This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
But it's not just the cost to you that matters. Not sure how Debenhams treats its staff but I am guessing it is far better than Amazon. Anyway, I never use Amazon but the Mrs does (though I am trying to pesuade her to not).
That is a very idealistic attitude but sadly the consumer will buy cheapest if all things are the same. Furthermore it benefits the 'just about managing' and I doubt employment issues are in the front of their minds
I am not sure that is always true. Waitrose being a good example. I pay more for my food in there than say Sainsbury's, because the staff are helpful and knowledgeable, and the overall shopping experience is superior.
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
Yes it’s the range thing. Dell Boy will only sweet talk you into what he has in stock, but you have done your own research online, across a few sites, now you are only after a specific article. That’s how the internet killed the high street.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Putting to one side that a half-way competent EU senior management would have worked with Cameron on a form of associate membership, that would have seen him win his referendum 60:40 and keeping us within a differently constitued EU...
Would it? If, say, the German government tried the same thing, do you think the rest of Europe should give them a special associate deal on their terms?
Except, we aren't in the Euro. That made it far easier to justify, far easier to create an associate membership limited to those outsidie th euro. So what if some other non-Euro members wanted it too? At least they would still be in the EU family, taking most of the rules, still paying a chunk of fees, not offering a competitve threat. And not getting in the way of Euro-country ever closer integration.
Really, really poor management by the EU.
People love to bandy around the term "associate membership" without defining it in a deliverable way. If it just amounts to having your cake and eating it, what makes you think that would ever be or should ever be negotiable?
Objectively speaking, what you say you wanted is exactly what Cameron got - full membership of the single market with a say in all the rules without any assumption of participation in the Eurozone or any related integrationist project that arise from it.
It doesn't amount to having your cake and eating it. It amounts to a reasonable balance of benefits, rights and responsibilites.
For example, I'd be happy to pay £3-4bn net per year (not £9bn per year) and have half the voting rights (by weight) to be an associate member of a single market in goods alone (but not services) and have no free movement, which I'd expect to be reciprocal, and otherwise independent of the EU's political structures, policies and courts.
But that's not the issue. The EU's worry is that the UK might do well, so it either wants to make Brexit entirely pointless - as an example to others - or extremely painful and destructive - as an example to others.
It's a sign of an extremely insecure, inflexible and nervous organisation that has little long-term stability.
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Price is only one problem. Customer service and lack of knowledge is a real killer. Go to PC World and they normally have the square root of f##k all idea, especially if it is clear you have some knowledge about tech.
Interestingly in the US, Best Buy (the big box retailer equivalent to Currys / Pc World) is actually doing ok, because they have trained their staff well and offer consultancy / installation services, so people who aren't tech savvy get decent advice and assistant on setting up their home tech.
I am fortunate that my youngest son is head of IT at his company so I have my own built in IT adviser
However, I do find Curry's quite good for technical advise and product knowledge
Emails between Google employees appear to show them discussing ways to alter the company’s search engine algorithm so that results pages detailed ways of countering President Donald Trump’s travel ban, after his administration restricted immigration from several Middle Eastern and African countries in January 2017.
The fact that Google employees are even thinking of this is extremely concerning. But write a paper on possible reasons for gender inequality in tech and you will be out of the door faster than Corbyn when asked a tough question.
James Damore was an ass. And most of all, he was wrong.
I didn't say he was right and he seems a weird dude (but lots of people in tech are), but IMO it seemed like a matter that could have been sorted with a discussion internally from the management.
But talking about manipulating search results is absolutely horrifying to me, even in "brain storm".
AFAICR he was doing everything he could to publicise that memo, and his reaction was rather unapologetic.
Agree that manipulating search results is terrible, and care needs taking. It's just that I see little connection between this and the Damore case.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
It's a dreadful organisation.
Dread in the sense of "regarded with awe; greatly revered"?
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
Putting to one side that a half-way competent EU senior management would have worked with Cameron on a form of associate membership, that would have seen him win his referendum 60:40 and keeping us within a differently constitued EU...
Would it? If, say, the German government tried the same thing, do you think the rest of Europe should give them a special associate deal on their terms?
Except, we aren't in the Euro. That made it far easier to justify, far easier to create an associate membership limited to those outsidie th euro. So what if some other non-Euro members wanted it too? At least they would still be in the EU family, taking most of the rules, still paying a chunk of fees, not offering a competitve threat. And not getting in the way of Euro-country ever closer integration.
