Fascinating. The two camps arguing for the future of the Labour Party going after each other over this. The "Adopt the Code" group vs the "We hate Israel" group.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
An increasing proportion of jobs are going to be in the "wiping the bottoms of old people" category going forward - an inevitable consequence of rising life expectancy. It's hard to get more productive at that.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
But this is because the car companies now out source a lot of manufacturing from those days. So now drivetrains, gearboxes, seats, ICE, etc is all outsourced. All that some car companies make are engines and some not even that. So the employment in the wholes supply chain needs to be considered. It is reduced, but not by just using the employees in the factory.
That night be true for Ford in general, but the Dearborn plant never made those things.
In the 1920's the ford plant made all the components for the Model A. I will admit ICE was not used then.
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
An increasing proportion of jobs are going to be in the "wiping the bottoms of old people" category going forward - an inevitable consequence of rising life expectancy. It's hard to get more productive at that.
If I remember correctly there has been a significant growth in people involved in personal(ization) services from taking goods and making them unique to things like dog walking.
While people spend most of their money on globalised goods / services, they increasingly want to spend some of their free cash on an item or service that isn't even if it costs significantly more.
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
Thing is that political 'colours' were a much looser notion than they are today. Candidates would often provide their own election campaign materials and would therefore choose any colour they liked (that continued to the 1940s among Conservatives). National campaigning movements tended to be more uniform (e.g. The Chartists were blue, Socialists were red).
The commonest Liberal colour was however red. I think they changed it in 1926 with Lloyd George's leadership to differentiate themselves from Labour - certainly the 1929 manifesto was the 'yellow book.'
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
I spend too much time watching past US election nights on YouTube and the main party colours there used to the other way round - but only on certain networks. These days it is Democrats in Blue and Republicans in Red - but it has been the other way round as recently as the 1980s.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
But this is because the car companies now out source a lot of manufacturing from those days. So now drivetrains, gearboxes, seats, ICE, etc is all outsourced. All that some car companies make are engines and some not even that. So the employment in the wholes supply chain needs to be considered. It is reduced, but not by just using the employees in the factory.
That night be true for Ford in general, but the Dearborn plant never made those things.
In the 1920's the ford plant made all the components for the Model A. I will admit ICE was not used then.
I'll send you across the Ford presentation if you're interested, there are tonnes of facts about how their manufacturing and workforce has changed over the years.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
An increasing proportion of jobs are going to be in the "wiping the bottoms of old people" category going forward - an inevitable consequence of rising life expectancy. It's hard to get more productive at that.
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
But this is because the car companies now out source a lot of manufacturing from those days. So now drivetrains, gearboxes, seats, ICE, etc is all outsourced. All that some car companies make are engines and some not even that. So the employment in the wholes supply chain needs to be considered. It is reduced, but not by just using the employees in the factory.
That night be true for Ford in general, but the Dearborn plant never made those things.
In the 1920's the ford plant made all the components for the Model A. I will admit ICE was not used then.
I'll send you across the Ford presentation if you're interested, there are tonnes of facts about how their manufacturing and workforce has changed over the years.
I am not disputing that, I agree. But my point was you can not say 100,000 have gone to 6,000. You need to take 6,000 plus all the jobs in the supply chain (as a percentage if they are supplying other companies) as the true figure for the reduction of employment.
genuine question to anybody who can help me - how does this work in other fta's - I don't understand why UK manufactured goods / foods etc automatically have services attached so can't be part of a deal on goods but Korean cars, kim chee etc don't. I know this means I'm thick as mince but why is it a problem with the UK but not say with the new Japan economic partnership?
What an interesting quirk! What hapened to Hitlers Liverpudlian nephew?
Checking Wiki he ended up a US citizen after he and his ma were invited over by W.R Hearst (quite Bannonesque).
'William Patrick Hitler was drafted into the United States Navy during World War II as a Pharmacist's Mate (a designation later changed to Hospital Corpsman) until he was discharged in 1947. On reporting for duty, the induction officer asked his name. "Hitler," he said. "Glad to see you Hitler," the officer replied, "My name's Hess." He was wounded in action during the war and awarded the Purple Heart.'
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
Rosettes weren't.
There was a great deal of regional variation - indeed in some areas party colours varied from constituency to constituency. In West Wales the Tories were wearing red rosettes in Pembroke and Cardigan until 1979. Until 1970 Labour was green in Pembroke and the Liberals tended to be blue.In the North East Labour was often green & white until fairly recent years - as evidenced by Ted Short's rosette in Newcastle.
genuine question to anybody who can help me - how does this work in other fta's - I don't understand why UK manufactured goods / foods etc but Korean cars, kim chee etc don't. I know this means I'm thick as mince but why is it a problem with the UK but not say with the new Japan economic partnership?
