It was disruptive change through immigration which led to Brexit.
Ending that will be enough for many people.
May could have ended non-EU immigration at any point during, what felt like, the 115 years she was Home Secretary but chose not to do so. Whatever Brexit does or doesn't do reducing immigration won't be one of its manifold and bountiful gifts.
Of course it will. I mean according to remainers we will within a few years be living in caves occasionally fed by subsistence farming. Immigration will collapse.
When I was in business I went to London regularly by train and had a rail card. I am now applying for a two together rail card and on contacting National Rail I spoke to a very helpful representative who, with one or two minor questions, had all my details from when I had my previous rail card.
I retired 9 years ago so on topic, why are we surprised about the amount tech companies know about us
Can't help feeling that is a breach of the Data Protection Act. You are allowed to hold personal date for a reasonable time. 9 years?
Turnout goes up when it's close, something is at stake nd all tribes get their voters to come out.
So Labour is screwed whilst Corbyn is leader. That is the element "at stake" for more people than Labour can persuade.
Yep, the Jezziah is this incompetent, tired, clueless government’s get out of jail free card.
The big difference is that this government can do something about being regarded by you (and perhaps others? ) as "incompetent, tired, clueless". It has clearly been entirely engrossed in delivering Brexit. Theresa May APPEARS so far to be delivering effectively a form of associate membership of the EU that the EU wouldn't/couldn't/didn't offer David Cameron. I suspect that at the end of the day, it will be a Brexit outcome that a significant majority will be happy to live with. To that extent, the Moaning Minnies of Remainerstan will have done her a huge favour. "They said it couldn't be done...." (Although given her form on asking the voters what they think, I doubt she will put it to a second referendum.)
Coming out the other side of Brexit with an OK outcome will be more than enough to put a spring in her - and her Government's - step. It doesn't augur well for Labour, under whichever leader's banner they choose to fight the next election.
The Britain.
Most people are wary of Government with "ideas" - they tend to be expensive failures. A bit of steady as she goes on the economy, bringing down the debt they inherited from a government with an idea - that it had beaten boom and bust - will do for now. I'm not saying there aren't things to fix - housing for the young being one very pressing need, another being Dementia Tax 2 - but how many people really want to take the risk of Corbyn implement HIS government of "ideas"?
There are more people worried by Corbyn than relaxed about him, which is why the Tories cannot lose while he leads Labour. But we desperately need a government with ideas and vision. The UK is still stuck in the 20th century, dominated by nostalgia on both the left and right. That will not cut the mustard or solve the many problems we have - ones that get bigger the further from London you go.
At least we don't have the murder rate of London.......
I'm pretty sure the 57% of people who voted Leave in Gateshead, where De La Rue makes its passports, didn't do so because they thought that the government would reallocate their work to the furriners.
They make passports for furriners.
Did they vote for "passports can only be printed in country" ?
Can we have 'EU Blue' as the colour for our new passports, preferably with some gold stars - a bit like the Queen's hat?
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
But more on this. Acceptance of mediocrity is the only way we will get something like resolution on Brexit, so maybe Leaver presumption is a good thing.
Mr. Eagles, I'm not yet persuaded the current soaring crime rate is a better alternative to what went before, although I fully agree that May is rubbish.
As for police problems, I'm more concerned with their lack of action of rape gangs than searching some people illegally.
Corbyn motivates the more radical wing of the Labour Party better than anyone since Foot but he turns off the more centrist voter who is needed for a majority.
Indeed. In 2017 though he had Brexit shoring up his moderate flank, as a lot of socially liberal moderates swallowed their misgivings about Corbyn as their primary motivation was not giving the Conservatives carte blanche to indulge their Brexit zealots. If you look at polling now, more Labour supporters think we should stay in the EU (however that's achieved) than think Corbyn will make a good PM. The question is, whether that can hold until the next election, and I don't think it can in most scenarios - as short of Corbyn demanding a second referendum and campaigning properly this time, it will either be a non issue, if we get a decent deal and abandon some of the sillier notions of Rees-Mogg et al, or Corbyn will be seen as complicit in the disaster.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
With respect you and your fellow remainers keep posting negatives on Brexit but none of it is cutting through or changing opinions.