Really, really poor management by the EU.
People love to bandy around the term "associate membership" without defining it in a deliverable way. If it just amounts to having your cake and eating it, what makes you think that would ever be or should ever be negotiable?
I see you have to fall back on "But it can't be done!" Ever the true Eurocrat....
If you read my next paragraph you'll see I argue that it was done. If Dave's deal had a decent PR man behind it, we wouldn't be in this mess.
"Dave's deal" needed binning, not better PR. It certainly ddn't need selling as the best that we could want - and those who thought otherwise were just Little Englanders, risking a continent at war again...
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
It's a dreadful organisation.
Dread in the sense of "regarded with awe; greatly revered"?
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Putting to one side that a half-way competent EU senior management would have worked with Cameron on a form of associate membership, that would have seen him win his referendum 60:40 and keeping us within a differently constitued EU...
Would it? If, say, the German government tried the same thing, do you think the rest of Europe should give them a special associate deal on their terms?
Except, we aren't in the Euro. That made it far easier to justify, far easier to create an associate membership limited to those outsidie th euro. So what if some other non-Euro members wanted it too? At least they would still be in the EU family, taking most of the rules, still paying a chunk of fees, not offering a competitve threat. And not getting in the way of Euro-country ever closer integration.
Really, really poor management by the EU.
People love to bandy around the term "associate membership" without defining it in a deliverable way. If it just amounts to having your cake and eating it, what makes you think that would ever be or should ever be negotiable?
Objectively speaking, what you say you wanted is exactly what Cameron got - full membership of the single market with a say in all the rules without any assumption of participation in the Eurozone or any related integrationist project that arise from it.
It doesn't amount to having your cake and eating it. It amounts to a reasonable balance of benefits, rights and responsibilites.
For example, I'd be happy to pay £3-4bn net per year (not £9bn per year) and have half the voting rights (by weight) to be an associate member of a single market in goods alone (but not services) and have no free movement, which I'd expect to be reciprocal, and otherwise independent of the EU's political structures, policies and courts.
But that's not the issue. The EU's worry is that the UK might do well, so it either wants to make Brexit entirely pointless - as an example to others - or extremely painful and destructive - as an example to others.
It's a sign of an extremely insecure, inflexible and nervous organisation that has little long-term stability.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I have lots of criticisms of the EU. However, they hardly coincide at all with the criticisms that come up in relation to British politics, which are generally dumb and uninformed, and hostile to solving the actual problems.
Simple example: There's not enough democratic accountability over the Commission, which is several layers of indirection away from the voters. The way to solve this is to gradually politicize the European level and appoint people based on election results. But when pro-democracy people in the EU try to do that by having pan-European groups put up candidates who take part in debates and have the winner get the job, the British right try to sabotage it and appoint someone who wasn't a candidate.
Isn’t the problem that both parties are split on Brexit. If you take a clear position you immediately lose your majority. Kinnock/Hoey, Mogg/Clarke do not agree.
Yes, you need an overall majority of 20 or so to have a decent shot. Labour has the advantage on this that far fewer members see the EU as an article of faith either way, and in particular the number of Labour MPs who will vote against a deal with the EU is tiny (about 4, as we've seen).
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
Yes it’s the range thing. Dell Boy will only sweet talk you into what he has in stock, but you have done your own research online, across a few sites, now you are only after a specific article. That’s how the internet killed the high street.
I think High Street chains have to ask themselves what are they for. Trying to be a Jack of all trades, master of none i.e. massive wide range without being cheap, they get killed by Amazon on range / price.
I think there is still room for stores that offer specialism / something unique or very very low price, however being in the middle of nowhere is where a lot of failing chains are e.g. Sports Direct does fine despite Amazon, Debenhams is going under. Woolies went bust, B&M, Wilkos and The Range grew.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
The EU has complete control over how much access to give capital, goods, services and people based in the UK to the European market. The less there is, the less Super the UK is. What’s more, I would not bet too much on voters giving a green light to massive deregulation and further degradation of public services.
Not entirely fair. Chequers was a plan. However, she failed to understand that the EU does not do negotiation with supplicants.
This is Greece and Syrizia all over.
TBF they do actually negotiate, and they did with Syriza. But what the situations have in common with Greece and a few previous situations in the EU is that you can easily win elections and referendums by promising that other countries' governments will do incredibly generous things for you if you demand them. But they won't.
The difference being that we are not asking for incredible generosity. Brexit is a shitshow, and I voted against it, but pretending the EU is somehow not also to blame does not wash.