The new Japan economic partnership doesn't also aim to eliminate all border processes and customs bureaucracy. In other words it comes back to the problem of cherry-picking the single market.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
It depends what you mean by "skilled manual labour". A chap I know has a company that custom makes metal parts (aerospace, F1 etc). He can't find anywhere near enough people to work there - they need to be a hybrid of manual machinist (to understand the materials) and computer programmer (to program the CNC/3D printers). Materials science knowledge is also vital.
He tells me that in the workforce surveys that he fills in, most of his staff are classed as office/IT because that is where they spend 70% of their time.
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
Rosettes weren't.
There was a great deal of regional variation - indeed in some areas party colours varied from constituency to constituency. In West Wales the Tories were wearing red rosettes in Pembroke and Cardigan until 1979. Until 1970 Labour was green in Pembroke and the Liberals tended to be blue.In the North East Labour was often green & white until fairly recent years - as evidenced by Ted Short's rosette in Newcastle.
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
I am assistant director on a production of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and the director wants to use the right colour for the Liberal Party member. I know that Yellow is the traditional Liberal colour - but it has changed over the years.
The action takes place in 1904.
So what colour should we be using?
Yellow
Edit Or it might have been blue.
Some places used green. It is a very confused picture!
If I recall party colours weren't that fixed because most things were printed in black and white.
Rosettes weren't.
There was a great deal of regional variation - indeed in some areas party colours varied from constituency to constituency. In West Wales the Tories were wearing red rosettes in Pembroke and Cardigan until 1979. Until 1970 Labour was green in Pembroke and the Liberals tended to be blue.In the North East Labour was often green & white until fairly recent years - as evidenced by Ted Short's rosette in Newcastle.
It isn't very accurate in the headline article though. The Liberals printed their pamphlets - which were a key part of the national campaign - between red covers to distinguish them from the Tories who tended just to use white. That's why I said red would be the most appropriate colour for the Liberals in 1904. It was the central party's preferred colour and remained so for another 20-odd years.
But as has been noted by others there could be wide variations by region, constituency and candidate. In fact I think in the old days of multi-member constituencies of which there were still a number in 1904, it was usual for candidates of the same party to use different colours (bearing in mind you didn't technically vote for a party).
Pants are certainly falling here prior to India being screwed...
I'm still trying to work out how @DavidL's 50% chance for India was calculated.
I think at 122-3 it was 50:50.
One good partnership was all that was required to swing the match India's way. Even now only 85 runs are required. Remember that in the first innings we conceded 43 runs for the final wicket.
I really didn't understand Pant's performance. Surely his job was to block and let Rahane score the runs. The Indians are so used to their top 6 delivering the goods their bowlers have forgotten how to bat.
Now they need 82 from the final wicket.
You are assuming Pant thinks logically. He apparently has two modes of batting - the attacking shot that goes for six, and the defensive one that goes for four.
It is a remarkable collapse from India. Kohli is a superstar but you just cannot rely on one man to keep delivering for the team. Pujara did well in the first innings here and Rahane did well in another test but they just rely too heavily on Kohli to put the runs on the board.
Looks India's collapse was almost as sudden as Pakistan's in 1971
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
Nos da and have fun.
I really hope you will continue to contribute when you have time. Best wishes. Nos da
genuine question to anybody who can help me - how does this work in other fta's - I don't understand why UK manufactured goods / foods etc automatically have services attached so can't be part of a deal on goods but Korean cars, kim chee etc don't. I know this means I'm thick as mince but why is it a problem with the UK but not say with the new Japan economic partnership?
FTAs can include services. The Japan India partnership effectively trades Japanese access to the Indian car market for Indians selling services to Japan in an area which isn't a Japanese strength. The EU India partnership faltered in part because India insisted on access to the EU services market, in competition with UK vested interests. Multilateral arrangements like the European Union are much more powerful trade instruments than bilateral ones, as we will find out to our cost as we leave the EU.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
Nos da and have fun.
I was talking to two recently retired GPs today. Both are younger than me but said that over ~30-40 years the DoH has turned what was a rewarding job into one that GPs retire from as soon as they possibly can.
Also they can no longer cope with the stress of being a full-time GP. So a married couple who are both GPs usually decide to job share. This doubles the training costs per full-time doctor.
It used to be that an alcoholic was a person who drank more than his doctor. Now I assume, a person suffers from stress if he is more stressed than his doctor.
