No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
It was an indirect answer which I assumed you were smart enough to infer. Oh well.
Yes Leave could have continued to campaign, just like Remain can today. That's completely different to finding excuses to re-run a vote before it's even enacted, just because you didn't like the result.
I would like to know how democratic it is to offer two specific proposed benefits in a referendum and then not deliver on them. To turn around your proposition on political engagement: People might STOP voting because Immigration is going to continue and the NHS does not get £350 Million a year.
Do you think that is acceptable?
The level of net immigration has fallen since the Brexit vote took place, and by 2021 or thereabouts, expenditure on the NHS will be about £350 a week higher than in 2016.
Yes, but instead of European Immigration we will be the recipient of migrants from places outside Europe. Personally, No immigrant worries me but I think a lot of Leave supporters are going to wonder what on earth has happened as the tide of immigration propelled by the need to offset an ageing population continues. The £350 Million on NHS spending was additionally spending on top of planned increases. Spending on the NHS was going to increase anyway - I have not seen in a budget delivered by Hammond any Brexit related spending in the NHS: Have you?
Why should it matter which country they come from, so long as they are individually net contributors?
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Great news in the FT suggesting that the new FOBT limit will likely be £2/stake. Absolutely necessary change.
Was on the Sunday Times front page too. Great news and good to see the government seeking to address the problem.
One of those issues where an obvious social blight is tackle-able with the stroke of a minister's pen. Excellent, excellent social policy.
Absolutely. Plenty of evidence of serious social problems caused by these machines, we really should just go back to the old one-armed bandits in the high streets and keep the casino games in casinos.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
"large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing"
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
"large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing"
No. A tiny proportion. Of which you are one.
So sad.
Some people are so bigoted and narrow minded that they cannot accept that their glorious EU isn’t universally popular and opponents must be racists. The penny may drop one day that they are the ones with narrow unpleasant views.
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
"Sources say that one official said that.." and the rest is paywalled from indigent nobodies like myself, but as third-hand tittle tattle it may not have deserved to get much attention?
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
Alastair is attempting the World endurance record for petulance, pay him no mind.
There's undoubtedly a broad swathe of the electorate who were 'on balance, leave' or 'on balance, remain'. Those positions are drowned out by the Ultras on both sides.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
IMHO, people would vote much the same way in a second referendum as they did previously.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
In my view the fact that we were having the referendum was proof that something had gone badly wrong in our politics and in our relationship with the EU, and given the uninspiring package that David Cameron was offering, the people did the right thing to reject it. That does not mean that it was the final word on the nature of our relationship with Europe, nor that what we will end up with will bear any relation to the fantasies that were peddled by the Leave campaign.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
In my view the fact that we were having the referendum was proof that something had gone badly wrong in our politics and in our relationship with the EU, and given the uninspiring package that David Cameron was offering, the people did the right thing to reject it. That does not mean that it was the final word on the nature of our relationship with Europe, nor that what we will end up with will bear any relation to the fantasies that were peddled by the Leave campaign.
I can agree with that. Our relationship with the countries of Europe has been evolving for millennia. The EU will not remain the same, nor will the UK. Geography dictates we learn to live well together, but the manner in which we do that will never reach some static state.
No fear. Just disgust at the anti-democratic attitude shown by some.
How exactly is another vote anti-democratic?
Show your working...
1. Keep asking people to vote until they 'get it right' is not democratic.
2. QED.
So if Remain had won in June 2016 you and your fellow Leavers would have stopped campaigning to leave the EU, sine die?
Remain can continue to campaign to Rejoin, but should not use their positions of authority to frustrate the decision of the referendum.
You didn't answer my question.
We can infer from your silence that you are a hypocrite.
In your scenario Leavers continuing to campaign would not have been trying to frustrate the outcome but to convince others to support them
It’s fine for a Remainer to campaign to Rejoin, but not to set aside the result of the referendum
What rot. If in 6 months time polls were showing 3:1 opposition to Brexit it would be perverse still to leave. The bar is high but showed Remainers are within their democratic rights to seek an immediate reversal of the vote.