Oh hi we'd like out-compete you by undercutting your health and labour regulations, we can have complete access to your markets yes?
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
It's a dreadful organisation.
Dread in the sense of "regarded with awe; greatly revered"?
Do you bow to a model of the commission building in Brussels every morning William
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
The EU isn't interested in a partnership of equals. It's a membership organisation setup for mutual benefit. In general organisations offer associate membership to those that don't qualify for full membership. It's always a lesser form where you derive less benefit.
So if the EU doesn't and really can't offer a partnership of equals, our choice is an unequal relationship or none at all. The second isn't viable.
This is the Brexit reality.
A partnership of the equally failing, further behind other world players, is not something they should be seeing as an organisation delivering mutual benefit. At best, they are huddling together to keep warm as winter sets in.
In that case, having no relationship is not only viable. It is essential. There's a big old world out there, offering more opportunity to us than being locked into a failing EU.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
The EU has complete control over how much access to give capital, goods, services and people based in the UK to the European market. The less there is, the less Super the UK is. What’s more, I would not bet too much on voters giving a green light to massive deregulation and further degradation of public services.
Given a choice between becoming Singapore and No Deal or Remain I think voters may plump for the latter.
Plus while the Singapore low tax, low spend, limited regulation, pure free trade city state model may work for London it would be less likely to work for the whole UK. Of course London voted Remain anyway
Michael Brown, who swindled investors out of tens of millions of pounds by falsely claiming to be the Gordonstoun-educated son of a lord, is working for G4S, the scandal-hit security firm which manages four jails.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
The EU has complete control over how much access to give capital, goods, services and people based in the UK to the European market. The less there is, the less Super the UK is. What’s more, I would not bet too much on voters giving a green light to massive deregulation and further degradation of public services.
This will be the same EU that post-Brexit, still really, really needs access to the City of London....
The EU isn't interested in a partnership of equals. It's a membership organisation setup for mutual benefit. In general organisations offer associate membership to those that don't qualify for full membership. It's always a lesser form where you derive less benefit.
So if the EU doesn't and really can't offer a partnership of equals, our choice is an unequal relationship or none at all. The second isn't viable.
This is the Brexit reality.
A partnership of the equally failing, further behind other world players, is not something they should be seeing as an organisation delivering mutual benefit. At best, they are huddling together to keep warm as winter sets in.
In that case, having no relationship is not only viable. It is essential. There's a big old world out there, offering more opportunity to us than being locked into a failing EU.
Your plan for the no deal world is? Who is offering us greater opportunity now we are cut off from our neighborhood? We need to get real.
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
Even so I expect even Debenhams now employs more people in its warehouses processing online deliveries and in its vans delivering them than in its actual stores nowadays, Amazon of course now has just warehouses and deliverers with no store at all and a few techies to manage its online service
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
That's what Cameron tried to get before the referendum and failed.
All together now: The four pillars of freedom of movement of goods, services*, capital and labour are indivisible**
* Long way to go - NO FTAs currently cover services and they are not regulated by Brussels anyway ** Except when it suits the EU....
Emails between Google employees appear to show them discussing ways to alter the company’s search engine algorithm so that results pages detailed ways of countering President Donald Trump’s travel ban, after his administration restricted immigration from several Middle Eastern and African countries in January 2017.
The fact that Google employees are even thinking of this is extremely concerning. But write a paper on possible reasons for gender inequality in tech and you will be out of the door faster than Corbyn when asked a tough question.
James Damore was an ass. And most of all, he was wrong.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
I am not interested in being involved in the EU but from security and trading, despite the present problems, the UK will still be important to the EU
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
That's a revealing comment. Choosing a model for our relationship with the EU is *not* just about picking which country we want to be like. We can only ever be ourselves, with the same problems and characteristics as ever.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
The EU has complete control over how much access to give capital, goods, services and people based in the UK to the European market. The less there is, the less Super the UK is. What’s more, I would not bet too much on voters giving a green light to massive deregulation and further degradation of public services.
This will be the same EU that post-Brexit, still really, really needs access to the City of London....
As they have acknowledged.
And the UK economy really, really needs the current levels of access it has to the Single Market. It always works both ways. And it always comes back to one inescapable fact: we need them more than they need us.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
Yes we could try to emulate Singapores highly educated, industrious and skilled population in the Council Estates of Redcar, but can you not see a flaw in that plan?
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
Simply a comment on familiarity rather than on Brexit.