We need to get the best deal we can and following our exit those who have very real and well held views must campaign to re-join.
None of the negative posting will change the fact we are leaving.
And by the way, it could be a disaster but equally it may not be.
I do not have pre- conceived ideas of how good or bad it will be
DavidL posted " The economy is trundling along reasonably well" and I posted the article stating "UK economic growth slows to weakest rate in five years". This was done without comment and in the interests of getting the FACTS right!
"Brexit will turn us into a Global Trading Nation!"
So, we can buy passports from France?
Ummm......
I'm pretty sure the 57% of people who voted Leave in Gateshead, where De La Rue makes its passports, didn't do so because they thought that the government would reallocate their work to the furriners.
The Govt. didn't award the contract to spite the good folk of Gateshead. De La Rue were not competitive in their bid. The voters of Gateshead are probably sanguine enough to understand this.
Mr. Eagles, I'm not yet persuaded the current soaring crime rate is a better alternative to what went before, although I fully agree that May is rubbish.
As for police problems, I'm more concerned with their lack of action of rape gangs than searching some people illegally.
The police are rubbish at when it comes sexual crimes, cf Jimmy Savile, all those BBC employees, The Roman Catholic Church, all those rape cases that have collapsed.
As you yourself said, it was common knowledge when you were young that you shouldn't spend time with Jimmy Savile.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
I was very disappointed in Dave when he resiled from his position of planning to give jail sentences to people caught carrying knives.
I thought that Brexit would have little practical effect too but have changed my mind. It seems you can significantly reduce immigration simply by making immigrants feel unwelcome. This isn't control in any meaningful sense. The most marketable immigrants, and therefore valuable to the UK economy, will be the ones most put off. There will be a temporary tightening of the labour market - we're seeing it already - but the situation will correct itself. Just as an increase in on immigration leads to an increase in GDP, so a decrease will see a reduction in GDP. Economic activity those immigrants were involved with will move abroad.
That guy's Twitter feed reads like williamglen and yourself wrote it.
HOWEVER I think the Home Office desperately needs to set up a hit squad to deal with stories such as this. We all know it's not going to happen, but those who think they might be affected may be in need of some serious reassurance. There should be a website, a social media presence, a telephone hotline and a dedicated mail address - because old people especially like snail mail and telephone contact. Ms Rudd needs to get on top of this very quickly or it will become a larger problem. They need to be proactive as well, send a letter to every EU citizen with a known address, making it very clear that they will have the right to remain indefinitely in the UK once we leave the EU.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
That was the first revisal of GDP for Q4. The second is due in a week's time and will very likely bring the growth for the quarter back to 0.5% on the back of revisals to our balance of trade which were favourable to a greater extent than that.
Hammond says forecasts are there to be exceeded and I expect our growth for this year to exceed the current forecast which assumed that wages would continue to fall for almost the entire year, something that seems to have come to an end yesterday.
The UK has significantly outgrown the EZ since 2010. It is inevitable that there will be an element of catch up eventually, particularly since they were much later in using QE than Osborne was. Our priority is to rebalance an economy much too dependent upon consumption and we are making progress in that direction.
Mr. Eagles, aye, I remember that. The police have been keener to chase octogenarians in London based on the fantasist 'Nick' than multiple reports of gang rapes in various cities, though. The media also spent more time on Julian Hartley-Brewer's knee than the Telford scandal (huge kudos to The Mirror for that story).
I thought that Brexit would have little practical effect too but have changed my mind. It seems you can significantly reduce immigration simply by making immigrants feel unwelcome. This isn't control in any meaningful sense. The most marketable immigrants, and therefore valuable to the UK economy, will be the ones most put off. There will be a temporary tightening of the labour market - we're seeing it already - but the situation will correct itself. Just as an increase in on immigration leads to an increase in GDP, so a decrease will see a reduction in GDP. Economic activity those immigrants were involved with will move abroad.
That guy's Twitter feed reads like williamglen and yourself wrote it.
HOWEVER I think the Home Office desperately needs to set up a hit squad to deal with stories such as this. We all know it's not going to happen, but those who think they might be affected may be in need of some serious reassurance. There should be a website, a social media presence, a telephone hotline and a dedicated mail address - because old people especially like snail mail and telephone contact. Ms Rudd needs to get on top of this very quickly or it will become a larger problem. They need to be proactive as well, send a letter to every EU citizen with a known address, making it very clear that they will have the right to remain indefinitely in the UK once we leave the EU.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
"Brexit will turn us into a Global Trading Nation!"