Opinion polls have no weight in our constitution.
Nor should they.
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
I'd fall into that category. I honestly don't know how I'd vote if we did get a second referendum. But for different reasons, some people on both sides are more intent on salving their emotional wounds, and others genuinely are fearful/hopeful of a change in course, hence the passionate, depressing vitriol.
Alastair is attempting the World endurance record for petulance, pay him no mind.
I don't think somebody as naturally sane and balanced as Alistair will manage another 28 years to eclipse history's most notorious sore loser. Famously, even when he declared his longest sulk was over in 1998, the person he bore a grudge against was still She Who Must Not Be Named
The abject terror that Leavers have that the public is unpersuaded is remarkable and instructive. It shows that they appreciate that large parts of the public have got them pegged as at best opportunistic race-baiters or at worst the real thing. That means they need to cling on to those who either haven't noticed, don't mind or actively approve of that. That's a shaky coalition. No wonder they're so anxious.
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
I'd fall into that category. I honestly don't know how I'd vote if we did get a second referendum. But for different reasons, some people on both sides are more intent on salving their emotional wounds, and others genuinely are fearful/hopeful of a change in course, hence the passionate, depressing vitriol.
It was a reluctant "leave" for me, but one that has only grown stronger with time - albeit with a rising fear that the UK may suffer real economic harm. These two thoughts are not incompatibe.
Before the referendum, all I was hoping for was a sign that the EU was saying "we hear you" about our concerns, but Dave's deal showed just how little the EU intended to listen. It was "our way or the highway" before the referendum and, quite surprisingly, the EU's tune hasn't changed since. I assumed some kind of accommodation or compromise would be reached.
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
A political union isn't popular, desirable - or necessary for strong economic ties. Yet the EU has made it clear there can be no a la carte menu. If you want the economic benefits of the community, you have to take it with a big old dollop of political ordure too.
The hard line posturing of the EU has led me to conclude that their primary objective is to keep the political project on track whatever the cost, and that probably means attempting to punish the UK pour encourager les autres. But this in turn has made me even more skeptical of the EU and more determined that we leave, whatever the cost. I would still prefer to see a compromise, but I no longer believe one is possible.
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
I don't suppose I am the only person on here who voted to leave with a heavy heart and is still not at all sure that it was the right thing to do. But I am quite sure I am not at all impressed by this vitriolic rhetoric.
You aren't - of that you may be certain.
As for the "vitriolic rhetoric", I'm not so certain. No one likes to be told they were wrong but those who voted REMAIN have every right to tell us we were wrong and those who voted LEAVE have every right to carry on asserting we were right.
It won't solve or change anything until or unless there is clear and irrefutable evidence that one side or the other was correct (rather than right). We're a long way from that so the baseline tennis continues.
Perhaps the wider question is whether parties and Governments should always respect a majority view or work in the best interests of the country. I've always inclined to the latter - if it turns out LEAVE is a disastrous self-inflicted wound, I'll happily admit a) I was wrong and b) the argument for returning to the EU would be strong.
I don't see that currently - it may turn out not to have made much difference at all over a 20-50 year timeframe - however it wouldn't surprise me if a Prime Minister one day stood up and argued for returning to the EU "in the national interest".
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
Google "Europe’s four freedoms are its very essence"
"But the logic of the four freedoms is not based on economic but political reasoning."
So what? Universal suffrage is based on political, not economic reasoning. That doesn't make it a bad idea.
It's not so much a 'so what' as: this is a major contributory reason for Brexit, but it's a purely political position, it's not some fundamental axiom. I have no issue with the freedoms, but clearly the UK electorate do.
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
Have you read this, from the fairly Eurosceptic Wolfgang Munchau, arguing that even in a 'variable geometry' EU, the four freedoms of the single market have to form the common denominator? Do you disagree with it?