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
Even so I expect even Debenhams now employs more people in its warehouses processing online deliveries and in its vans delivering them than in its actual stores nowadays, Amazon of course now has just warehouses and deliverers with no store at all and a few techies to manage its online service
Amazon will soon be virtually all AI.
Sadly the High Street of department stores will be extinct within 5 years
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
It was really granting India independence that marked our end as a global superpower, Suez was just a symptom of that.
In or out of the EU we will still be a European power ie the most powerful European nation after Germany alongside France. You could also say Russia is really the most powerful European nation (as most of it is in Europe) and they have never been in the EU at all.
The fact the UK does not want to be part of an attempt to create an EU superpower does not change that
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Debenhams is very 'mediocre middle' - neither cheap enough nor good enough nor specialised enough.
But some retail chains must be doing very well - non food stores sales have increased by 20% over the last five years.
Primark is always packed in Leicester, but I think that it will be another tough winter for retail, with a number of other flagship names disappearing from many towns or even completely.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
To be honest voters have no idea of the mechanics of Norway or Canada but generally know Singapore is a wealthy country
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
You think for the UK to win, France and Germany have to lose?
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Debenhams is very 'mediocre middle' - neither cheap enough nor good enough nor specialised enough.
But some retail chains must be doing very well - non food stores sales have increased by 20% over the last five years.
Primark is always packed in Leicester, but I think that it will be another tough winter for retail, with a number of other flagship names disappearing from many towns or even completely.
I believe that Primark is the number one destination for my teenage granddaughter
'This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
Even so I expect even Debenhams now employs more people in its warehouses processing online deliveries and in its vans delivering them than in its actual stores nowadays, Amazon of course now has just warehouses and deliverers with no store at all and a few techies to manage its online service
Amazon will soon be virtually all AI.
Sadly the High Street of department stores will be extinct within 5 years'
If the High Street disappears almost entirely and Amazon becomes virtually all AI there will be virtually no jobs at all for most people, especially with the rise of self service supermarket checkouts and automation of most manufacturing jobs too. Hence the argument for a universal basic income and tax on robots would become inevitable
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
Yes we could try to emulate Singapores highly educated, industrious and skilled population in the Council Estates of Redcar, but can you not see a flaw in that plan?
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
Its a generations old problem.
And requires change in many aspects of UK society and economy.
The magic money tree being cut down being one of them.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
Yes we could try to emulate Singapores highly educated, industrious and skilled population in the Council Estates of Redcar, but can you not see a flaw in that plan?
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
There is also a reason why Singapore does not allow its citizens the political freedoms we have.
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
Simply a comment on familiarity rather than on Brexit.
No a comment on the fact most voters did not vote for Brexit to turn the UK into a low tax, low spend, low regulation laissez-faire nirvana
Have they weakened Theresa May? That's not how it looks from the headlines.
She does her whole Thatcher thing, that gets her through the party conference, and everyone goes back to negotiating.
Perhaps - it might just give her a couple weeks despite from coup talk as she sounds harder for s bit, but as the EU appear to be genuine that the problems are on indivisible red lines not meeting, I don't know what May could pivot back to in negotiations post conference. Sure, it would mean even less time for rebels to seek to oust her if she waters Chequers down even more, but they can still just vote it down with Labour, so trying to haggle over something like but not Chequers is meaningless unless the EU has been bluffing, and I don't think they have been. May probably has, but lacks numbers to give in even if she tries.
Unless the EU can offer something in return for a cspulation which she might be able to sell. May be.but what could that be?
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
To be honest voters have no idea of the mechanics of Norway or Canada but generally know Singapore is a wealthy country
Especially anyone who has been to see Crazy Rich Asians....
Have they weakened Theresa May? That's not how it looks from the headlines.
She does her whole Thatcher thing, that gets her through the party conference, and everyone goes back to negotiating.
Perhaps - it might just give her a couple weeks despite from coup talk as she sounds harder for s bit, but as the EU appear to be genuine that the problems are on indivisible red lines not meeting, I don't know what May could pivot back to in negotiations post conference. Sure, it would mean even less time for rebels to seek to oust her if she waters Chequers down even more, but they can still just vote it down with Labour, so trying to haggle over something like but not Chequers is meaningless unless the EU has been bluffing, and I don't think they have been. May probably has, but lacks numbers to give in even if she tries.
Unless the EU can offer something in return for a cspulation which she might be able to sell. May be.but what could that be?
