Dunno about Haiti, but all the sub Saharan African countries I have been to are shitholes, and the inhabitants would be the first to confirm that.
Have you been to Botswana?
Yes, and I loved it, esp. the Okavango. But I went as a rich (by local standards) honky, to the places where rich honkies go. I wouldn't wanna be a Botswanan.
They were defending three of them and the fourth was a gain from Ind. Would put last night down as a ‘relief; could have been a lot worse.'
3 holds and a gain out of 4 contests after the PM's reshuffle disaster is more than just relief at CCHQ I would expect and encouraging for May's local elections
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
We all know that Donald J Trump is a pathological liar...
A low-grade sociopath who Freud would say was stuck in the oral stage of development and has a serious penis envy which he cannot hide because of his tiny hands.Hie cannot hide his excessive use of caffeine either-hand tremor.
Mr. Meeks, also worth mentioning that nobles were often called after their place of birth, hence John of Gaunt.
The Vikings bloody loved nicknames. The last king of York (Jorvik) was Erik Bloodaxe.
Edited extra bit: the Eastern Romans had a few nicknames, but mostly not. Nicephorus Phocas was known as The White Death of the Saracens (I occasionally wonder if the emperor's nickname in The Witcher is based on this), and Basil was called the Bulgar-Slayer after his Balkan antics.
You find it among Remoaners too: Gove Expertsbane, Boris the Buswriter. It's a coping mechanism.
We all know that Donald J Trump is a pathological liar...
A low-grade sociopath who Freud would say was stuck in the oral stage of development and has a serious penis envy which he cannot hide because of his tiny hands.Hie cannot hide his excessive use of caffeine either-hand tremor.
You do realise, do you, that Freud's theories about the oral stage of development are believed about as much as the phlogiston theory of fire, these days? And it's girls who have penis envy because of, you know, not having one. And why would having tiny hands make penis envy hard to hide?
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
The outrage bus has been making many stops today.
No, these comments don’t make Trump a racist. But he is a contemptible shithead anyway.
Yes, Khan is playing silly games. But since he doesn’t seem interested in any of the serious aspects of the mayoralty, he may as well get stuck in.
And yes, Boris is ill-advised to add his two pennorth. But he is also a steaming hypocrite who has done more damage to the UK’s reputation than Khan could dream of.
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
1) I'd say the use of a word like shithole as a descriptor is unnecessary to make the point that they feel, probably correctly, like their own countries are in general worse off or provide them with far less opportunities. Even being intentionally blunt and crude it wouldn't be necessary. However, I think the odds are high plenty have used such a term in thought or in an unguarded moment without making a comment on race. I know I have. But that was shitty of me, and people in positions of power can be held to a higher standard on being more careful, even acknowledging that outrage over specific words can and has been at times in the past a distraction from more important points.
2) No
---- I will say this though - quite often when a story about someone saying something bad is reported, the reports on the main sites don't quote what was supposedly said, leaving me confused as to how outraged I am supposed to be, but this time the story does state at least some of what is meant to have been said.
Having only just really looked at the story, I doubt I am the first person to be skeptical of this person's incredulity though:
I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Mr Durbin told reporters on Friday
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
1) I'd say the use of a word like shithole as a descriptor is unnecessary to make the point that they feel, probably correctly, like their own countries are in general worse off or provide them with far less opportunities. Even being intentionally blunt and crude it wouldn't be necessary. However, I think the odds are high plenty have used such a term in thought or in an unguarded moment without making a comment on race. I know I have. But that was shitty of me, and people in positions of power can be held to a higher standard on being more careful, even acknowledging that outrage over specific words can and has been at times in the past a distraction from more important points.
2) No
---- I will say this though - quite often when a story about someone saying something bad is reported, the reports on the main sites don't quote what was supposedly said, leaving me confused as to how outraged I am supposed to be, but this time the story does state at least some of what is meant to have been said.
Having only just really looked at the story, I doubt I am the first person to be skeptical of this person's incredulity though:
I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Mr Durbin told reporters on Friday
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
1) I'd say the use of a word like shithole as a descriptor is unnecessary to make the point that they feel, probably correctly, like their own countries are in general worse off or provide them with far less opportunities. Even being intentionally blunt and crude it wouldn't be necessary. However, I think the odds are high plenty have used such a term in thought or in an unguarded moment without making a comment on race. I know I have. But that was shitty of me, and people in positions of power can be held to a higher standard on being more careful, even acknowledging that outrage over specific words can and has been at times in the past a distraction from more important points.
2) No
---- I will say this though - quite often when a story about someone saying something bad is reported, the reports on the main sites don't quote what was supposedly said, leaving me confused as to how outraged I am supposed to be, but this time the story does state at least some of what is meant to have been said.
Having only just really looked at the story, I doubt I am the first person to be skeptical of this person's incredulity though:
I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Mr Durbin told reporters on Friday
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
Good evening all.
There was a decent article in the Economist back in '14, which I could precis in Trumpspeak as 'Africa is full of ex-shithole countries'.