Why do you think freedom of movement of people is an essential component of the EU?
It worked so long as there was broad equivalence between the economies of the member states, but the direct consequence of the EU enlargement and the economic malaise of the PIIGS has been to create a race to the bottom where vast numbers have flocked to the UK, depressing wages and causing a reduction in living standards for our poorest.
While I voted to leave because of the democratic deficit, I fully understand why leaver-ism is now more associated with an anti-immgration working class demographic.
A couple of points from the article you linked to:
"The EU’s strength is to mediate between conflicting interests..."
It has singluarly failed to take into account the interests of the British working class, which is why leave is happening. The EU are entirely "our way or the highway" as I said before.
"Freedom of movement provided workers who were mobile with the ability to raise their income in other parts of the union."
Yes, at the expense of depressing wages and living conditions for others. This is why they voted to leave. I would vote against lower wages, house prices spiralling out of control, longer wait times at the doctor, etc, too.
The article repeatedly states that the four freedoms come as a complete package yet fails to make a convincing argument why. It is simply a shibboleth of those desiring political integration - a little more wiggle room for the UK might have allowed all sides to save face.
The fact that the EU can't conscience it suggests to me that they are completely unable to compromise or "mediate between conflicting interests", rather they wish to push political integration at all costs. They know that to give the UK an exemption from FoM would lead to cries for similar opt-outs from other countries, which would derail the whole political project.
In short, the only reason the four freedoms are considered indivisible is because they lead inexorably towards a federal superstate. Not because they have any special economic properties that makes them indivisible in order to benefit from their individual effects.
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
Rude and bullying? Sounds like something out of the school playground.
Maybe Macron needs to get a tougher team then if they were that upset - I would hate to see how they might react when meeting the Russians or Chinese!
Someone in No 10 was rude to the French?
I didn't know TSE was there.
Difficult to outdo Georgie Osborne's Sarko box "joke" on this front. I imagine there was nothing more to the incident than a tactless mention of Trafalgar Square or Waterloo station.
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
Rude and bullying? Sounds like something out of the school playground.
Maybe Macron needs to get a tougher team then if they were that upset - I would hate to see how they might react when meeting the Russians or Chinese!
Someone in No 10 was rude to the French?
I didn't know TSE was there.
Difficult to outdo Georgie Osborne's Sarko box "joke" on this front. I imagine there was nothing more to the incident than a tactless mention of Trafalgar Square or Waterloo station.
The Sarkozy's box joke was, to be fair, quite amusing.
This story doesn't seem to have got much attention. Accusations that Theresa May's staff were rude and bullying to the French delegation this week and subjected them to verbal abuse...
Rude and bullying? Sounds like something out of the school playground.
Maybe Macron needs to get a tougher team then if they were that upset - I would hate to see how they might react when meeting the Russians or Chinese!
Someone in No 10 was rude to the French?
I didn't know TSE was there.
Difficult to outdo Georgie Osborne's Sarko box "joke" on this front. I imagine there was nothing more to the incident than a tactless mention of Trafalgar Square or Waterloo station.
The Sarkozy's box joke was, to be fair, quite amusing.
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
In short, the only reason the four freedoms are considered indivisible is because they lead inexorably towards a federal superstate. Not because they have any special economic properties that makes them indivisible in order to benefit from their individual effects.
That's clearly not true because otherwise they wouldn't apply to the EEA countries and Switzerland too.
The logic behind saying that everything comes as a package is that within a single market, you are pooling your economic strategic autonomy. You accept, for example, that your finance industry might end up centred around a major hub in one member state. In those circumstances it is essential that your citizens have unrestricted access to take up employment anywhere within the single market so that their opportunities are not limited by arbitrary political decisions that you cannot control.
In short, the only reason the four freedoms are considered indivisible is because they lead inexorably towards a federal superstate. Not because they have any special economic properties that makes them indivisible in order to benefit from their individual effects.
That's clearly not true because otherwise they wouldn't apply to the EEA countries and Switzerland too.