So, we can buy passports from France?
Ummm......
I'm pretty sure the 57% of people who voted Leave in Gateshead, where De La Rue makes its passports, didn't do so because they thought that the government would reallocate their work to the furriners.
The Govt. didn't award the contract to spite the good folk of Gateshead. De La Rue were not competitive in their bid. The voters of Gateshead are probably sanguine enough to understand this.
Presumably one of the reasons they voted Leave was to put a stop to this sort of thing. As to their sanguinity? Yes I'm sure they will see the bigger economic picture.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
I was very disappointed in Dave
Words you thought you would never read.
He disappointed me on a few occasions.
He disappointed me the most when he fought against AV in 2011, despite having being elected Tory leader by a form of AV himself in 2005.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
I was very disappointed in Dave
Words you thought you would never read.
He disappointed me on a few occasions.
He disappointed me the most when he fought against AV in 2011, despite having being elected Tory leader by a form of AV himself in 2005.
It's almost as if he thought he could get a majority out of the existing system isn't it?
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Whatever, he’s, on this occasion anyway, and case as stated, behaved like a very nasty piece of work. He should be chucked out of whichever party he belongs to, and, ‘encouraged’, to resign as a councillor as well.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
I was very disappointed in Dave
Words you thought you would never read.
He disappointed me on a few occasions.
He disappointed me the most when he fought against AV in 2011, despite having being elected Tory leader by a form of AV himself in 2005.
It's almost as if he thought he could get a majority out of the existing system isn't it?
But he should look at a time when he was no longer Leader.
He's the only Tory to have won a majority this century.
As a humble man he thought making net seat gains/winning majorities would be easy for his successors too.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Its a pretty stupid question. If the UK economy continues to grow are we better off? Surely the answer is yes unless some meaningful comparator is introduced. If that comparator is remaining it will be entirely hypothetical and meaningless because we will never be able to test the alternative. If it was, say, compared to the EZ then the time period (unspecified) is critical. Over the first couple of years I would guess not but in the medium term I expect the UK to grow faster (as it would have done had we remained and for the same reasons).
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
It's really dumb of me, but I've just realised that Trump's 'style' is based entirely on the poorer sort of hard boiled pulp fiction (as interpreted by a 9 year old child).
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
The vast majority of leavers are not expecting barriers on trade, they are expecting a FTA.
The boss of De La Rue was on the box this morning. Seemed like a well balanced sensible chap, and didn’t, unless I missed it, expect to have to lay anyone off in Gateshead. In business he said, you win some, you lose some.
It's really dumb of me, but I've just realised that Trump's 'style' is based entirely on the poorer sort of hard boiled pulp fiction (as interpreted by a 9 year old child).
Whatever, he’s, on this occasion anyway, and case as stated, behaved like a very nasty piece of work. He should be chucked out of whichever party he belongs to, and, ‘encouraged’, to resign as a councillor as well.
But - he's Labour. A Labour councillor - a Labour councillor. Let's just keep reminding ourselves of that, when Labour surveys the moral highgound, sat atop its high horse. A Labour councillor, allegedly chasing a 6-year old Muslim girl - who he allegedly called a "chocolate monkey" - with an air freshener because she "smelled like curry".
Just IMAGINE the tsunami of indignation if that had been a Tory.
Still, look on the bright side - she wasn't Jewish. Labour can take comfort that it is now equally offensive to all.
I think we'll be better off post Brexit (Which was the question asked), but slightly less well off than if we had remained (This is the question every remainer appears to have answered but it was NOT the one put !)
The boss of De La Rue was on the box this morning. Seemed like a well balanced sensible chap, and didn’t, unless I missed it, expect to have to lay anyone off in Gateshead. In business he said, you win some, you lose some.
Your spoiling their gloating which is unseemly enough to give a true picture of their worth and therefore valuable no matter how distasteful.