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
In 2004-9 we were on the winning side 97% of the time, after 2009 it was still 87% of the time.
A fuller analysis here and a breakdown by country and subject areas. Overall we used to be a positive influence, but those days are gone:
Told my Grand Kids to stop worrying about their homework, do it the Theresa May way! Don’t do it until the last moment Put any old rubbish down, don’t worry about being right When your teachers give you a bad mark say they’ve insulted you, aren’t showing you respect and tell them they should do the homework
Have they weakened Theresa May? That's not how it looks from the headlines.
She does her whole Thatcher thing, that gets her through the party conference, and everyone goes back to negotiating.
Perhaps - it might just give her a couple weeks despite from coup talk as she sounds harder for s bit, but as the EU appear to be genuine that the problems are on indivisible red lines not meeting, I don't know what May could pivot back to in negotiations post conference. Sure, it would mean even less time for rebels to seek to oust her if she waters Chequers down even more, but they can still just vote it down with Labour, so trying to haggle over something like but not Chequers is meaningless unless the EU has been bluffing, and I don't think they have been. May probably has, but lacks numbers to give in even if she tries.
Unless the EU can offer something in return for a cspulation which she might be able to sell. May be.but what could that be?
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
That's a revealing comment. Choosing a model for our relationship with the EU is *not* just about picking which country we want to be like. We can only ever be ourselves, with the same problems and characteristics as ever.
As 'ourselves' we are culturally and economically closer to Canada or even Norway than we are to Singapore.
Singapore may be a model for London, not the UK. Post Brexit we will have to pick one model to follow, the EU as they have made clear will not make one up for the UK and to make a success of No Deal a Singapore model would be the only option
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reasons to be pro EU are political, not economic. My job is well protected whatever happens, and I am not dependent on imports or exports to live and prosper.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
How often were they on different sides?
I think it was De Gaulle who said that the concept of 'Europe' was an alliance between France and Germany.
And that is what in reality the EU is.
How many times have we heard that "France will need an ally against Germany" or "Germany will need an ally against France" ?
Yet France and Germany continued as allies and the UK was the odd country out.
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
The irony on FOM is that it is entirely the fault of Britain's non-contributory benefit system that has created the problem. Hardly any other EU country operates in the same way.
Rochdale “Parliament won't vote for exit to EEA. Won't vote for no deal (I expect a vote compelling the government not to accept a no deal scenario). Yet they are your choices...”
I need to have a nose at the legislation. How do you see that working? Parliament voted to trigger A50 which sets a timescale and includes no deal. If there is no deal and the two years expires what is the effect of a Parliamentary vote not to accept it?
Yeah! Hence the massive constitutional crisis we are in!
What happens when MPs reject all options available? Reject extending the timetable? Reject a new referendum? But vote that they have confidence in Her Majesty's Government? What happens when despite all that the Prime Minister refuses to resign?
MPs won't vote for exit to EEA. Have a legally binding meaningful vote which will reject no deal and compel one of the options they have already rejected. Won't vote for a referendum to hand this critis back to the voters. And despite it all probably won't vote no confidence in the government. Nor will May face a viable challenge from her MPs.
A Prime Minister and a government literally stuck in office unable to do anything at all other than make petulant speeches about how crap a negotiator she is. Yet whilst stuck in office unable to do anything may work at another time, at this time we cannot have that...
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
What you miss is that a super Singapore depends entirely on the EU permitting it and then the electorate voting for it. Neither is a given.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Whatever else Brexit will see a massive increase in red tape. The UK as Singapore does worry the EU, which is why one reason why it is uncompromising on the UK either being fully in or fully out. Someone likened the UK to a foreign gunboat with uncertain intentions. You either want it in your port where you can keep an eye on it within range of your shore batteries. Or you push it out to sea. You don't want the boat marauding off your coast. Unfortunately that's where Britain wants to be. The high seas are lonely.
Actually polling shows most voters would rather be Canada or even Norway than Singapore
To be honest voters have no idea of the mechanics of Norway or Canada but generally know Singapore is a wealthy country
Norway and Canada are also wealthy countries but regardless of what they know or do not know, Singapore spends less and taxes less than any western nation
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
Yes we could try to emulate Singapores highly educated, industrious and skilled population in the Council Estates of Redcar, but can you not see a flaw in that plan?
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
Its a generations old problem.
And requires change in many aspects of UK society and economy.
The magic money tree being cut down being one of them.