The logic behind saying that everything comes as a package is that within a single market, you are pooling your economic strategic autonomy. You accept, for example, that your finance industry might end up centred around a major hub in one member state. In those circumstances it is essential that your citizens have unrestricted access to take up employment anywhere within the single market so that their opportunities are not limited by arbitrary political decisions that you cannot control.
It is precisely because of arbitrary political decisions out of my control (as a voter) that I voted to leave. I want to be governed by people who are accountable to the electorate.
Ultimately, however, I don't think it's a surfeit of French bankers swamping the UK that has been the problem. It has been the unrestricted free movement of peoples from nations far poorer than our own that have strained resources and lowered living standards for our own workign class.
Ultimately, however, I don't think it's a surfeit of French bankers swamping the UK that has been the problem. It has been the unrestricted free movement of peoples from nations far poorer than our own that have strained resources and lowered living standards for our own workign class.
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Monotony on Brexit 2 needs breaking. It is one long yawn with circular arguments.
Everyone needs to take a pill and calm down - it is boring.
Ultimately, however, I don't think it's a surfeit of French bankers swamping the UK that has been the problem. It has been the unrestricted free movement of peoples from nations far poorer than our own that have strained resources and lowered living standards for our own workign class.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Monotony on Brexit 2 needs breaking. It is one long yawn with circular arguments.
Everyone needs to take a pill and calm down - it is boring.
And Southampton played very well today
Spurs being Spursy!
Anyone in the bottom half could go down, but Soton are in the zone, struggle to score and have a pretty tough run in. Fan and player morale seems poor.
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Monotony on Brexit 2 needs breaking. It is one long yawn with circular arguments.
Everyone needs to take a pill and calm down - it is boring.
And Southampton played very well today
Spurs being Spursy!
Anyone in the bottom half could go down, but Soton are in the zone, struggle to score and have a pretty tough run in. Fan and player morale seems poor.
I reckon not nailed on, but value at 6.4.
Betting wise yes but I would be surprised
Re Spurs saying Kane is not for sale in the summer even for 200 million. I have to say that if a club comes in for Kane at the £450,000 per week Sanchez is getting they haven't a hope of retaining him
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
In short, the only reason the four freedoms are considered indivisible is because they lead inexorably towards a federal superstate. Not because they have any special economic properties that makes them indivisible in order to benefit from their individual effects.
That's clearly not true because otherwise they wouldn't apply to the EEA countries and Switzerland too.
The logic behind saying that everything comes as a package is that within a single market, you are pooling your economic strategic autonomy. You accept, for example, that your finance industry might end up centred around a major hub in one member state. In those circumstances it is essential that your citizens have unrestricted access to take up employment anywhere within the single market so that their opportunities are not limited by arbitrary political decisions that you cannot control.
It is precisely because of arbitrary political decisions out of my control (as a voter) that I voted to leave. I want to be governed by people who are accountable to the electorate.
Ultimately, however, I don't think it's a surfeit of French bankers swamping the UK that has been the problem. It has been the unrestricted free movement of peoples from nations far poorer than our own that have strained resources and lowered living standards for our own workign class.
Yes and whose fault was that? Blair's for failing to impose transition controls on migration from the new Eastern European accession nations as most western EU nations did from 2004 to 2007
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
And of course McDonnell's emergency budget would be eaten up with inflation busting wage rises
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Brave on The Voice. Donel Mangena's to lose.
You need to see The Shape of Water before betting on Best Picture.
The Post is weighed down by its own worthiness. Hanks is workaday, but no more. Streep not great by her standards. I think if you want to give Trump the finger, then The Shape of Water is the one for the Academy voters.
I'd forgotten that Southampton have four away games in a row coming up. They really shouldn't have agreed to that.
But I think they'll have enough to stay up. I think Huddersfield and Brighton are starting to wobble.
Soton seem not to be making signings, but it is wide open at the bottom. Huddersfield seem to have lost momentum, and established PL teams seem to now have their measure.