When those countries were actual shitholes, the inhabitants would die quietly in situ. With modestly increasing affluence and the introduction of mobile technology, young people can see with their own eyes that Europe's streets are paved with gold, and have enough disposable income to attempt the journey. Why go to the trouble of nation-building when you can simply join an existing one?
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
Why can’t we be business-like and polite?
Quite. To use a cliche, we have the politics of the playground. The US is one of our oldest and best allies. That transcends whoever happens to be POTUS. Adults know that dealing with unpleasant leaders is part and parcel of the game of geopolitics. We shouldn't have to overtly proclaim how odious we find Trump in order to stay in with the cool kids; it's a given.
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
1) I'd say the use of a word like shithole as a descriptor is unnecessary to make the point that they feel, probably correctly, like their own countries are in general worse off or provide them with far less opportunities. Even being intentionally blunt and crude it wouldn't be necessary. However, I think the odds are high plenty have used such a term in thought or in an unguarded moment without making a comment on race. I know I have. But that was shitty of me, and people in positions of power can be held to a higher standard on being more careful, even acknowledging that outrage over specific words can and has been at times in the past a distraction from more important points.
2) No
---- I will say this though - quite often when a story about someone saying something bad is reported, the reports on the main sites don't quote what was supposedly said, leaving me confused as to how outraged I am supposed to be, but this time the story does state at least some of what is meant to have been said.
Having only just really looked at the story, I doubt I am the first person to be skeptical of this person's incredulity though:
I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Mr Durbin told reporters on Friday
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
Why can’t we be business-like and polite?
Quite. To use a cliche, we have the politics of the playground. The US is one of our oldest and best allies. That transcends whoever happens to be POTUS. Adults know that dealing with unpleasant leaders is part and parcel of the game of geopolitics. We shouldn't have to overtly proclaim how odious we find Trump in order to stay in with the cool kids; it's a given.
Trouble is, POTUS is not following the rules. Which is of course why he was elected in the first place.
We need to understand the new paradox of having a POTUS that really doesn't care about precedent or orthodoxy while we seem to be adhering to both.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
Why can’t we be business-like and polite?
Quite. To use a cliche, we have the politics of the playground. The US is one of our oldest and best allies. That transcends whoever happens to be POTUS. Adults know that dealing with unpleasant leaders is part and parcel of the game of geopolitics. We shouldn't have to overtly proclaim how odious we find Trump in order to stay in with the cool kids; it's a given.
Trouble is, POTUS is not following the rules. Which is of course why he was elected in the first place.
We need to understand the new paradox of having a POTUS that really doesn't care about precedent or orthodoxy while we seem to be adhering to both.
I don't think that addresses my point, but fair enough. Trump will last for eight years max. If I thought we'd have Trump II, I might worry, but I expect we'll see orthodoxy returning to the White House - hopefully in '20.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
It is not going to happen - the best those of you who want to remain can do is consider pursuading labour to campaign to rejoin at the next election
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
Strewth - Do you ever give up
If you are not being a total sycophant to Theresa May you are telling people what they can and cannot advocate. Maybe you should practice what you preach? I think someone criticising Brexit is probably of greater value than a stout defender of the current shambolic PM and government. Don't take my comment personally but from time to time I think you debase your own comments!
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
Can you expand on the relevance of "with Trump now in power"?
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
Why can’t we be business-like and polite?
Quite. To use a cliche, we have the politics of the playground. The US is one of our oldest and best allies. That transcends whoever happens to be POTUS. Adults know that dealing with unpleasant leaders is part and parcel of the game of geopolitics. We shouldn't have to overtly proclaim how odious we find Trump in order to stay in with the cool kids; it's a given.
Trouble is, POTUS is not following the rules. Which is of course why he was elected in the first place.
We need to understand the new paradox of having a POTUS that really doesn't care about precedent or orthodoxy while we seem to be adhering to both.
Indeed. Usually It's right to. Even if after Iraq British leaders should be wary of being swept along with US policy. A supportive friend, but one who is able to go its own way when necessary. Trump is a different kettle of fish. He's someone who an increasing number of politicians on his own country believe is a morally repugnant threat.
The problem is, Brexit has put us in a feeble, pathetic, position. Whereas Macron and Merkel can play good cop bad cop with Trump, mixing flattery with castigation in the knowledge that while they need America as Europe has since 1940, they're not beholden to it. In another, better, world we voted in and as a member of the EU are agreeing a China trade deal while keeping studious distance while America world out its political funk.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
Strewth - Do you ever give up
If you are not being a total sycophant to Theresa May you are telling people what they can and cannot advocate. Maybe you should practice what you preach? I think someone criticising Brexit is probably of greater value than a stout defender of the current shambolic PM and government. Don't take my comment personally but from time to time I think you debase your own comments!
My comments are entirely consistent. I voted remain, accept the democratic vote, and expect a deal to leave the EU.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
It is so difficult knowing what to say when the latest outrage bus hits town. So to make sure I get it right, two question for the PB Brain Trust:-
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
In my experience the most frequent use of the word shithole is to describe other parts of this country.