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
Nos da and have fun.
Good to pun with you over the last few weeks and hope to have you back again as soon as!
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
genuine question to anybody who can help me - how does this work in other fta's - I don't understand why UK manufactured goods / foods etc automatically have services attached so can't be part of a deal on goods but Korean cars, kim chee etc don't. I know this means I'm thick as mince but why is it a problem with the UK but not say with the new Japan economic partnership?
Note the description 'industrial good'.
This is not referring to most manufacturing output.
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
Increases in manufacturing productivity have tailed off from approximately 50% in the 1997-2007 period to approximately 10% in the last decade.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Chess entails thinking a few moves ahead and having a strategy.
She's only interested in her own survival from one day to the next.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Chess entails thinking a few moves ahead and having a strategy.
She's only interested in her own survival from one day to the next.
In these circumstances it's possible that being a genius strategist and just doing whatever it takes to survive from day to day look exactly the same in practice.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Chess entails thinking a few moves ahead and having a strategy.
She's only interested in her own survival from one day to the next.
I think that she is more committed to the survival of the Tory Party than herself.
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
Nos da and have fun.
You will be missed, but we’ll try to keep up the awful puns in your absence. Hope term goes well.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
My understanding (and I am no expert on the car industry) is that Ford is basically kept afloat by the F-150 truck.
I can't remember if it was one of Robert's videos or elsewhere but I saw recently that their Deerhorn plant once employed 100,000 people to make 700,000 cars/trucks and now employs 6,000 to make 1,000,000. So productivity has risen from 7 cars per worker per year to 167. Needless to say the educational qualification level of those that are left is somewhat higher than it was before too. It's a challenge.
It was indeed one of my videos. It came from a Ford investor slide where they also pointed out that at the plant they've gone from c. 80% High school graduates to just 20%, and people with masters from under 5% to 20%. There's bugger all opportunity left for skilled manual labour in the Western world
I linked earlier to our manufacturing employment in the UK, down from 4.3m in 1997 to 2.8m now when manufacturing output has gone up I must say I was having some difficulty in reconciling that with our allegedly poor productivity growth.
An increasing proportion of jobs are going to be in the "wiping the bottoms of old people" category going forward - an inevitable consequence of rising life expectancy. It's hard to get more productive at that.
Or much of the service sector.
And as the proportion of the services sector of the total economy has grown there becomes proportionally less of sectors which have traditionally had higher productivity growth.
Other factors I would say are:
Cheap migrant labour being used instead of capital investment.
ZIRP not leading to 'creative destruction' freeing up land and labour for more productive use.
An increase in the proportion of 'overhead workers' to 'productive workers'.
Fatcattery and low pay rises for workers dis-incentivising the workforce.
Anyway, it is that time of year again. I shall be offline for a while as I try to get to grips with new timetable, new staff, new curriculum, new management and new everything else. I hope to be back at some point but nothing is certain. So thank you all for your company, comments, criticism, puns (Sunil!) and information and I hope to see you the other side of the train wreck, oops, new term.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
Her record in the Home Office suggests she's incredibly good at it.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Chess entails thinking a few moves ahead and having a strategy.
She's only interested in her own survival from one day to the next.
I think that she is more committed to the survival of the Tory Party than herself.
He's very close to Michael Gove, and his intervention this weekend is one to filed under 'very interesting'.
I think Michael Gove is the only one who can sell the 'great betrayal*' to the Tory Party and country.
It's an odd intervention.
"Chequers is a humiliation so let's go for the Norway option instead. It won't be forever, honest."
The trick is to plan to move to a genuinely bilateral arrangement but we are not quite there yet. In the meantime we'll stick with doing what we are told. That might seem cynical but it's the only way the circle gets somewhat squared. The EU has no interest in a partnership of equals. It's a membership organisation. If we are happy to fit in with their rules they will go along with that.
He's very close to Michael Gove, and his intervention this weekend is one to filed under 'very interesting'.
I think Michael Gove is the only one who can sell the 'great betrayal*' to the Tory Party and country.
It's an odd intervention.
"Chequers is a humiliation so let's go for the Norway option instead. It won't be forever, honest."
The trick is to plan to move to a genuinely bilateral arrangement but we are not quite there yet. In the meantime we'll stick with doing what we are told. That might seem cynical but it's the only way the circle gets somewhat squared. The EU has no interest in a partnership of equals. It's a membership organisation. If we are happy to fit in with their rules they will go along with that.