May is heading to the softest of soft Brexits where disruption or indeed change will not be noticeable to the majority of people. So far, remarkably, she has brought the wildest Brexiteers along with her and she seems increasingly confident about facing them down. The economy is trundling along reasonably well, still generating more jobs, soon to start delivering real wage increases again and putting chunky sums into public services, notably health. If you add the £4bn for the wage deal to the sums in the last budget we are more than half way to the £350m a week already.
There is lots and lots that can go wrong yet but right now quite a lot is going right.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
The vast majority of leavers are not expecting barriers on trade, they are expecting a FTA.
And this shows their ignorance of trade. An FTA would mean putting up trade barriers versus what we have now.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Remainers in general haven't answered the question put here, unless they are predicting a very long recession...
The only sensible way to interpret that question is on the cost of Brexit, ie whether the UK will be better off with Brexit than it would otherwise be. You don't ask questions about Brexit that can be answered by factors that have nothing to do with Brexit, in particular the state of the world economy. More importantly, I am sure most respondents would intuitively interpret the question as being about the effect of Brexit. But, yes, it is a risk to say something is "categorical". Maybe downgrade it to "overwhelming evidence" ?
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
The vast majority of leavers are not expecting barriers on trade, they are expecting a FTA.
And this shows their ignorance of trade. An FTA would mean putting up trade barriers versus what we have now.
Depends on the terms of the agreement. If we continue to have regulatory alignment then all that will happen is that the administration (such as it is) that now applies when we import third party goods into the Single Market will be replaced by similar administration when we export to the EU. Goods made exclusively here or there will not be affected.
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
The vast majority of leavers are not expecting barriers on trade, they are expecting a FTA.
And this shows their ignorance of trade. An FTA would mean putting up trade barriers versus what we have now.
Depends on the terms of the agreement. If we continue to have regulatory alignment then all that will happen is that the administration (such as it is) that now applies when we import third party goods into the Single Market will be replaced by similar administration when we export to the EU. Goods made exclusively here or there will not be affected.
The only possible agreement that would not involve new barriers would be the full single market and customs union.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Remainers in general haven't answered the question put here, unless they are predicting a very long recession...
The only sensible way to interpret that question is on the cost of Brexit, ie whether the UK will be better off with Brexit than it would otherwise be. You don't ask questions about Brexit that can be answered by factors that have nothing to do with Brexit, in particular the state of the world economy. More importantly, I am sure most respondents would intuitively interpret the question as being about the effect of Brexit. But, yes, it is a risk to say something is "categorical". Maybe downgrade it to "overwhelming evidence" ?
No - the question asks if we will be "better off" post brexit, not if we'd be better off than the remain counterfactual.
I thought answering a different question to the one asked was overwhemingly the hobby horse of a subset of leave voters, though it seems remainers are just as guilty with the right question.
Scotland will, of course, be so much better off as an independent state within the EU that there will be no need for people to risk their lives in trawlers unless they really want to.
How about because exisiting EU rules required the Govt. to tender to EU companies. Whereas when we Brexit.....
As Robert pointed out last night...
The FTAs we sign will almost all include public procurement rules, so it's not clear that we will be able to discriminate much post Brexit.
But in any case, the government should be seeking the best value for money, not the local solution. Using public procurement as a tool of economic development tends to end up with enormously wasteful projects.
How about because exisiting EU rules required the Govt. to tender to EU companies. Whereas when we Brexit.....
I wonder if De La Rue might have padded their bid somewhat, not expecting to get called on it because of the symbolism and the long-standing relationship with the UK govt.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Remainers in general haven't answered the question put here, unless they are predicting a very long recession...
The only sensible way to interpret that question is on the cost of Brexit, ie whether the UK will be better off with Brexit than it would otherwise be. You don't ask questions about Brexit that can be answered by factors that have nothing to do with Brexit, in particular the state of the world economy. More importantly, I am sure most respondents would intuitively interpret the question as being about the effect of Brexit. But, yes, it is a risk to say something is "categorical". Maybe downgrade it to "overwhelming evidence" ?
No - the question asks if we will be "better off" post brexit, not if we'd be better off than the remain counterfactual.
I thought answering a different question to the one asked was overwhemingly the hobby horse of a subset of leave voters, though it seems remainers are just as guilty with the right question.