I see no reason why it shouldn't be used to describe other parts of the world which are even worse.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
For people saying that being hostile towards Trump would damage our relationship with the US: is it not also likely that being overly friendly and forgiving would damage our relationship with future anti-Trump presidents?
Why can’t we be business-like and polite?
Quite. To use a cliche, we have the politics of the playground. The US is one of our oldest and best allies. That transcends whoever happens to be POTUS. Adults know that dealing with unpleasant leaders is part and parcel of the game of geopolitics. We shouldn't have to overtly proclaim how odious we find Trump in order to stay in with the cool kids; it's a given.
Trouble is, POTUS is not following the rules. Which is of course why he was elected in the first place.
We need to understand the new paradox of having a POTUS that really doesn't care about precedent or orthodoxy while we seem to be adhering to both.
Indeed. Usually It's right to. Even if after Iraq British leaders should be wary of being swept along with US policy. A supportive friend, but one who is able to go its own way when necessary. Trump is a different kettle of fish. He's someone who an increasing number of politicians on his own country believe is a morally repugnant threat.
The problem is, Brexit has put us in a feeble, pathetic, position. Whereas Macron and Merkel can play good cop bad cop with Trump, mixing flattery with castigation in the knowledge that while they need America as Europe has since 1940, they're not beholden to it. In another, better, world we voted in and as a member of the EU are agreeing a China trade deal while keeping studious distance while America world out its political funk.
Apart from the UK Trump has no reason to humour us.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
By the way can we not have some more project fear? Sterling is reaching dangerously high levels which risk undermining the recovery in our balance of payments. Can we not have more experts explaining why we are all doomed to poverty and wailing in the dark so we can remain competitive?
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
To put that 1-3% in perspective if UK productivity had expanded at the same rate between 2006 and 2016 as it did in the previous three decades then we would now be at least 20% better off than we are:
My comments are entirely consistent. I voted remain, accept the democratic vote, and expect a deal to leave the EU.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
"We negotiate a fair deal to leave" - will any deal presented by the Prime Minister to this country be "fair" ? Fair to whom - the Conservative Party ? I'm far from convinced the Government you support is capable of achieving a decent deal for this country and its citizens.
The problem for a "second referendum" (a deliberately stupid and misleading term because we are not repeating the first vote but asking a completely separate vote about the outcome of the A50 negotiation) is not the question but the consequences of a NO vote.
This has always been the problem since a NO vote could mean one of:
a) crashing out without any agreement b) remaining on 23/6/16 terms. c) remaining on new terms dictated to by the EU (the Euro, Schengen, no rebates) d) seeking to continue the A50 negotiations to get a new treaty and seek a third referendum.
Since a binary question can't have five answers, a vote on A50 without a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of a NO vote is therefore illogical and impractical.
My comments are entirely consistent. I voted remain, accept the democratic vote, and expect a deal to leave the EU.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
"We negotiate a fair deal to leave" - will any deal presented by the Prime Minister to this country be "fair" ? Fair to whom - the Conservative Party ? I'm far from convinced the Government you support is capable of achieving a decent deal for this country and its citizens.
The problem for a "second referendum" (a deliberately stupid and misleading term because we are not repeating the first vote but asking a completely separate vote about the outcome of the A50 negotiation) is not the question but the consequences of a NO vote.
This has always been the problem since a NO vote could mean one of:
a) crashing out without any agreement b) remaining on 23/6/16 terms. c) remaining on new terms dictated to by the EU (the Euro, Schengen, no rebates) d) seeking to continue the A50 negotiations to get a new treaty and seek a third referendum.
Since a binary question can't have five answers, a vote on A50 without a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of a NO vote is therefore illogical and impractical.
How do you judge whether the public as a whole ever have a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of any vote and therefore whether any vote has been logical and practical?
My comments are entirely consistent. I voted remain, accept the democratic vote, and expect a deal to leave the EU.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
"We negotiate a fair deal to leave" - will any deal presented by the Prime Minister to this country be "fair" ? Fair to whom - the Conservative Party ? I'm far from convinced the Government you support is capable of achieving a decent deal for this country and its citizens.
The problem for a "second referendum" (a deliberately stupid and misleading term because we are not repeating the first vote but asking a completely separate vote about the outcome of the A50 negotiation) is not the question but the consequences of a NO vote.
This has always been the problem since a NO vote could mean one of:
a) crashing out without any agreement b) remaining on 23/6/16 terms. c) remaining on new terms dictated to by the EU (the Euro, Schengen, no rebates) d) seeking to continue the A50 negotiations to get a new treaty and seek a third referendum.
Since a binary question can't have five answers, a vote on A50 without a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of a NO vote is therefore illogical and impractical.
The answer to your first paragraph is that the deal will need to be broadly acceptable with the population but your doubt on TM being able to do a deal may or may not be realised but at the present time she has the worst job in the Country and one that no one else wants so we all need to be more positive that a fair deal will happen
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
I've always accepted the conclusions of the pre-EUref IFS report. Others differ. Based on that report, we've voted ourselves to be slightly less rich than otherwise, which is, I feel, an important distinction. Else I'd be reaching for the pitchfork and torch given we've lost ~15% of economic growth since 2008 - thanks to our banker friends.