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
The railways were privatised in the 1990s, but there was no British Rail Plc.
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
Clarity on why they are meant to want to do this would also be good. Do they hate the poor and want them to die? Do they want more investment opportunities in general, or do they specifically want to make a killing by putting business the way of healthcare companies in which they have large holdings via shell companies registered in sleazy tax havens?
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
The railways were privatised in the 1990s, but there was no British Rail Plc.
Am I incorrect in thinking Network Rail remains in public ownership
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Brave on The Voice. Donel Mangena's to lose.
You need to see The Shape of Water before betting on Best Picture.
The Post is weighed down by its own worthiness. Hanks is workaday, but no more. Streep not great by her standards. I think if you want to give Trump the finger, then The Shape of Water is the one for the Academy voters.
Saw The Post today, Street played Graham as a woman trying to make a mark in a man's world and taking on the US government which might play with the Academy in the current climate especially with Nixon a Trump like villain. Also saw Darkest Hour and All the Money in the World in the last fortnight, with Oldman almost certain to be Best Actor but Christopher Plummer deserves a nomination for playing Getty very well having come in as a last minute replacement for Kevin Spacey
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Brave on The Voice. Donel Mangena's to lose.
You need to see The Shape of Water before betting on Best Picture.
The Post is weighed down by its own worthiness. Hanks is workaday, but no more. Streep not great by her standards. I think if you want to give Trump the finger, then The Shape of Water is the one for the Academy voters.
Yes, Shape of Water looks a very good film. The Post is longer odds than I would expect.
Three Billboards is intriguingly ambiguous. Certainly Ebbing Police dept make the South Yorkshire force seem competent, but the ending was a little unconvincing.
Can Kade win? perhaps not, but I think that he will go far. He is a local lad and has great stage presence, but also takes direction well. I suspect able to trade out as the odds shorten over the weeks.
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
Presumably most people would have to get healthcare from a number of private health insurance companies as in the USA unless they are very poor or pensioners in which case they may still get some state healthcare
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
The railways were privatised in the 1990s, but there was no British Rail Plc.
Am I incorrect in thinking Network Rail remains in public ownership
After Railtrack was liquidated, Network Rail was set up as a private company with one shareholder - HMG. Guess what? This meant it could carry on to borrow money against the value of its assets on the commercial market, none of which was included on the government balance sheet.
A couple of years ago it was officially brought into public ownership, partly to stop the nonsense of them borrowing at commercial rates. Now they have to pitch for money just like any other government department.
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
I've always thought that the Tories should use this as a counter-argument to the lazy claim that they want to privatise the NHS. How do people expect it to be done? Do they imagine there would be an NHS Plc listed on the stock market if they got their way?
The railways were privatised in the 1990s, but there was no British Rail Plc.
Am I incorrect in thinking Network Rail remains in public ownership
After Railtrack was liquidated, Network Rail was set up as a private company with one shareholder - HMG. Guess what? This meant it could carry on to borrow money against the value of its assets on the commercial market, none of which was included on the government balance sheet.
A couple of years ago it was officially brought into public ownership, partly to stop the nonsense of them borrowing at commercial rates. Now they have to pitch for money just like any other government department.
To break the monotony of Brexitref 2, The Empire Strikes Back.
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
Brave on The Voice. Donel Mangena's to lose.
You need to see The Shape of Water before betting on Best Picture.
The Post is weighed down by its own worthiness. Hanks is workaday, but no more. Streep not great by her standards. I think if you want to give Trump the finger, then The Shape of Water is the one for the Academy voters.
Yes, Shape of Water looks a very good film. The Post is longer odds than I would expect.
Three Billboards is intriguingly ambiguous. Certainly Ebbing Police dept make the South Yorkshire force seem competent, but the ending was a little unconvincing.
Can Kade win? perhaps not, but I think that he will go far. He is a local lad and has great stage presence, but also takes direction well. I suspect able to trade out as the odds shorten over the weeks.