I'm sorry, that's obtuse. If someone asks you whether you are better off after a change they are asking about your perceptions of that change, not about trends that are happening anyway. If I change my job with a paycut, am I better off because with inflation I will eventually have a salary that is higher than the one I had before?
It's really dumb of me, but I've just realised that Trump's 'style' is based entirely on the poorer sort of hard boiled pulp fiction (as interpreted by a 9 year old child).
I can sympathise a bit with From The Road here. We recently lost a contract to a german company from a potential Scottish customer that had been bailed out with Scottish government money then bought by a russian oligarch ! It sucks but life goes on.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Remainers in general haven't answered the question put here, unless they are predicting a very long recession...
The only sensible way to interpret that question is on the cost of Brexit, ie whether the UK will be better off with Brexit than it would otherwise be. You don't ask questions about Brexit that can be answered by factors that have nothing to do with Brexit, in particular the state of the world economy. More importantly, I am sure most respondents would intuitively interpret the question as being about the effect of Brexit. But, yes, it is a risk to say something is "categorical". Maybe downgrade it to "overwhelming evidence" ?
No - the question asks if we will be "better off" post brexit, not if we'd be better off than the remain counterfactual.
I thought answering a different question to the one asked was overwhemingly the hobby horse of a subset of leave voters, though it seems remainers are just as guilty with the right question.
I'm sorry, that's obtuse. If someone asks you whether you are better off after a change they are asking about your perceptions of that change, not about trends that are happening anyway. If I change my job with a paycut, am I better off because with inflation I will eventually have a salary that is higher than the one I had before?
There'll be no "pay cut" though - £50 at evens the UK economy will show positive growth the year after Brexit ?
Brexiteers believe Brexit makes the UK better off economically and so their vote to leave was the right one. At the same time they believe any bad effects are due to the wilfulness of the European Union and so we are well shot of that corrupt institution. Those beliefs are bulletproof. Passing mediocrity off as success drives anyone who is not bought in to utter frustration.
Brexiters think that the economic harm Brexit will bring is a price worth paying (there are more important things than wealth) at the same time as wanting to spend the Brexit bonus on the NHS.
SNIP
That's not an accurate summary at all. You can believe there will be economic harm - just that the economic benefits elsewhere will outweigh it - and overall say we are better off.
Accuracy is important, so fair point. I should have written, "Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO economic harm overall and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying a "price of Brexit" whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain."
The vast majority of leavers are not expecting barriers on trade, they are expecting a FTA.
And this shows their ignorance of trade. An FTA would mean putting up trade barriers versus what we have now.
Depends on the terms of the agreement. If we continue to have regulatory alignment then all that will happen is that the administration (such as it is) that now applies when we import third party goods into the Single Market will be replaced by similar administration when we export to the EU. Goods made exclusively here or there will not be affected.
The only possible agreement that would not involve new barriers would be the full single market and customs union.
Even full SM+CU will likely come with some barriers on third party trade. Goods wholly made in the UK can pass freely to the EU, thanks to the SM. Imported goods with value added in the UK can be reexported to the EU without onerous rules of origin certifications, thanks to the CU. However Imported goods with value added in the UK that are reexported to third countries may be subject to duties if they fail to make the minimum UK content thresholds. This is a big issue for car manufacturers.
How about because exisiting EU rules required the Govt. to tender to EU companies. Whereas when we Brexit.....
As Robert pointed out last night...
The FTAs we sign will almost all include public procurement rules, so it's not clear that we will be able to discriminate much post Brexit.
But in any case, the government should be seeking the best value for money, not the local solution. Using public procurement as a tool of economic development tends to end up with enormously wasteful projects.
So we are all agreed: the passport contract was awarded to the Franco-Dutch under EU bidding rules....
De La Rue sounds suspiciously French anyway. No wonder the Leavers want nothing to do with it.
From the Bailiwick of Guernsey.
Lest we forget they collaborated with the Germans during the World War II, so definitely showing off their French heritage.
No Channel Islanders were prosecuted after WW2 for collaboration. So I wouldn't go making any holiday plans there in the foreseeable....
A number of women had their heads shaved, though. To be fair, the options for a Resistance on Jersey and Guernsey were vanishingly small. Pretty well all the Alderney residents left, though. Taken, AIUI to Glasgow.
