I wonder whether what is described here as the "Remain campaign" is right to be so hostile to this emerging idea of a "blind Brexit"? For sure, it bypasses the possibility of calamity Brexit followed by a clamour to rejoin, but nevertheless it would seem much easier to slip back in as a member from the blind Brexit position, which could last for as long as it takes for leavers to work out how to get what they want; I would imagine the hard leavers will be equally hostile.
That article looks quite plausible to me - it's exactly the sort of fudge that the EU defaults to when unanimity is difficult to achieve. What it would mean in UK politics is pretty hard to read - I imagine many people would be a bit exasperated at the idea of talks continuing indefinitely, but they might be relieved at the absence of food shortages and all that stuff. On the whole I think Remainers are right to be wary - it's very close to the "Get out first, then change the leader and sort the details" which some of the Leave champions favour.
Food shortages is bunkum, We can source from elsewhere. Might be more expensive..
I wonder whether what is described here as the "Remain campaign" is right to be so hostile to this emerging idea of a "blind Brexit"? For sure, it bypasses the possibility of calamity Brexit followed by a clamour to rejoin, but nevertheless it would seem much easier to slip back in as a member from the blind Brexit position, which could last for as long as it takes for leavers to work out how to get what they want; I would imagine the hard leavers will be equally hostile.
That article looks quite plausible to me - it's exactly the sort of fudge that the EU defaults to when unanimity is difficult to achieve. What it would mean in UK politics is pretty hard to read - I imagine many people would be a bit exasperated at the idea of talks continuing indefinitely, but they might be relieved at the absence of food shortages and all that stuff. On the whole I think Remainers are right to be wary - it's very close to the "Get out first, then change the leader and sort the details" which some of the Leave champions favour.
Food shortages is bunkum, We can source from elsewhere. Might be more expensive..
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
Fundamental to a strong economy - in which entrepreneurs have confidence to invest and take risks - is stability and certainty, surely?
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
By your curious and dubious measure, the Conservatives would be on the Left as well. May is an interventionist in the style of a Heseltine while all the Conservatives I encounter, especially at local level, are passionate believers in strong and well-run public services.
There may be differences with other parties over priorities and emphasis but I'm pretty certain most Conservatives value the work of social workers, police men and women, fire fighters and the like and would like the maximum resources to be made available to these front-line public-facing workers. We also see May wanting to spend even more on the NHS so that must make her a "leftie" in your eyes, or does it ?
Once again, it is the overall emphasis and philosophy that is the differentiator here in my mind - clearly a Labour CotE is focused on the economy, a Conservative health secretary on public services and this is equally true at local level.
And political necessity is also a muddying factor, thus the NHS boost.
Surely the issue for the remainers now is how much worse they can make Brexit look? Pretty soon there will only be upside based on their apocalyptic utterings so they are in effect shooting themselves in the foot.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
I wonder whether what is described here as the "Remain campaign" is right to be so hostile to this emerging idea of a "blind Brexit"? For sure, it bypasses the possibility of calamity Brexit followed by a clamour to rejoin, but nevertheless it would seem much easier to slip back in as a member from the blind Brexit position, which could last for as long as it takes for leavers to work out how to get what they want; I would imagine the hard leavers will be equally hostile.
That article looks quite plausible to me - it's exactly the sort of fudge that the EU defaults to when unanimity is difficult to achieve. What it would mean in UK politics is pretty hard to read - I imagine many people would be a bit exasperated at the idea of talks continuing indefinitely, but they might be relieved at the absence of food shortages and all that stuff. On the whole I think Remainers are right to be wary - it's very close to the "Get out first, then change the leader and sort the details" which some of the Leave champions favour.
It does seem as though the wind is turning a bit in the UK's direction. The EU seems to be moving to their default 'lets fudge it' position, and there seems to be a recognision that a no-deal would actually be distasterous for all sides, so lets avoid it, even it it needs a be of slight of hand and a 'don't look at this too closely' attitude.
Surely the issue for the remainers now is how much worse they can make Brexit look? Pretty soon there will only be upside based on their apocalyptic utterings so they are in effect shooting themselves in the foot.
Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
They are Thatcherite. They have an utterly unreasonable but fully fathomable hatred of being controlled by a Butskellite organisation, even at a low level. All follows from that.
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
Stewart Lee seems to have had a rare "double peak" in his career.
That double peak (or triple, or quadruple...) peak is usually a sign of quality: Spielberg had it (Jaws/CE3K/ET, then slump, then Saving Private Ryan/Schindlers), Scorsese had it (Taxi Driver/Raging Bull/The King of Comedy, then slump, then Goodfellas/Cape Fear/Casino), Hitchcock had it (early British films, then his early American period, then slump, then Psycho), Chaplin did it, Soderbergh did it, Woody Allen (let's separate the art from the artist for a moment) has done this several times.
It's not consistent: Ridley Scott has been up and down so many times now I've given up (he should have been shot for Alien:Covenant), Kubrick never made a bad film (says me), nor Christopher Nolan. And what do you do with Michael Mann or Terrence Malik, who are brilliant but aren't doing as well these days as they really should?
Sorry I seem to have gone off on a tangent...
You seriously think Eyes Wide Shut was not a bad film?
There was one truly great scene. The rest of the movie I don't remember.
Stewart Lee seems to have had a rare "double peak" in his career.
That double peak (or triple, or quadruple...) peak is usually a sign of quality: Spielberg had it (Jaws/CE3K/ET, then slump, then Saving Private Ryan/Schindlers), Scorsese had it (Taxi Driver/Raging Bull/The King of Comedy, then slump, then Goodfellas/Cape Fear/Casino), Hitchcock had it (early British films, then his early American period, then slump, then Psycho), Chaplin did it, Soderbergh did it, Woody Allen (let's separate the art from the artist for a moment) has done this several times.
It's not consistent: Ridley Scott has been up and down so many times now I've given up (he should have been shot for Alien:Covenant), Kubrick never made a bad film (says me), nor Christopher Nolan. And what do you do with Michael Mann or Terrence Malik, who are brilliant but aren't doing as well these days as they really should?
Sorry I seem to have gone off on a tangent...
You seriously think Eyes Wide Shut was not a bad film?
It was terrible. Full Metal Jacket was repeated the other night. I had forgotten how brilliant it was. As good as Apocalypse Now amongst Vietnam films IMO.
Not really. It was quite obviously filmed not on location.
If the landscape/environment is significantly different it does dent the authenticity of the film. Your comment made me think of Hotel Rwanda, filmed in a very flat part of South Africa when Rwanda is known as the land of a thousand hills.
This is the first time this flaw has been pointed out to me in either film ! I thought both Hotel Rwanda and FMJ were both very good indeed. As an aside, how old will Alma Deutscher be when she peaks ?
If you watch 'Shooting Dogs', starring John Hurt, and compare the two films, you can see the difference that authentic on-location filming brings to a historical film.
We watched a historical film last night: "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter". It was brilliant, and gave me an angle on history that I'd never known before.
It's great when films give you insight to little-known history.
Not a patch on Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, which adds to that an interesting reading of Austen's masterpiece. (And has a hero who is oddly reminiscent of George Osborne in appearance, if not politics.)
Yes, but Abraham Lincoln was a real person, whilst Jane Austen is a fictional one.
Surely the issue for the remainers now is how much worse they can make Brexit look? Pretty soon there will only be upside based on their apocalyptic utterings so they are in effect shooting themselves in the foot.
Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit.
I agree. He does however make the serious point that painting a downside far worse than is likely does risk things not turning out quite so bad actually seeming like some kind of upside.
Surely the issue for the remainers now is how much worse they can make Brexit look? Pretty soon there will only be upside based on their apocalyptic utterings so they are in effect shooting themselves in the foot.
Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit.
I think the point he is trying to make is that if it isn't quite as bad as predicted - if, for example, every plane on the planet isn't grounded and we don't have Theresa May collapsing because there's no insulin - it will look like a success.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
They are Thatcherite. They have an utterly unreasonable but fully fathomable hatred of being controlled by a Butskellite organisation, even at a low level. All follows from that.