I don't think anyone is peddling the idea that the 2030 UK economy is going to be smaller than it is now.
My comments are entirely consistent. I voted remain, accept the democratic vote, and expect a deal to leave the EU.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
"We negotiate a fair deal to leave" - will any deal presented by the Prime Minister to this country be "fair" ? Fair to whom - the Conservative Party ? I'm far from convinced the Government you support is capable of achieving a decent deal for this country and its citizens.
The problem for a "second referendum" (a deliberately stupid and misleading term because we are not repeating the first vote but asking a completely separate vote about the outcome of the A50 negotiation) is not the question but the consequences of a NO vote.
This has always been the problem since a NO vote could mean one of:
a) crashing out without any agreement b) remaining on 23/6/16 terms. c) remaining on new terms dictated to by the EU (the Euro, Schengen, no rebates) d) seeking to continue the A50 negotiations to get a new treaty and seek a third referendum.
Since a binary question can't have five answers, a vote on A50 without a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of a NO vote is therefore illogical and impractical.
How do you judge whether the public as a whole ever have a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of any vote and therefore whether any vote has been logical and practical?
It’s straight forward. They either got the right answer or they didn’t.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
Bit of an attempt to rewrite history Toppo and who's accepting we're going to be poorer ?
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
How do you judge whether the public as a whole ever have a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of any vote and therefore whether any vote has been logical and practical?
Valid point.
I voted LEAVE and I could have been wrong - I have to entertain that possibility. Neither LEAVE nor REMAIN campaign spent enough time justifying and explaining and supporting their own position and spent far too much time misrepresenting, undermining and mocking the opposing view.
The problem is the public never like being told they were wrong especially by a politician but the possibility exists.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
How do you judge whether the public as a whole ever have a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of any vote and therefore whether any vote has been logical and practical?
Valid point.
I voted LEAVE and I could have been wrong - I have to entertain that possibility. Neither LEAVE nor REMAIN campaign spent enough time justifying and explaining and supporting their own position and spent far too much time misrepresenting, undermining and mocking the opposing view.
The problem is the public never like being told they were wrong especially by a politician but the possibility exists.
An earth creature after my own heart. I too have been wrong on occasion. We should form a club. It might be quite an exclusive one .
The answer to your first paragraph is that the deal will need to be broadly acceptable with the population but your doubt on TM being able to do a deal may or may not be realised but at the present time she has the worst job in the Country and one that no one else wants so we all need to be more positive that a fair deal will happen
The deal only has to be acceptable to the Conservative Party to get through the Commons and probably the Lords. The 2022 General Election will be the question and I can't conceive of a Conservative standing up and saying "the A50 deal is terrible, vote Labour".
As to May having "the worst job in the country", I'd make three points - First, there are of course thousands if not tens of thousands of worse jobs. Second, she wants to do it, she could walk away tonight if she wanted. Third, she made her own political bed by arrogantly assuming in the spring we would all rally behind her and "trust" her. We didn't then, I don't now.
As to being "more positive a fair deal will happen", the shambles in the autumn is, I suspect, a sign of what is to come. Something will be agreed, it will be portrayed by her supporters and apologists as a triumph and will fall apart under the slightest critical analysis and scrutiny.
Then we will be told how Corbyn and McDonnell will destroy the country and the economy and force us all into indentured servitude and how the only road to freedom is to vote Conservative.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Yep. Cameron’s aid policies were not only enlightened but self enlightened. I am glad that the Tories have learned that lesson at least.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
Bit of an attempt to rewrite history Toppo and who's accepting we're going to be poorer ?
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
No, the sober analysis assuming all else is equal and we have a sensible government suggests the best case is -1% and the worst case is -3%. If you want to remove the assumptions that all else is equal and we have a sensible government the downside gets much bigger, and its hard to see where any potential upside could come from.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
They abolished their army in the 20's, an astute move as in many Latin American countries the army is a danger only to their own people.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
The answer to your first paragraph is that the deal will need to be broadly acceptable with the population but your doubt on TM being able to do a deal may or may not be realised but at the present time she has the worst job in the Country and one that no one else wants so we all need to be more positive that a fair deal will happen
The deal only has to be acceptable to the Conservative Party to get through the Commons and probably the Lords. The 2022 General Election will be the question and I can't conceive of a Conservative standing up and saying "the A50 deal is terrible, vote Labour".
As to May having "the worst job in the country", I'd make three points - First, there are of course thousands if not tens of thousands of worse jobs. Second, she wants to do it, she could walk away tonight if she wanted. Third, she made her own political bed by arrogantly assuming in the spring we would all rally behind her and "trust" her. We didn't then, I don't now.
As to being "more positive a fair deal will happen", the shambles in the autumn is, I suspect, a sign of what is to come. Something will be agreed, it will be portrayed by her supporters and apologists as a triumph and will fall apart under the slightest critical analysis and scrutiny.