Categorical evidence that Brexiteers think Brexit will bring NO harm economic harm whatsoever and will definitely come with a bonus. We won't be paying that price whether it is worth it or not. The 42% who think the UK will be better off after imposing barriers on trade didn't vote Remain.
Remainers in general haven't answered the question put here, unless they are predicting a very long recession...
The only sensible way to interpret that question is on the cost of Brexit, ie whether the UK will be better off with Brexit than it would otherwise be. You don't ask questions about Brexit that can be answered by factors that have nothing to do with Brexit, in particular the state of the world economy. More importantly, I am sure most respondents would intuitively interpret the question as being about the effect of Brexit. But, yes, it is a risk to say something is "categorical". Maybe downgrade it to "overwhelming evidence" ?
No - the question asks if we will be "better off" post brexit, not if we'd be better off than the remain counterfactual.
I thought answering a different question to the one asked was overwhemingly the hobby horse of a subset of leave voters, though it seems remainers are just as guilty with the right question.
I'm sorry, that's obtuse. If someone asks you whether you are better off after a change they are asking about your perceptions of that change, not about trends that are happening anyway. If I change my job with a paycut, am I better off because with inflation I will eventually have a salary that is higher than the one I had before?
There'll be no "pay cut" though - £50 at evens the UK economy will show positive growth the year after Brexit ?
No. Not least because it's irrelevant. I am claiming that question was about the effect of Brexit. By implication that suggests you think the question wasn't about the effect of Brexit but was a general question about the state of the British economy that happened to mention Brexit.
The boss of De La Rue was on the box this morning. Seemed like a well balanced sensible chap, and didn’t, unless I missed it, expect to have to lay anyone off in Gateshead. In business he said, you win some, you lose some.
Your spoiling their gloating which is unseemly enough to give a true picture of their worth and therefore valuable no matter how distasteful.
Can I have a translation of this comment please David.
They were “demilitarised” by the British and told not to resist. Only the British didn’t tell the Germans who then proceeded to bomb the place. Not many places you can hide on a 24 sq mile island for a “resistance”... And they’re very clear - it’s “Germans” not “Nazis” as we're supposed to say these days..
The boss of De La Rue was on the box this morning. Seemed like a well balanced sensible chap, and didn’t, unless I missed it, expect to have to lay anyone off in Gateshead. In business he said, you win some, you lose some.
Your spoiling their gloating which is unseemly enough to give a true picture of their worth and therefore valuable no matter how distasteful.
Can I have a translation of this comment please David.
They were “demilitarised” by the British and told not to resist. Only the British didn’t tell the Germans who then proceeded to bomb the place. Not many places you can hide on a 24 sq mile island for a “resistance”... And they’re very clear - it’s “Germans” not “Nazis” as we're supposed to say these days..
So were the French, and they still formed the Maquis.
Let that sink in, the French put up more resistance, truly shameful if you're a Channel Islander.
They were “demilitarised” by the British and told not to resist. Only the British didn’t tell the Germans who then proceeded to bomb the place. Not many places you can hide on a 24 sq mile island for a “resistance”... And they’re very clear - it’s “Germans” not “Nazis” as we're supposed to say these days..
So were the French, and they still formed the Maquis.
Let that sink in, the French put up more resistance, truly shameful if you're a Channel Islander.
Area of France: 248,573 sq miles Area of Guernsey 24 sq miles.
The boss of De La Rue was on the box this morning. Seemed like a well balanced sensible chap, and didn’t, unless I missed it, expect to have to lay anyone off in Gateshead. In business he said, you win some, you lose some.
Your spoiling their gloating which is unseemly enough to give a true picture of their worth and therefore valuable no matter how distasteful.
Can I have a translation of this comment please David.
They were “demilitarised” by the British and told not to resist. Only the British didn’t tell the Germans who then proceeded to bomb the place. Not many places you can hide on a 24 sq mile island for a “resistance”... And they’re very clear - it’s “Germans” not “Nazis” as we're supposed to say these days..
So were the French, and they still formed the Maquis.
Let that sink in, the French put up more resistance, truly shameful if you're a Channel Islander.
Area of France: 248,573 sq miles Area of Guernsey 24 sq miles.
Let that sink in.