If Gove were intellectually honest about his pre-referendum position, even going back to his time as a columnist, he would have to admit that his strategy of flirting with departure as a way to increase UK leverage over the direction of the EU has been a total failure.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
And the costal liberals wonder how people in the rust belt could possibly vote for Trump....Ford factory only employees a fraction of the former workforce and the party of the working man is arguing over...
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
I have said on many occassions too many jump on one report or another when in truth it is pointless, I await hearing from TM in due course
You'd have thought that, after over 2-years of the same, people would be on less of a hair trigger over every minute announcement or comment. Can't be good for one's heart to live like that
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
I really hope not
THe Boles plan is potentially much more Brexity. The idea is to exit from Article 50 straight into EFTA which will maintain the EEA Agreement in tact. In a stroke deadlines, cliff edges, the wretched Irish backstop, the CAP and the CFP are all gone giving the opportunity to negotiate into a FTA as circumstances dictate.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
I have said on many occassions too many jump on one report or another when in truth it is pointless, I await hearing from TM in due course
You'd have thought that, after over 2-years of the same, people would be on less of a hair trigger over every minute announcement or comment. Can't be good for one's heart to live like that
We are at one on this.
I simply refuse to be goaded into one side or the other. Maybe as you get into your mid seventies you become wiser and I do believe a deal of some sort will happen and life will carry on
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
I really hope not
A nation meets its destiny.
A Republic Constitutional Monarchy lives on a knife's edge
THe Boles plan is potentially much more Brexity. The idea is to exit from Article 50 straight into EFTA which will maintain the EEA Agreement in tact. In a stroke deadlines, cliff edges, the wretched Irish backstop, the CAP and the CFP are all gone giving the opportunity to negotiate into a FTA as circumstances dictate.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
I think we are back in the to territory of hard brexit happening by default.
I really hope not
THe Boles plan is potentially much more Brexity. The idea is to exit from Article 50 straight into EFTA which will maintain the EEA Agreement in tact. In a stroke deadlines, cliff edges, the wretched Irish backstop, the CAP and the CFP are all gone giving the opportunity to negotiate into a FTA as circumstances dictate.
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
Norway would be better than May's Chequers.
I hold no firm and fast opinion on this but I can see TM doing a deal, but whether it is Chequers or not, I am very relaxed about it
Is he defending Enoch or referring to people who defend Enoch.
We need to see the actual article.
And why wont Tom Mills (whoever he is) link to the article ?
It's 100% clear from that quote (assuming it's verbatim) that he's referring to people who defend Powell, and that he's about to tear what they say apart. No doubt there's a Corbyn angle...
Is he defending Enoch or referring to people who defend Enoch.
We need to see the actual article.
And why wont Tom Mills (whoever he is) link to the article ?
It's 100% clear from that quote (assuming it's verbatim) that he's referring to people who defend Powell, and that he's about to tear what they say apart. No doubt there's a Corbyn angle...
Bloody hell that's a terrible photo of him - has he got some kind of skin complaint?
I do not know but he seems to be stupid enough not to realise he does not have the numbers and is more likely to drive Norway or remain as the end state
It is to be hoped for the Country's sake TM puts him back in his box
If the EU is rejecting Chequers then what's the frigging point of May?
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
She's clearly playing a three dimensional chess game of some kind, but what?
Three dimensions - mislead, concede and deceive.
You do know you are in a substantial Parliamentary minority for your hard Brexit
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
Norway would be better than May's Chequers.
I hold no firm and fast opinion on this but I can see TM doing a deal, but whether it is Chequers or not, I am very relaxed about it
Any fool could agree a deal if all they do is sign whatever Barnier tells them to sign. That's like saying Washington could have got a deal with George III.
You really do have to be quite spectacularly naive to think that Boris Johnson, of all people on this earth, with his famous attention to detail and in view of the great respect he is held in by European leaders, would somehow be able to get a deal which eluded the team which included, err, Boris Johnson.
In the abstract, it would be amusing to see him try, in the same sense that in the abstract it would be amusing to see John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn running the economy.
There's a massive gender divide on the united Ireland question in the event of Brexit. Women are hugely in favour 61/30 and men are opposed 49/44.
The same divide in the figures for Scotland. Women favour independence in the event of Brexit by a strong margin and men are slightly opposed.
In the actual indy ref I believe men were more strongly Yes than women. That suggests changed circumstances can provide a lot of churn beneath the surface.
Comments
While people spend most of their money on globalised goods / services, they increasingly want to spend some of their free cash on an item or service that isn't even if it costs significantly more.
The commonest Liberal colour was however red. I think they changed it in 1926 with Lloyd George's leadership to differentiate themselves from Labour - certainly the 1929 manifesto was the 'yellow book.'