Then we will be told how Corbyn and McDonnell will destroy the country and the economy and force us all into indentured servitude and how the only road to freedom is to vote Conservative.
You may or may not be correct in your assumptions - only time will tell
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
Bit of an attempt to rewrite history Toppo and who's accepting we're going to be poorer ?
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
We shall see, Ricky.
Certainly, this is all going to be a long term and hypothetical discussion.
But there are a couple of things which we have already learnt to be true - firstly that the Project Fear predictions were bollox and secondly that the Treasury's credibility is even more down the shithole than it was before.
The car factories have shut down, the City has relocated to Frankfurt, the economy is in recession and the stock and housing markets have crashed.
Oh wait ...
*Standard rejoinder* 'We haven't left yet'.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade .
It only became the standard rejoinder when it was realised that the immediate recession wasn't happening as predicted.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
I'm familiar with pretty much all the Brexit tropes. The latest analysis by Sadiq Khan's consultants estimates that the delta between that lost idyll where Britain remained in the EU and poor, huddled, friendless Britain is going to be between 1-3% by 2030, depending on whether we leave chummily or are ejected sans deal. Not chump change, but not an apocalypse either.
Very few people said it would be an apocalypse. But it’s good to see that there is an acceptance that we voted for ourselves to be poorer.
Bit of an attempt to rewrite history Toppo and who's accepting we're going to be poorer ?
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
We shall see, Ricky.
Certainly, this is all going to be a long term and hypothetical discussion.
But there are a couple of things which we have already learnt to be true - firstly that the Project Fear predictions were bollox and secondly that the Treasury's credibility is even more down the shithole than it was before.
The Treasury couldn't have known that a cynical and flinty Remainer would take over after the referendum and immediately set about kicking any meaningful Brexit into the long grass while pretending to do the opposite.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Yep. Cameron’s aid policies were not only enlightened but self enlightened. I am glad that the Tories have learned that lesson at least.
Well, they did learn that, though they seem to have forgotten.
I supported the Coalition, which I think will be looked back on as a golden age of good government, with only a few aberrations. Indeed in 2010, I voted Conservative in a GE for the first and only time in my life. Cameron's biggest mistake was targetting the LibDem seats in 2015. It destroyed his government and legacy by letting the Tory lunatics take over the asylum.
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
No, the sober analysis assuming all else is equal and we have a sensible government suggests the best case is -1% and the worst case is -3%. If you want to remove the assumptions that all else is equal and we have a sensible government the downside gets much bigger, and its hard to see where any potential upside could come from.
So a 2% spread in a prediction with a timescale of over a decade.
Considering that the Treasury's 2016 prediction has already underestimated UK economic growth by between 2.8% and 4.1%.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
In the short term - poorer countries becoming a bit richer seems to be increasing migration - since people can now afford to attempt the perilous and expensive journey.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
They abolished their army in the 20's, an astute move as in many Latin American countries the army is a danger only to their own people.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
I've heard it said that the most successful colonies were ones where people moved to empty places to farm - Oregon, New Zealand, Costa Rica - while the least successful were those where people moved to populated places to exploit the resources - Texas, South Africa, El Salvador.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Yep. Cameron’s aid policies were not only enlightened but self enlightened. I am glad that the Tories have learned that lesson at least.
Well, they did learn that, though they seem to have forgotten.
I supported the Coalition, which I think will be looked back on as a golden age of good government, with only a few aberrations. Indeed in 2010, I voted Conservative in a GE for the first and only time in my life. Cameron's biggest mistake was targetting the LibDem seats in 2015. It destroyed his government and legacy by letting the Tory lunatics take over the asylum.
I was a great admirer of the Coalition and accept that the Lib Dem’s added significantly to its success. But in the game of thrones you win or you die. Cameron won. The Lib Dem’s died.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
They abolished their army in the 20's, an astute move as in many Latin American countries the army is a danger only to their own people.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
I've heard it said that the most successful colonies were ones where people moved to empty places to farm - Oregon, New Zealand, Costa Rica - while the least successful were those where people moved to populated places to exploit the resources - Texas, South Africa, El Salvador.
Not sure that I would agree with that. The South African Voortrekkers were very good at being pioneer farmers, while the NZ settlers fought three hard fought land wars with the NZ Maoris.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Yep. Cameron’s aid policies were not only enlightened but self enlightened. I am glad that the Tories have learned that lesson at least.
Well, they did learn that, though they seem to have forgotten.
I supported the Coalition, which I think will be looked back on as a golden age of good government, with only a few aberrations. Indeed in 2010, I voted Conservative in a GE for the first and only time in my life. Cameron's biggest mistake was targetting the LibDem seats in 2015. It destroyed his government and legacy by letting the Tory lunatics take over the asylum.
I was a great admirer of the Coalition and accept that the Lib Dem’s added significantly to its success. But in the game of thrones you win or you die. Cameron won. The Lib Dem’s died.
I think the point is that Cameron won for about a year and a month. After that, history caught up with him. Had he remained in coalition there would have been no referendum and the Tory right would have been outflanked.