There’s a film out next month about Guernsey’s collaboration during WWII.
Mr. Floater, they've replaced stop-and-search by police with stop-and-stab by criminals.
At what point does the risk of being attacked and not having a weapon to defend yourself outweigh the risk of a significant prison sentence from simply carrying the knife? When the police stop looking for knives of course.
I was very disappointed in Dave when he resiled from his position of planning to give jail sentences to people caught carrying knives.
Comments
The police disgracefully misused their stop and search powers, a quarter of a million stop and searches were likely to be illegal.
But more on this. Acceptance of mediocrity is the only way we will get something like resolution on Brexit, so maybe Leaver presumption is a good thing.
As for police problems, I'm more concerned with their lack of action of rape gangs than searching some people illegally.
This was done without comment and in the interests of getting the FACTS right!
I’d hate to get on your bad side!
As you yourself said, it was common knowledge when you were young that you shouldn't spend time with Jimmy Savile.
HOWEVER I think the Home Office desperately needs to set up a hit squad to deal with stories such as this. We all know it's not going to happen, but those who think they might be affected may be in need of some serious reassurance. There should be a website, a social media presence, a telephone hotline and a dedicated mail address - because old people especially like snail mail and telephone contact. Ms Rudd needs to get on top of this very quickly or it will become a larger problem. They need to be proactive as well, send a letter to every EU citizen with a known address, making it very clear that they will have the right to remain indefinitely in the UK once we leave the EU.
Hammond says forecasts are there to be exceeded and I expect our growth for this year to exceed the current forecast which assumed that wages would continue to fall for almost the entire year, something that seems to have come to an end yesterday.
The UK has significantly outgrown the EZ since 2010. It is inevitable that there will be an element of catch up eventually, particularly since they were much later in using QE than Osborne was. Our priority is to rebalance an economy much too dependent upon consumption and we are making progress in that direction.
https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/976720821568835584
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/971735849774862336
What do you mean - he's Labour?
He disappointed me the most when he fought against AV in 2011, despite having being elected Tory leader by a form of AV himself in 2005.
Though if you can't find your passport, you can say you were 'Finding Nemo'
He's the only Tory to have won a majority this century.
As a humble man he thought making net seat gains/winning majorities would be easy for his successors too.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/976765417908776963
Just IMAGINE the tsunami of indignation if that had been a Tory.
Still, look on the bright side - she wasn't Jewish. Labour can take comfort that it is now equally offensive to all.
I’m still a Remainer, but one has to try and maintain some semblance of common sense.
https://twitter.com/AidanKerrTweets/status/976771428908437504
I thought answering a different question to the one asked was overwhemingly the hobby horse of a subset of leave voters, though it seems remainers are just as guilty with the right question.
The FTAs we sign will almost all include public procurement rules, so it's not clear that we will be able to discriminate much post Brexit.
But in any case, the government should be seeking the best value for money, not the local solution. Using public procurement as a tool of economic development tends to end up with enormously wasteful projects.
Lest we forget they collaborated with the Germans during the World War II, so definitely showing off their French heritage.
It sucks but life goes on.
“The Prime Minister has been clear: Britain will leave the CFP as of March 2019. We both support her wholeheartedly."
https://tinyurl.com/yarm8ykv
"Fishing leaders 'let down' as Tories agree UK will remain part of CFP for another two years"
https://tinyurl.com/ycvxvoot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_occupation_of_the_Channel_Islands#Allegations_of_collaboration
It was how I've always imagined Pitcairn Island to be.
Pretty well all the Alderney residents left, though. Taken, AIUI to Glasgow.
http://www.visitpitcairn.pn/media/photos/index.html
No giant Nazi bunkers in sight.....
Let that sink in, the French put up more resistance, truly shameful if you're a Channel Islander.
Do they eat more cheese in the Channel Islands than they do in Malta?
Area of Guernsey 24 sq miles.
Let that sink in.
https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/976778776637067264
https://twitter.com/JonahFisherBBC/status/976764932996911105
https://twitter.com/JonahFisherBBC/status/976765527728246785
https://twitter.com/JonahFisherBBC/status/976773647665901568
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1289403/
Because the UK is in favour of free trade and free markets - unlike many EU countries (such as France).
Does resiled mean welshed?