I know several people who loved Three Billboards, until (spoiler alert) the police station arson..... Then it lost them.
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
Is thinking that the shops were busier 'in the old days' a similar habit to thinking that football / music / tv was better in years gone by ?
I think there's a massive amount of extra retail space compared to twenty years ago. So you can have retail sales up, footfall up and it still will feel less busy than the old days because it's spread over a greater acreage of shopping centre/retail park.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
I read a stat last week that the NHS purchases one-tenth of the world's pagers.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
I read a stat last week that the NHS purchases one-tenth of the world's pagers.
Really? I havent seen one in a decade in my hospital.
Hard to see him hanging on for long, but equally hard to see anyone but Farage putting together any vaguely credible alternative. I don't think that will totally finish the party - some people will still vote for them to send a message regardless of the shambles. But they may have real difficulty finding candidates.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
I read a stat last week that the NHS purchases one-tenth of the world's pagers.
Really? I havent seen one in a decade in my hospital.
Hard to see him hanging on for long, but equally hard to see anyone but Farage putting together any vaguely credible alternative. I don't think that will totally finish the party - some people will still vote for them to send a message regardless of the shambles. But they may have real difficulty finding candidates.
It's really striking how closely the 2017 UKIP vote matches with the 2010 BNP vote in individual constituencies.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
I read a stat last week that the NHS purchases one-tenth of the world's pagers.
Really? I havent seen one in a decade in my hospital.
Now I don't know if I'm the only person to have thought this but I was sure that the shops seemed quiter this Christmas than in recent years.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
Is thinking that the shops were busier 'in the old days' a similar habit to thinking that football / music / tv was better in years gone by ?
I think there's a massive amount of extra retail space compared to twenty years ago. So you can have retail sales up, footfall up and it still will feel less busy than the old days because it's spread over a greater acreage of shopping centre/retail park.
We'll see what happens when the FISA memo is released, which has rather a lot of dirt on many top Democrats. Now isn't it amazing that I've not heard a word about this in our 'mainstream' media! Oh wait a minute, that doesn't fit the narrative, it's inconvenient news. What a laughing stock our media has become. I guess many people in the UK wouldn't have a clue what you'd be on about if you mentioned the FISA memo right now!
We'll see what happens when the FISA memo is released, which has rather a lot of dirt on many top Democrats. Now isn't it amazing that I've not heard a word about this in our 'mainstream' media! Oh wait a minute, that doesn't fit the narrative, it's inconvenient news. What a laughing stock our media has become. I guess many people in the UK wouldn't have a clue what you'd be on about if you mentioned the FISA memo right now!
Indeed. We will see. And then we can judge. Not holding my breath...
We'll see what happens when the FISA memo is released, which has rather a lot of dirt on many top Democrats. Now isn't it amazing that I've not heard a word about this in our 'mainstream' media! Oh wait a minute, that doesn't fit the narrative, it's inconvenient news. What a laughing stock our media has become. I guess many people in the UK wouldn't have a clue what you'd be on about if you mentioned the FISA memo right now!
Indeed. We will see. And then we can judge. Not holding my breath...
Well, I had a google and a bit of a skim read. I suspect quite a few people on both sides will be less than happy when/if it's released.
McDonnell's emergency budget and tax rises for the NHS will raise approx 5 billion pa according to him. Has no one told him the NHS providers are looking for 30 billion pa
Voltaire opined that Prussia was an army with a state, we're a health service with a country. It's what, 1.6 million employees - the fourth largest in the world, second if you exclude the military. £120bn budget. If it were a country, it's budget (as GDP) would put it at #58 in the world, or thereabouts. It's a difficult critter to manage.
Second largest non-military behind Walmart!
So it is often said, but the NHS is not a single employer. There are 4 Health Services, but even within England there are several hundred employers. My employment contract is not with the NHS, it is with a single Acute Trust, and there are 4 other competing Trusts/CCG's in Leics, as well as a number of private providers contracting NHS work. Each has its own contracts, and function as distinct employers, all for a population of approx a million people.