Of course - we'll never truly know what might have happened, Ukip might have been polling 23% now for all we know had such a situation taken place. But Cameron never struck me as a tactical genius - the title of 'essay crisis prime minister' seems like an accurate one.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
Well you could but the first question is whether Trump was right to describe it as one. The answer seems to be yes.
I agree. I said so at breakfast time here.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
Yep. Cameron’s aid policies were not only enlightened but self enlightened. I am glad that the Tories have learned that lesson at least.
Well, they did learn that, though they seem to have forgotten.
I supported the Coalition, which I think will be looked back on as a golden age of good government, with only a few aberrations. Indeed in 2010, I voted Conservative in a GE for the first and only time in my life. Cameron's biggest mistake was targetting the LibDem seats in 2015. It destroyed his government and legacy by letting the Tory lunatics take over the asylum.
I was a great admirer of the Coalition and accept that the Lib Dem’s added significantly to its success. But in the game of thrones you win or you die. Cameron won. The Lib Dem’s died.
Cameron was politically dead within a year. Sometimes people just don't know that they are dead.
A promotion for Pidcock, just after she had a warm welcome of solidarity for Chris Williamson. Must have spoilt her day.
Clive Lewis is back - that’s significant I think. A little while back many talked about him as Labours next leader.
Jack Dromey is also a formidable figure in a key brief - if Labour are serious about taking power winning over pensioners is going to be important.
However the rest do suggest a certain lack of ready talent. Pidcock and Carden? Really? Do they have anything at all to recommend them except that they're even further off the charts than the Jezziah himself?
Dunno about Haiti, but all the sub Saharan African countries I have been to are shitholes, and the inhabitants would be the first to confirm that.
Which countries?
The countries I have been to sub-Saharan Africa are truly beautiful with wonderful friendly people. So welcoming and willing to share whatever little they had.
People carry around their own world and experience themselves reflected back in what they see.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
They abolished their army in the 20's, an astute move as in many Latin American countries the army is a danger only to their own people.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
I've heard it said that the most successful colonies were ones where people moved to empty places to farm - Oregon, New Zealand, Costa Rica - while the least successful were those where people moved to populated places to exploit the resources - Texas, South Africa, El Salvador.
Not sure that I would agree with that. The South African Voortrekkers were very good at being pioneer farmers, while the NZ settlers fought three hard fought land wars with the NZ Maoris.
The Voortrekkers were not averse to exploitation of the local resources - people. Wasn't one of the causes of them leaving the Cape the abolition of slavery in 1833 ?
And I think that the majority of colonists to New Zealand initially settled the empty South Island.
Bizarre interview with someone from El Salvador when driving home on R 5. Trumps comments outrageous and insulting. No we couldn’t possibly take the 200k that were given temporary residence in the USA after the earthquake. Don’t you realise this is one of the most violent countries in the world, where only 1 in 5 have a proper paying job? Where there is no accommodation or jobs for those who got temporary residence in the USA?
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?” But of course he didn’t.
Fox Jr was in El Salvador last year and found it very interesting culturally. It is undeniably a violent place, but a large part of the reason that it is "a shithole" is because of the 79-92 violent civil war. The American supported death squads massacred civilians for years, couple that with a drug trade fuelled by the insatiable US desire for cocaine and heroin. There is an appaling legacy of fragmented society and gun violence.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I think its a better idea to look at similar but rather more successful places and find out what they are going right. Costa Rica, for example, seems to be a pretty pleasant place.
They abolished their army in the 20's, an astute move as in many Latin American countries the army is a danger only to their own people.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
I've heard it said that the most successful colonies were ones where people moved to empty places to farm - Oregon, New Zealand, Costa Rica - while the least successful were those where people moved to populated places to exploit the resources - Texas, South Africa, El Salvador.
Not sure that I would agree with that. The South African Voortrekkers were very good at being pioneer farmers, while the NZ settlers fought three hard fought land wars with the NZ Maoris.
The Voortrekkers were not averse to exploitation of the local resources - people. Wasn't one of the causes of them leaving the Cape the abolition of slavery in 1833 ?
And I think that the majority of colonists to New Zealand initially settled the empty South Island.
Auckland and the Bay of Islands were the earliest areas of settlement, but South Island was the more populated by the end of the 19th Century. In large part that was because the NI Maori fought very effectively!
A promotion for Pidcock, just after she had a warm welcome of solidarity for Chris Williamson. Must have spoilt her day.
Clive Lewis is back - that’s significant I think. A little while back many talked about him as Labours next leader.
Jack Dromey is also a formidable figure in a key brief - if Labour are serious about taking power winning over pensioners is going to be important.
However the rest do suggest a certain lack of ready talent. Pidcock and Carden? Really? Do they have anything at all to recommend them except that they're even further off the charts than the Jezziah himself?
Most of them I know nothing about. Still I guess it’s good to have a wide pool with some shadow experience, ready for the next time Labour are in government. Someone like Emily Thornberry has become a much more effective media performer with the practice she has been getting.