And Brexit is a distraction from that task. Nothing that needs doing in the distressed areas couldn't be done while in the EU.
Told my Grand Kids to stop worrying about their homework, do it the Theresa May way! Don’t do it until the last moment Put any old rubbish down, don’t worry about being right When your teachers give you a bad mark say they’ve insulted you, aren’t showing you respect and tell them they should do the homework
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
That's what Cameron tried to get before the referendum and failed.
All together now: The four pillars of freedom of movement of goods, services*, capital and labour are indivisible**
* Long way to go - NO FTAs currently cover services and they are not regulated by Brussels anyway ** Except when it suits the EU....
The key differences are that the UK is no longer a member and the overall.arrangement is seen as worse than membership. But as I say the assumption needs testing. It will still be immigration according to rules, but those rules might be a bit looser.
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
I refer you to my previous post (in fact, I think I've had this conversation with you some months ago). We are not negotiating per se with the EU, we are asking them for a favour. It's a different approach.
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
I would be very surprised if next May's EU elections do not see a big move towards hard right and left MEP's being elected and if so they only have themselves to blame.
It is one of the great mysteries to me as to why Juncker is still in post. Any other CEO would have been sacked for utter incompetence but his legacy is forever tarnished in that he will be Commission President when the UK leave the EU
My main reaso
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
How often were they on different sides?
I think it was De Gaulle who said that the concept of 'Europe' was an alliance between France and Germany.
And that is what in reality the EU is.
How many times have we heard that "France will need an ally against Germany" or "Germany will need an ally against France" ?
Yet France and Germany continued as allies and the UK was the odd country out.
Things have moved on from De Gaulles time in the 1960s when there were just six countries in the EEC. Inevitably Germany and France have more weight than most, but so did we.
The truth is that the EU is greater than the sum of its parts.
Told my Grand Kids to stop worrying about their homework, do it the Theresa May way! Don’t do it until the last moment Put any old rubbish down, don’t worry about being right When your teachers give you a bad mark say they’ve insulted you, aren’t showing you respect and tell them they should do the homework
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
Yes, posturing, that's why it's an article in the Guardian, first port of call for all ardent Daily Mail readers.
Rochdale “Parliament won't vote for exit to EEA. Won't vote for no deal (I expect a vote compelling the government not to accept a no deal scenario). Yet they are your choices...”
I need to have a nose at the legislation. How do you see that working? Parliament voted to trigger A50 which sets a timescale and includes no deal. If there is no deal and the two years expires what is the effect of a Parliamentary vote not to accept it?
Yeah! Hence the massive constitutional crisis we are in!
What happens when MPs reject all options available? Reject extending the timetable? Reject a new referendum? But vote that they have confidence in Her Majesty's Government? What happens when despite all that the Prime Minister refuses to resign?
MPs won't vote for exit to EEA. Have a legally binding meaningful vote which will reject no deal and compel one of the options they have already rejected. Won't vote for a referendum to hand this critis back to the voters. And despite it all probably won't vote no confidence in the government. Nor will May face a viable challenge from her MPs.
A Prime Minister and a government literally stuck in office unable to do anything at all other than make petulant speeches about how crap a negotiator she is. Yet whilst stuck in office unable to do anything may work at another time, at this time we cannot have that...
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
You are putting your own interest in not losing face above the interests of your country. That is shameful.
But the EU can't prevent us being super-Singpore if we have crash-out Brexit. They have no control over the tax rates we set, the minimal red tape.There means of stopping it is in a reasonable negotiation, where some of that freedom is negotiated away. Yet the EU strategy is currently so crap it is going to result in the very thing they fear.
Singapore in the Atlantic is never going to be a credible threat because it would take multiple terms of right wing tory governments to achieve it. There isn't going to be one more term of tory government after Brexit never mind multiple ones. The post Brexit political and economic landscape is going to be defined by a Labour government. We can be Super-Belarus if that holds any appeal.
Yes, Brexit was built on the cry for an end of austerity in the regions, and parts of the country most dependent on government support. Not just geographically, but also pensioners, the poorly educated, the low skilled. They voted to bash the corporate elite, not to elevate them.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
I think the manufacturing sector makes up approximately double the proportion of the Singapore economy that it does in the UK.
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
Yes we could try to emulate Singapores highly educated, industrious and skilled population in the Council Estates of Redcar, but can you not see a flaw in that plan?
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
Its a generations old problem.
And requires change in many aspects of UK society and economy.
The magic money tree being cut down being one of them.