CCG's are an odd organisation; individual practices are 'employers' although the way in which they operate is constrained by all sorts of measures. GP's, or partnerships of GP's are contractors to the NHS, as are pharmacies. Boots, for example, isn't one contractor; it holds 4000 or so individual contracts to supply pharmaceutical services, at 4000 or so individual addresses.
Comments
Nor should they.
No. A tiny proportion. Of which you are one.
So sad.
We're leaving, and quite soon, too.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/le-bust-up-no-10-staff-bullied-macrons-team-6bbk9qfbl
Better to legislate in a zero edge/0.1% punters edge on all these games across all mediums.
That would take away the incentive to offer them, whether in a shop, online, via apps etc etc etc
A few bookies/casinos would probably survive by charging an entrance fee/subscription, imposing their own stake limits.
Problem solved.
There's undoubtedly a broad swathe of the electorate who were 'on balance, leave' or 'on balance, remain'. Those positions are drowned out by the Ultras on both sides.
Before the referendum, all I was hoping for was a sign that the EU was saying "we hear you" about our concerns, but Dave's deal showed just how little the EU intended to listen. It was "our way or the highway" before the referendum and, quite surprisingly, the EU's tune hasn't changed since. I assumed some kind of accommodation or compromise would be reached.
I can only assume that the reason for the EU's intransigence is that they know that other members would quite like a few more opt outs, aren't so keen on ever closer union, don't want to be herded into a federal EU. And if the UK was granted special status they would be clamouring for it too.
A political union isn't popular, desirable - or necessary for strong economic ties. Yet the EU has made it clear there can be no a la carte menu. If you want the economic benefits of the community, you have to take it with a big old dollop of political ordure too.
The hard line posturing of the EU has led me to conclude that their primary objective is to keep the political project on track whatever the cost, and that probably means attempting to punish the UK pour encourager les autres. But this in turn has made me even more skeptical of the EU and more determined that we leave, whatever the cost. I would still prefer to see a compromise, but I no longer believe one is possible.
https://www.ft.com/content/49dc02dc-c637-11e7-a1d2-6786f39ef675
Again.
As for the "vitriolic rhetoric", I'm not so certain. No one likes to be told they were wrong but those who voted REMAIN have every right to tell us we were wrong and those who voted LEAVE have every right to carry on asserting we were right.
It won't solve or change anything until or unless there is clear and irrefutable evidence that one side or the other was correct (rather than right). We're a long way from that so the baseline tennis continues.
Perhaps the wider question is whether parties and Governments should always respect a majority view or work in the best interests of the country. I've always inclined to the latter - if it turns out LEAVE is a disastrous self-inflicted wound, I'll happily admit a) I was wrong and b) the argument for returning to the EU would be strong.
I don't see that currently - it may turn out not to have made much difference at all over a 20-50 year timeframe - however it wouldn't surprise me if a Prime Minister one day stood up and argued for returning to the EU "in the national interest".
There's a lot of talk about the people being allowed to change their minds. I'd suggest the mind changing happened over the last 40 years.
Maybe Macron needs to get a tougher team then if they were that upset - I would hate to see how they might react when meeting the Russians or Chinese!
It worked so long as there was broad equivalence between the economies of the member states, but the direct consequence of the EU enlargement and the economic malaise of the PIIGS has been to create a race to the bottom where vast numbers have flocked to the UK, depressing wages and causing a reduction in living standards for our poorest.
While I voted to leave because of the democratic deficit, I fully understand why leaver-ism is now more associated with an anti-immgration working class demographic.
A couple of points from the article you linked to:
"The EU’s strength is to mediate between conflicting interests..."
It has singluarly failed to take into account the interests of the British working class, which is why leave is happening. The EU are entirely "our way or the highway" as I said before.
"Freedom of movement provided workers who were mobile with the ability to raise their income in other parts of the union."