I googled Dan Carden and it’s just weird to see someone only a bit older than me as an MP.
Auckland and the Bay of Islands were the earliest areas of settlement, but South Island was the more populated by the end of the 19th Century. In large part that was because the NI Maori fought very effectively!
Dunno about Haiti, but all the sub Saharan African countries I have been to are shitholes, and the inhabitants would be the first to confirm that.
Which countries?
The countries I have been to sub-Saharan Africa are truly beautiful with wonderful friendly people. So welcoming and willing to share whatever little they had.
People carry around their own world and experience themselves reflected back in what they see.
You’ve been watching Paddington 2. Be nice to the world and it will be nice to you. It’s a lovely idea.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
Since 23rd June 2016, manufacturing output has grown by more than it did in the previous 16 years.
So, industrial towns that backed are indeed, better off.
The best thing we could do for the special relationship would be to hold a second EU referendum. A UK with a secure place in the EU would make us more relevant to US interests, and the democratic reversal of a mistake would be leading by example in respect of Trump.
I agree with your thinking. Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
Since 23rd June 2016, manufacturing output has grown by more than it did in the previous 16 years.
So, industrial towns that backed are indeed, better off.
Cheap exports short term as currency devalued, expensive imports long term, low unemployment short term, high unemployment long term as other countries are able to undercut our cost basis. Leaver Wet Dreams! Everyone else's nightmares....
Auckland and the Bay of Islands were the earliest areas of settlement, but South Island was the more populated by the end of the 19th Century. In large part that was because the NI Maori fought very effectively!
I think gold might have played a part !!
True enough, my ancestors went there in the gold rush, settled as Presbyterian ministers.
Comments
https://twitter.com/brexitcentral/status/951876709049163777
Irony breakdown.
The guy is a bonafida c*nt!!!!
1. Are all those Africans from sub-Saharan countries risking their lives to get to the Mediterranean to get on leaky boats so as to make it to Europe coming from "shithole" countries or not? And if they're not "shithole" countries why are they leaving?
2. Does racism now mean making any criticism at all of a black person or a country in Africa? For instance, if I were to say that Zimbabwe has been reduced to penury by a despotic, greedy and murderous dictator and that for many of its citizens, particularly in the Matabeleland, the country has been reduced to a "shithole", (though I would not normally use such vulgar language), would that count as racism or not?
Thank you very much.
I think you need to talk to your analyst, pronto.
No, these comments don’t make Trump a racist. But he is a contemptible shithead anyway.
Yes, Khan is playing silly games. But since he doesn’t seem interested in any of the serious aspects of the mayoralty, he may as well get stuck in.
And yes, Boris is ill-advised to add his two pennorth. But he is also a steaming hypocrite who has done more damage to the UK’s reputation than Khan could dream of.
We are led by knaves.
2) No
----
I will say this though - quite often when a story about someone saying something bad is reported, the reports on the main sites don't quote what was supposedly said, leaving me confused as to how outraged I am supposed to be, but this time the story does state at least some of what is meant to have been said.
Having only just really looked at the story, I doubt I am the first person to be skeptical of this person's incredulity though:
I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Mr Durbin told reporters on Friday
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42664173
Really? None of them, at any time? I find it quite easy to believe.
The Mrs has perused my recent comments and she’s embarrassed.
There was a decent article in the Economist back in '14, which I could precis in Trumpspeak as 'Africa is full of ex-shithole countries'.
When those countries were actual shitholes, the inhabitants would die quietly in situ. With modestly increasing affluence and the introduction of mobile technology, young people can see with their own eyes that Europe's streets are paved with gold, and have enough disposable income to attempt the journey. Why go to the trouble of nation-building when you can simply join an existing one?
We need to understand the new paradox of having a POTUS that really doesn't care about precedent or orthodoxy while we seem to be adhering to both.
A noble gesture.
We understand that passions can rise sometimes, but knowing you can overstep is a virtue in itself.
Yes, Trump is uncouth, but that's what got him elected.
Brexit is a historical mistake but with Trump now in power it is something that is going to have to be reversed or stopped. The Brexit supporters are completely deluded and fail to present any sound argument as to how the UK will be better off. Immigration is going to continue, £350 Million a week will not be diverted to the NHS and the only trade deals on the cards are with tiny economies like New Zealand, Australia or Canada. The big deals with China, India and the US are no nearer and just a fantasy. Time to stop this foolish Brexit!
Oh wait ...
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/951897321591144449
A promotion for Pidcock, just after she had a warm welcome of solidarity for Chris Williamson. Must have spoilt her day.
PB is at its most tedious when playing the old Brexit hit parade
The problem is, Brexit has put us in a feeble, pathetic, position. Whereas Macron and Merkel can play good cop bad cop with Trump, mixing flattery with castigation in the knowledge that while they need America as Europe has since 1940, they're not beholden to it. In another, better, world we voted in and as a member of the EU are agreeing a China trade deal while keeping studious distance while America world out its political funk.
There are two extremes in this debate, hard remainers and hard Brexiteers, neither of whom will see their dream fulfilled as we negotiate a fair deal to leave.