It's not just a money thing! It's cultural too - c.f. educational aspiration (and attainment) between immigrant working class and the indigenous working class.
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
Labour split post conference when second referendum is canned by Corbyn/McDonnell
Rochdale “Parliament won't vote for exit to EEA. Won't vote for no deal (I expect a vote compelling the government not to accept a no deal scenario). Yet they are your choices...”
I need to have a nose at the legislation. How do you see that working? Parliament voted to trigger A50 which sets a timescale and includes no deal. If there is no deal and the two years expires what is the effect of a Parliamentary vote not to accept it?
Yeah! Hence the massive constitutional crisis we are in!
What happens when MPs reject all options available? Reject extending the timetable? Reject a new referendum? But vote that they have confidence in Her Majesty's Government? What happens when despite all that the Prime Minister refuses to resign?
MPs won't vote for exit to EEA. Have a legally binding meaningful vote which will reject no deal and compel one of the options they have already rejected. Won't vote for a referendum to hand this critis back to the voters. And despite it all probably won't vote no confidence in the government. Nor will May face a viable challenge from her MPs.
A Prime Minister and a government literally stuck in office unable to do anything at all other than make petulant speeches about how crap a negotiator she is. Yet whilst stuck in office unable to do anything may work at another time, at this time we cannot have that...
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
You are putting your own interest in not losing face above the interests of your country. That is shameful.
Is there anything the EU could say which you would say no to ?
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
Yes, posturing, that's why it's an article in the Guardian, first port of call for all ardent Daily Mail readers.
The fact that the Guardian's reported it doesn't mean it's intended for Guardian consumption.
Rochdale “Parliament won't vote for exit to EEA. Won't vote for no deal (I expect a vote compelling the government not to accept a no deal scenario). Yet they are your choices...”
I need to have a nose at the legislation. How do you see that working? Parliament voted to trigger A50 which sets a timescale and includes no deal. If there is no deal and the two years expires what is the effect of a Parliamentary vote not to accept it?
Yeah! Hence the massive constitutional crisis we are in!
What happens when MPs reject all options available? Reject extending the timetable? Reject a new referendum? But vote that they have confidence in Her Majesty's Government? What happens when despite all that the Prime Minister refuses to resign?
MPs won't vote for exit to EEA. Have a legally binding meaningful vote which will reject no deal and compel one of the options they have already rejected. Won't vote for a referendum to hand this critis back to the voters. And despite it all probably won't vote no confidence in the government. Nor will May face a viable challenge from her MPs.
A Prime Minister and a government literally stuck in office unable to do anything at all other than make petulant speeches about how crap a negotiator she is. Yet whilst stuck in office unable to do anything may work at another time, at this time we cannot have that...
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
You are putting your own interest in not losing face above the interests of your country. That is shameful.
Is there anything the EU could say which you would say no to ?
Rochdale “Parliament won't vote for exit to EEA. Won't vote for no deal (I expect a vote compelling the government not to accept a no deal scenario). Yet they are your choices...”
I need to have a nose at the legislation. How do you see that working? Parliament voted to trigger A50 which sets a timescale and includes no deal. If there is no deal and the two years expires what is the effect of a Parliamentary vote not to accept it?
Yeah! Hence the massive constitutional crisis we are in!
What happens when MPs reject all options available? Reject extending the timetable? Reject a new referendum? But vote that they have confidence in Her Majesty's Government? What happens when despite all that the Prime Minister refuses to resign?
MPs won't vote for exit to EEA. Have a legally binding meaningful vote which will reject no deal and compel one of the options they have already rejected. Won't vote for a referendum to hand this critis back to the voters. And despite it all probably won't vote no confidence in the government. Nor will May face a viable challenge from her MPs.
A Prime Minister and a government literally stuck in office unable to do anything at all other than make petulant speeches about how crap a negotiator she is. Yet whilst stuck in office unable to do anything may work at another time, at this time we cannot have that...
You can’t negotiate when the other side refuses to.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
You are putting your own interest in not losing face above the interests of your country. That is shameful.
Last time I checked, Charles wasn't actually a member of the government.
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
The irony on FOM is that it is entirely the fault of Britain's non-contributory benefit system that has created the problem. Hardly any other EU country operates in the same way.
Germany, France, Sweden etc have non contributory benefits just contributory benefits too, which National Insurance arguably is part of to some degree (eg to claim JSA if you have savings over the threshold you need NI contributions). It is only really Italy and Poland and Spain which have barely any non contributory benefits
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
Yes, posturing, that's why it's an article in the Guardian, first port of call for all ardent Daily Mail readers.