Yes, at the expense of depressing wages and living conditions for others. This is why they voted to leave. I would vote against lower wages, house prices spiralling out of control, longer wait times at the doctor, etc, too.
The article repeatedly states that the four freedoms come as a complete package yet fails to make a convincing argument why. It is simply a shibboleth of those desiring political integration - a little more wiggle room for the UK might have allowed all sides to save face.
The fact that the EU can't conscience it suggests to me that they are completely unable to compromise or "mediate between conflicting interests", rather they wish to push political integration at all costs. They know that to give the UK an exemption from FoM would lead to cries for similar opt-outs from other countries, which would derail the whole political project.
In short, the only reason the four freedoms are considered indivisible is because they lead inexorably towards a federal superstate. Not because they have any special economic properties that makes them indivisible in order to benefit from their individual effects.
Someone in No 10 was rude to the French?
I didn't know TSE was there.
Blimey it was a bit close in Germany...!!
That member's vote will be interesting - remember Schulz has promised further concessions...
Anti-democratically...
Could I tip Kade Smith at 20/1 on BF to win The Voice.
Southampton to be relegated at 6.4 on BF.
I have also been to see Three Billboards. Best Actress, probably, best Picture less likely at the Oscars. Perhaps The Post offers the best value as a longshot for Best Picture, but I haven't seen it yet. Get Out may hit the Zeitgeist too.
The logic behind saying that everything comes as a package is that within a single market, you are pooling your economic strategic autonomy. You accept, for example, that your finance industry might end up centred around a major hub in one member state. In those circumstances it is essential that your citizens have unrestricted access to take up employment anywhere within the single market so that their opportunities are not limited by arbitrary political decisions that you cannot control.
Ultimately, however, I don't think it's a surfeit of French bankers swamping the UK that has been the problem. It has been the unrestricted free movement of peoples from nations far poorer than our own that have strained resources and lowered living standards for our own workign class.
Everyone needs to take a pill and calm down - it is boring.
And Southampton played very well today
https://twitter.com/johnnymerceruk/status/955137646245941248
Anyone in the bottom half could go down, but Soton are in the zone, struggle to score and have a pretty tough run in. Fan and player morale seems poor.
I reckon not nailed on, but value at 6.4.
But, in fact, retail sales were at their highest level ever - nearly 20% higher than they were ten years ago and over 50% higher than they were twenty years ago:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/retailindustry/timeseries/j467/drsi
Is thinking that the shops were busier 'in the old days' a similar habit to thinking that football / music / tv was better in years gone by ?
Re Spurs saying Kane is not for sale in the summer even for 200 million. I have to say that if a club comes in for Kane at the £450,000 per week Sanchez is getting they haven't a hope of retaining him
The other issue is the Black Friday / Cyber Monday promotions making good volumes but limited profits.
But I think they'll have enough to stay up. I think Huddersfield and Brighton are starting to wobble.
You need to see The Shape of Water before betting on Best Picture.
The Post is weighed down by its own worthiness. Hanks is workaday, but no more. Streep not great by her standards. I think if you want to give Trump the finger, then The Shape of Water is the one for the Academy voters.
Three Billboards is intriguingly ambiguous. Certainly Ebbing Police dept make the South Yorkshire force seem competent, but the ending was a little unconvincing.
Can Kade win? perhaps not, but I think that he will go far. He is a local lad and has great stage presence, but also takes direction well. I suspect able to trade out as the odds shorten over the weeks.
A couple of years ago it was officially brought into public ownership, partly to stop the nonsense of them borrowing at commercial rates. Now they have to pitch for money just like any other government department.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/21/ukip-leader-henry-bolton-unanimously-loses-confidence-vote
Hard to see him hanging on for long, but equally hard to see anyone but Farage putting together any vaguely credible alternative. I don't think that will totally finish the party - some people will still vote for them to send a message regardless of the shambles. But they may have real difficulty finding candidates.