl_Qu