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
I thought Thatcher was pro the single market, indeed to a large degree she helped bring it about.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
They are Thatcherite. They have an utterly unreasonable but fully fathomable hatred of being controlled by a Butskellite organisation, even at a low level. All follows from that.
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
Unfathomable in the sense of immeasurably great depth.
It is not the nature of the EU that they hate but its fact, hence their wish not just to leave it but to destroy it. It is a pathological affliction.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Surely the issue for the remainers now is how much worse they can make Brexit look? Pretty soon there will only be upside based on their apocalyptic utterings so they are in effect shooting themselves in the foot.
Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit.
I think the point he is trying to make is that if it isn't quite as bad as predicted - if, for example, every plane on the planet isn't grounded and we don't have Theresa May collapsing because there's no insulin - it will look like a success.
Chelley Ryan - feature writer for The Morning Star.
Also like the "RTs are not necessarily endorsements." attempt at get out of jail free card. If you want to retweet something as you think it is of interest, but you definitely don't agree with you can easily just put a comment that says so at the time.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Don't forget your 'Giselas', those government issued food stamps.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Heathrow could have the Boris Johnson 3rd Planepark
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Don't forget your 'Giselas', those government issued food stamps.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing Jezza can have been found doing or saying that will alter their view. Definitely not a cult.
Note that we are back having a go at 'the establishment'. This madness is the flip side of the same coin of Trump. Same crap, 'the people', 'the many', 'the corrupt media', 'the elite', 'the bankers who control the world' etc etc.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
They are Thatcherite. They have an utterly unreasonable but fully fathomable hatred of being controlled by a Butskellite organisation, even at a low level. All follows from that.
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
I thought Thatcher was pro the single market, indeed to a large degree she helped bring it about.
Ah, but they have a mythological Thatcher.
There is to be a 60ft statue in the Margaret Thatcher Farm of unpicked, rotting produce in the Lincolnshire Fens.
I wonder whether what is described here as the "Remain campaign" is right to be so hostile to this emerging idea of a "blind Brexit"? For sure, it bypasses the possibility of calamity Brexit followed by a clamour to rejoin, but nevertheless it would seem much easier to slip back in as a member from the blind Brexit position, which could last for as long as it takes for leavers to work out how to get what they want; I would imagine the hard leavers will be equally hostile.
That article looks quite plausible to me - it's exactly the sort of fudge that the EU defaults to when unanimity is difficult to achieve. What it would mean in UK politics is pretty hard to read - I imagine many people would be a bit exasperated at the idea of talks continuing indefinitely, but they might be relieved at the absence of food shortages and all that stuff. On the whole I think Remainers are right to be wary - it's very close to the "Get out first, then change the leader and sort the details" which some of the Leave champions favour.
It does seem as though the wind is turning a bit in the UK's direction. The EU seems to be moving to their default 'lets fudge it' position, and there seems to be a recognision that a no-deal would actually be distasterous for all sides, so lets avoid it, even it it needs a be of slight of hand and a 'don't look at this too closely' attitude.
I think it's sunk in that May has done what she can to compromise, and has exhausted all her political capital getting there. They finally believe the message that there are sufficient headbangers to let the UK crash out if they keep pushing for more. And they are right.
If we are going to have a transition period we will effectively have to stay in the single market for the length of it, plus Gove has now fallen well behind Boris and Gove in the Tory membership next Tory leader polling anyway
"Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit."
No? People starving to death on the streets = An end to the obesity crisis.
This is all so last century. Don't you remember the original project fear? Millions unemployed as soon as Article 50 is invoked. The horsemen of the Apocalypse running free.
If this happens as soon as we leave the EU, how did we survive before we joined? Does the rest of the world not exist? IF we are now so dependent on the kindness of strangers, when did we stop being an independent country?
It's beginning to sound nearly as bad a the Y2K bug.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Heathrow could have the Boris Johnson 3rd Planepark
Or we could just rename the mainland Boris Island.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing Jezza can have been found doing or saying that will alter their view. Definitely not a cult.