Keep your eye on Nick Boles.
He's very close to Michael Gove, and his intervention this weekend is one to filed under 'very interesting'.
I think Michael Gove is the only one who can sell the 'great betrayal*' to the Tory Party and country.
*Pragmatic Brexit if you prefer.
"Chequers is a humiliation so let's go for the Norway option instead. It won't be forever, honest."
'William Patrick Hitler was drafted into the United States Navy during World War II as a Pharmacist's Mate (a designation later changed to Hospital Corpsman) until he was discharged in 1947. On reporting for duty, the induction officer asked his name. "Hitler," he said. "Glad to see you Hitler," the officer replied, "My name's Hess." He was wounded in action during the war and awarded the Purple Heart.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Stuart-Houston
He tells me that in the workforce surveys that he fills in, most of his staff are classed as office/IT because that is where they spend 70% of their time.
Why don't the three EPP member parties merge - they could be the second largest party?
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jul/01/political-parties-change-colours
But as has been noted by others there could be wide variations by region, constituency and candidate. In fact I think in the old days of multi-member constituencies of which there were still a number in 1904, it was usual for candidates of the same party to use different colours (bearing in mind you didn't technically vote for a party).
I can't think of anything more calculated to swing the ERG behind it.
Although that May of course be the idea.
Nos da and have fun.
https://twitter.com/WeyandSabine/status/1036339270930317312
(Fingers crossed that's right.)
Why should it take Lynton Crosby and Boris to kill a deal that's already dead. How long is May going to carry on with the pretence that Chequers is agreed when it isn't? It's a Dead Parrot and it's time for May to shuffle off.
Also they can no longer cope with the stress of being a full-time GP. So a married couple who are both GPs usually decide to job share. This doubles the training costs per full-time doctor.
It used to be that an alcoholic was a person who drank more than his doctor.
Now I assume, a person suffers from stress if he is more stressed than his doctor.
This is not referring to most manufacturing output.
I have said on many occassions too many jump on one report or another when in truth it is pointless, I await hearing from TM in due course
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/timeseries/djk6/prdy
And in the overall economy from over 20% per decade to almost nothing during the last ten years:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/timeseries/lzvb/prdy
She's only interested in her own survival from one day to the next.
Hope term goes well.
And as the proportion of the services sector of the total economy has grown there becomes proportionally less of sectors which have traditionally had higher productivity growth.
Other factors I would say are:
Cheap migrant labour being used instead of capital investment.
ZIRP not leading to 'creative destruction' freeing up land and labour for more productive use.
An increase in the proportion of 'overhead workers' to 'productive workers'.
Fatcattery and low pay rises for workers dis-incentivising the workforce.
Hope to see you again soon.
Indeed push too hard and Norway will be the best you get, and indeed we may even ending up staying
Can a room temperature really be sexist?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45345518
http://betterbrexit.org.uk/
If Chequers crashes this where we will be going, I suspect. It would of course be a humiliation for TM.
https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/1036358342485176321
I simply refuse to be goaded into one side or the other. Maybe as you get into your mid seventies you become wiser and I do believe a deal of some sort will happen and life will carry on
https://twitter.com/ta_mills/status/1036351760229654528
We need to see the actual article.
And why wont Tom Mills (whoever he is) link to the article ?
Edit: Here you are:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6122805/DAN-HODGES-Jeremy-Corbyn-NOT-bad-Enoch-Powell.html
In other words, precisely the same defence that has been deployed by the Corbyn cultists in support of their own hero.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6122805/amp/DAN-HODGES-Jeremy-Corbyn-NOT-bad-Enoch-Powell.html
But that would mean our Divvie has fallen for some bollox on twatter ...
https://twitter.com/MrMalky/status/1036275153741787137
It is to be hoped for the Country's sake TM puts him back in his box
And what did he do?
Diddly squat.
At no point has he put forward a credible position as to how he would have negotiated more effectively.
"Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
1h1 hour ago
Sweden, Skop poll:
S-S&D: 24% (-1)
SD-ECR: 20%
M-EPP: 17% (+1)
V-LEFT: 11% (+1)
C-ALDE: 8% (-1)
KD-EPP: 7% (+1)
MP-G/EFA: 6%
L-ALDE: 5% (-2)
Field work: 25/08/18 – 31/08/18
Sample size: 2,000
#val2018 #Sweden #valet2018"
Can we get a good deal? That's the question.
In the abstract, it would be amusing to see him try, in the same sense that in the abstract it would be amusing to see John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn running the economy.
Try again in March.