There is no other logical conclusion and any idea of a second referendum is not even likely as any real call for such will happen far too late for it to go through the HOC and HOL by 29th March 2019.
Furthermore, as discussed on here yesterday, it will be impossible to agree a wording for a referendum question, more especially as the EU have indicated any attempt by the UK to remain will see the loss of the rebate and schenegan and a demand to join the euro longer term
I see no reason why it shouldn't be used to describe other parts of the world which are even worse.
But the internet reveals all:
' Britain’s economy would be tipped into a year-long recession, with at least 500,000 jobs lost and GDP around 3.6% lower, following a vote to leave the EU, new Treasury analysis launched today by the Prime Minister and Chancellor shows. '
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/britain-to-enter-recession-with-500000-uk-jobs-lost-if-it-left-eu-new-treasury-analysis-shows
Top stuff that Treasury analysis - it failed to predict a recession in March 2008 but predicted a recession in June 2016.
Or for a more vibrant example there's this spectacular meltdown by Richard Branson on Tuesday 28/06/16:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GQZyP_Odio
You so wanted Tony Lipsey to say: “so, a shithole in other words?”
But of course he didn’t.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/timeseries/lzvb/prdy
Alternatively the UK economy is already between 2.8% and 4.1% larger than the Treasury predicted it would be after a Leave vote.
The problem for a "second referendum" (a deliberately stupid and misleading term because we are not repeating the first vote but asking a completely separate vote about the outcome of the A50 negotiation) is not the question but the consequences of a NO vote.
This has always been the problem since a NO vote could mean one of:
a) crashing out without any agreement
b) remaining on 23/6/16 terms.
c) remaining on new terms dictated to by the EU (the Euro, Schengen, no rebates)
d) seeking to continue the A50 negotiations to get a new treaty and seek a third referendum.
Since a binary question can't have five answers, a vote on A50 without a clear and unequivocal understanding of the consequences of a NO vote is therefore illogical and impractical.
We may well ask, "who made El Salvador a shithole?".
I don't think anyone is peddling the idea that the 2030 UK economy is going to be smaller than it is now.
Rather even the most headbanging Remainers are now admiting the potential downside is only 1-3%. The potential upside is much bigger.
I voted LEAVE and I could have been wrong - I have to entertain that possibility. Neither LEAVE nor REMAIN campaign spent enough time justifying and explaining and supporting their own position and spent far too much time misrepresenting, undermining and mocking the opposing view.
The problem is the public never like being told they were wrong especially by a politician but the possibility exists.
Haiti had a reasonable tourist industry in the 1960's. I wouldn't fancy it now, and much as I love Africa, I can understand why people leave.
The best way of stopping migration from these places is for them to become peaceful and prosperous.
As to May having "the worst job in the country", I'd make three points - First, there are of course thousands if not tens of thousands of worse jobs. Second, she wants to do it, she could walk away tonight if she wanted. Third, she made her own political bed by arrogantly assuming in the spring we would all rally behind her and "trust" her. We didn't then, I don't now.
As to being "more positive a fair deal will happen", the shambles in the autumn is, I suspect, a sign of what is to come. Something will be agreed, it will be portrayed by her supporters and apologists as a triumph and will fall apart under the slightest critical analysis and scrutiny.
Then we will be told how Corbyn and McDonnell will destroy the country and the economy and force us all into indentured servitude and how the only road to freedom is to vote Conservative.
They passed unnoticed on PB.
Probably the most important though is land ownership. El Salvador are nations where large estates are owned by a few, and most peasants are landless and poverty stricken. In Costra Rica most land is in small holdings by farmers with a stake in the country.
But there are a couple of things which we have already learnt to be true - firstly that the Project Fear predictions were bollox and secondly that the Treasury's credibility is even more down the shithole than it was before.
[joke]
I supported the Coalition, which I think will be looked back on as a golden age of good government, with only a few aberrations. Indeed in 2010, I voted Conservative in a GE for the first and only time in my life. Cameron's biggest mistake was targetting the LibDem seats in 2015. It destroyed his government and legacy by letting the Tory lunatics take over the asylum.
Considering that the Treasury's 2016 prediction has already underestimated UK economic growth by between 2.8% and 4.1%.
A little while back many talked about him as Labours next leader.
The.Guardian
Of course - we'll never truly know what might have happened, Ukip might have been polling 23% now for all we know had such a situation taken place. But Cameron never struck me as a tactical genius - the title of 'essay crisis prime minister' seems like an accurate one.
However the rest do suggest a certain lack of ready talent. Pidcock and Carden? Really? Do they have anything at all to recommend them except that they're even further off the charts than the Jezziah himself?
And I think that the majority of colonists to New Zealand initially settled the empty South Island.
Still I guess it’s good to have a wide pool with some shadow experience, ready for the next time Labour are in government. Someone like Emily Thornberry has become a much more effective media performer with the practice she has been getting.
I googled Dan Carden and it’s just weird to see someone only a bit older than me as an MP.
So, industrial towns that backed are indeed, better off.