Note that we are back having a go at 'the establishment'. This madness is the flip side of the same coin of Trump. Same crap, 'the people', 'the many', 'the corrupt media', 'the elite', 'the bankers who control the world' etc etc.
The parallels with Trump are quite clear. Putin must be loving it.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing Jezza can have been found doing or saying that will alter their view. Definitely not a cult.
Note that we are back having a go at 'the establishment'. This madness is the flip side of the same coin of Trump. Same crap, 'the people', 'the many', 'the corrupt media', 'the elite', 'the bankers who control the world' etc etc.
Momentum didnt want to have to "unendorse" Willsman but even they realise they cant fight every battle. Therefore far better to have the 8 candidates endorsed by Momentum who probably have the same view as Willsman anyway.
If we are going to have a transition period we will effectively have to stay in the single market for the length of it, plus Gove has now fallen well behind Boris and Gove in the Tory membership next Tory leader polling anyway
Is he playing a clever game (and what ever his faults he is clever)? Maybe he figures theres no way there wont be a Brexiteer in the final two. Perhaps if enough non-whack job MPs see him as the sane and adult Brexiteer who can compromise, they will put him through rather than Boris or Mogg.
. I agree. So far we haven't really identified a difference other than a stress on the individual as against on the collective. Which to be fair is quite important, at least to me.
I think the stress on individual vs collective is the difference, but the fact is that this does not lie across the main left/right dividing line of British politics. The identifier for me is whether you think the job of government is to deliver good public services assisted by a strong economy on the left, or whether it is to deliver a strong economy to which public services may contribute on the right.
The fact is that LDs and Liberals have been reliably on the left of this line for a very long time - even the Orange book is very heavily about the delivery of public services.
Defining a new centre, whatever form it ultimately takes, would genuinely be enhanced by seeking to span the two mindsets.
I see your point. What I don't see is any party giving primacy to delivering a strong economy right now.
To be, perhaps overly, fair, the Tory right do see Brexit as an economic endeavour, the opportunity for deregulation and restructuring, an heir to Thatcherite policies. Very much Singapore-on-Thames.
And all the echoes of 79-81, pain for gain, if it isn't hurting it isn't working, are ringing in their ears.
Even Boris's 'F business' line could readily be expanded - they don't know what's good for them.
Of course, the trouble with the concept of Creative Destruction is that it's strongest advocates are almost invariably common-or-garden Destroyers using the fig leaf and hope of future Creation by somebody else.
You are being far too charitable. They have an unreasoning and unfathomable hatred of the EU. All follows from that.
They are Thatcherite. They have an utterly unreasonable but fully fathomable hatred of being controlled by a Butskellite organisation, even at a low level. All follows from that.
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
I thought Thatcher was pro the single market, indeed to a large degree she helped bring it about.
Indeed. Thatcher’s name is used for all sorts of ideas with which she would have had no truck.
"Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit."
No? People starving to death on the streets = An end to the obesity crisis.
This is all so last century. Don't you remember the original project fear? Millions unemployed as soon as Article 50 is invoked. The horsemen of the Apocalypse running free.
If this happens as soon as we leave the EU, how did we survive before we joined? Does the rest of the world not exist? IF we are now so dependent on the kindness of strangers, when did we stop being an independent country?
It's beginning to sound nearly as bad a the Y2K bug.
"It's beginning to sound nearly as bad a the Y2K bug."
Let's hope it's not, as the only reason the Y2K bug was not a disaster was that a fortune was spent by institutions and organisations on good, qualified people to prevent the worst happening.
Whereas Brexit has Boris, Fox, Davis (well, not any more) and JRM.
If we are going to have a transition period we will effectively have to stay in the single market for the length of it, plus Gove has now fallen well behind Boris and Gove in the Tory membership next Tory leader polling anyway
At the moment staying in the single market is being proposed as an alternative to the transition period. Effectively an indefinite transition.
Morning all. On Brexit, the latest noises from Merkel are encouraging for Theresa May and the Government. Attacking a Eurofudge deferment as ‘blind Brexit’ shows how worried arch-Remainers are by it.
I don’t see a path to a second referendum either. Jeremy Corbyn has not stopped being a Eurosceptic, and being able to beat the Tories up about whatever kind of Brexit is ultimately achieved makes more tactical sense than giving them the tool to hand responsibility back to the people.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Don't forget your 'Giselas', those government issued food stamps.
Field Formerly Known As Honda Factory?
After the refurb is done, how about Big Ben being The Headbanger Tower.
I do miss Ed Miliband. I thought he would be PM and I was ok with that, even though I preferred a continuation of the Coalition.
I miss when the right wing press mocked him for having weird nose, eating bacon wrong coming from "North London" and having a farther who's loyalties lay elsewhere. Those were the days.
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Point 4 a bit thin given the Haltemprice by-election, surely?
I sill have some anti-elephant powder available to protect your front garden. Perhaps it will soon get as bad as the BSE epidemic we were due. Considering the amount of cheap minced beef I ate in the 1970s, I should have succumbed years ago.
We'll muddle through, and you'll say … "Only because the EU took pity on us."
Regular reminder: the vast majority of the populace isn't on Twitter. Most voters are barely aware of this issue. Most of those who are probably don't care all that much, or think this is a storm in a teacup whipped up by Labour's opponents. And a lot of people who do take these things in will just engage in a bit of mental whataboutery and conclude that the Tories are just as bad.
This whole farrago might bring Corbyn down, but let's just say I'll believe it when I see it. Certainly I've not even made the trip to the wine shop yet, let alone bought the Champagne and put it on ice.
Yeah, I remember Carlotta posted that 83% of the electorate aren’t on twitter.
I remember last year when this site thought that video of Corbyn on Facebook (I think it was about the IRA) that got a million + views was going to destroy Corbyn in the GE. Social media is a bit more relevant as far as the under 40s go as millennials/late Gen x are more likely to use it. There’s little evidence that my Generation + late Gen x are moving away from Corbyn as a result of the antisemitism scandal, though.
Six million + views and it wasn't "this site" as a whole, it was mainly me. I was wrong for the right reason, though. It was an incredibly powerful video, just not in the way I thought - it made Corbyn look like a rock star.
The main thing was that they were paid impressions. The tories bought most of those 6 million views, it wasn't from people sharing it.
If we are going to have a transition period we will effectively have to stay in the single market for the length of it, plus Gove has now fallen well behind Boris and Gove in the Tory membership next Tory leader polling anyway
Is he playing a clever game (and what ever his faults he is clever)? Maybe he figures theres no way there wont be a Brexiteer in the final two. Perhaps if enough non-whack job MPs see him as the sane and adult Brexiteer who can compromise, they will put him through rather than Boris or Mogg.
No as the membership will revolt if Boris or Mogg are excluded, only Boris can beat Corbyn in the polls and if Leadsom got to the final two then Boris or Mogg certainly will. Gove came third remember
If we are going to have a transition period we will effectively have to stay in the single market for the length of it, plus Gove has now fallen well behind Boris and Gove in the Tory membership next Tory leader polling anyway
At the moment staying in the single market is being proposed as an alternative to the transition period. Effectively an indefinite transition.
The single market and transition will run alongside while a FTA negotiated, if no FTA agreed by December 2020 and we have not ended the transition by then May will be toppled and likely replaced by Boris
Looks like the July PMIs are removing the remaining doubt about an interest rate rise later today.
PB anecdotes about lots of visible construction work are proved right again:
' UK construction companies achieved a stronger expansion of business activity levels during July, underpinned by the fastest increase in residential work for just over two-and-a-half years. The latest survey also indicated that new business growth gained momentum, which contributed to the largest rise in employment numbers since December 2015. '
Nelson's Column could become Boris Johnson's Fantasy?
Nah. The Boris Johnson food queue. The Rees-Mogg plane stack. The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post. The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Point 4 a bit thin given the Haltemprice by-election, surely?
Purposefully so. I genuinely don't see David Davis as a proponent of civil liberties; only as a proponent of David Davis.
I sill have some anti-elephant powder available to protect your front garden. Perhaps it will soon get as bad as the BSE epidemic we were due. Considering the amount of cheap minced beef I ate in the 1970s, I should have succumbed years ago.
We'll muddle through, and you'll say … "Only because the EU took pity on us."
Urrrm, no. Just because some predictions are wrong, does not mean that all predictions are wrong.
Although I never worked on Y2K issues directly, I was lucky enough to see systems in the mid-1990s that would absolutely fail due to a Y2K-style bug, and planning was already starting on how to replace those systems before 2000.
Comments
And political necessity is also a muddying factor, thus the NHS boost.
https://twitter.com/Mike_Blackley/status/1024928358134677504
https://twitter.com/BigMoneyChaucer/status/1024926049300295681
The day anything becomes unfathomable is the day you can no longer fight it.
Around here a COB is a sandwich, so is someone out to lunch?
JC = Jeremy Corbyn presumably. Not sure about the rest.
https://twitter.com/chelleryn99/status/1002944529358614529
It is not the nature of the EU that they hate but its fact, hence their wish not just to leave it but to destroy it. It is a pathological affliction.
https://twitter.com/chelleryn99/status/951562532522725381
I liked this one:
https://twitter.com/harrythebarber/status/1024928907630469122
Mainly because I think Lawson is a climate science denying, Brexit-loving hypocrite.
The Rees-Mogg plane stack.
The Fox foreign-looking person inquisition post.
The Davis civil liberties re-education centre.
Chelley Ryan - feature writer for The Morning Star.
Also like the "RTs are not necessarily endorsements." attempt at get out of jail free card. If you want to retweet something as you think it is of interest, but you definitely don't agree with you can easily just put a comment that says so at the time.
There is to be a 60ft statue in the Margaret Thatcher Farm of unpicked, rotting produce in the Lincolnshire Fens.
Anyway, must run.
"Upside? Don't you get it yet? There is no upside to Brexit."
No? People starving to death on the streets = An end to the obesity crisis.
This is all so last century. Don't you remember the original project fear? Millions unemployed as soon as Article 50 is invoked. The horsemen of the Apocalypse running free.
If this happens as soon as we leave the EU, how did we survive before we joined? Does the rest of the world not exist? IF we are now so dependent on the kindness of strangers, when did we stop being an independent country?
It's beginning to sound nearly as bad a the Y2K bug.
Let's hope it's not, as the only reason the Y2K bug was not a disaster was that a fortune was spent by institutions and organisations on good, qualified people to prevent the worst happening.
Whereas Brexit has Boris, Fox, Davis (well, not any more) and JRM.
If Brexit is Y2K, then we're utterly screwed.
Morning all. On Brexit, the latest noises from Merkel are encouraging for Theresa May and the Government. Attacking a Eurofudge deferment as ‘blind Brexit’ shows how worried arch-Remainers are by it.
I don’t see a path to a second referendum either. Jeremy Corbyn has not stopped being a Eurosceptic, and being able to beat the Tories up about whatever kind of Brexit is ultimately achieved makes more tactical sense than giving them the tool to hand responsibility back to the people.
I sill have some anti-elephant powder available to protect your front garden. Perhaps it will soon get as bad as the BSE epidemic we were due. Considering the amount of cheap minced beef I ate in the 1970s, I should have succumbed years ago.
We'll muddle through, and you'll say … "Only because the EU took pity on us."
NEW THREAD
PB anecdotes about lots of visible construction work are proved right again:
' UK construction companies achieved a stronger expansion of business activity levels during July, underpinned by the fastest increase in residential work for just over two-and-a-half years. The latest survey also indicated that new business growth gained momentum, which contributed to the largest rise in employment numbers since December 2015. '
https://www.markiteconomics.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/2b8a16f020c3495b8e4f23255d840dfe
Others may differ.
More interestingly Tesco now have redcurrents from Perthshire and sweetcorn cobettes from West Sussex.
Although I never worked on Y2K issues directly, I was lucky enough to see systems in the mid-1990s that would absolutely fail due to a Y2K-style bug, and planning was already starting on how to replace those systems before 2000.
A massive amount of work went on to avoid it.