I read the guardian on line regularly as well as my mail plus
The comments following McDonnell's commitment to Brexit are a joy to behold. Really big trouble looming if they are to be believed
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
Yes, posturing, that's why it's an article in the Guardian, first port of call for all ardent Daily Mail readers.
I read the guardian on line regularly as well as my mail plus
The comments following McDonnell's commitment to Brexit are a joy to behold. Really big trouble looming if they are to be believed
So who believes the Foreign Secretary that no deal is an abyss?
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
The irony on FOM is that it is entirely the fault of Britain's non-contributory benefit system that has created the problem. Hardly any other EU country operates in the same way.
Germany, France, Sweden etc have non contributory benefits just contributory benefits too, which National Insurance arguably is part of to some degree (eg to claim JSA if you have savings over the threshold you need NI contributions). It is only really Italy and Poland and Spain which have barely any non contributory benefits
We may not always agree but you do have amazing political knowledge
The amazing issue for me is the blind loyalty of those wanting to remain in the EU who never say a word of criticism against the EU. It is almost as if they worship at the altar of Brussels.They would be far more credible if they would express their opinions on the negatives arising from the EU and how it could be made more accountable.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
I can agree with some of that but I do not think our place as a very important nation to Europe changes at all
Of course Brexit reduces our influence in Europe! that is the whole point of withdrawing the bit of Sovreignty that we had pooled. We have chosen to withdraw from the European political, social, and cultural field. We can watch from the cheap seats, but not influence what goes on.
And how much influence did we have in the EU ?
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
How often were they on different sides?
I think it was De Gaulle who said that the concept of 'Europe' was an alliance between France and Germany.
And that is what in reality the EU is.
How many times have we heard that "France will need an ally against Germany" or "Germany will need an ally against France" ?
Yet France and Germany continued as allies and the UK was the odd country out.
Things have moved on from De Gaulles time in the 1960s when there were just six countries in the EEC. Inevitably Germany and France have more weight than most, but so did we.
The truth is that the EU is greater than the sum of its parts.
Yet the alliance of France and Germany is still the mentality of Brussels.
If it had been British car factories that had been breaking vehicle emissions laws do you think the EU would have looked the other way as they did with Germans ?
Not really, that'll go down well with Tory members when it comes to the leadership contest.
So what you’re saying is our chief diplomat is prioritising party over country. Surely it’s the job of the FO to lower tension and discover a way forward, not play to his leadership dream. The sort of nonsense you expect from Boris.
I'm not a Boris Johnson fan, but I agree Matthew Syed that Boris gets too much grief for being openly ambitious. The likes of Hunt covet the top job just as much but are probably not quite so blatant when it comes to posturing and positioning.
I'm going to be watching Jeremy Hunt and his odds very carefully over the next few weeks.
What's Canada+++ ? Is it cake?
It’s what the EU has offered - the fly in the ointment, to mix metaphors is the customs border in the Irish Sea (EU version) or whole U.K. in SM for goods (UK version).
When you add enough pluses to Canada you end up in Norway?
No - because Norway has one significant minus - Freedom of Movement.
I suspect the EU would accept some concessions on FoM in a Norway type deal. The assumption needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
The irony on FOM is that it is entirely the fault of Britain's non-contributory benefit system that has created the problem. Hardly any other EU country operates in the same way.
Germany, France, Sweden etc have non contributory benefits just contributory benefits too, which National Insurance arguably is part of to some degree (eg to claim JSA if you have savings over the threshold you need NI contributions). It is only really Italy and Poland and Spain which have barely any non contributory benefits
We may not always agree but you do have amazing political knowledge
Thankyou although really just things I pick up rather than being any great oracle
Comments
For example, I'd be happy to pay £3-4bn net per year (not £9bn per year) and have half the voting rights (by weight) to be an associate member of a single market in goods alone (but not services) and have no free movement, which I'd expect to be reciprocal, and otherwise independent of the EU's political structures, policies and courts.
But that's not the issue. The EU's worry is that the UK might do well, so it either wants to make Brexit entirely pointless - as an example to others - or extremely painful and destructive - as an example to others.
It's a sign of an extremely insecure, inflexible and nervous organisation that has little long-term stability.
However, I do find Curry's quite good for technical advise and product knowledge
Agree that manipulating search results is terrible, and care needs taking. It's just that I see little connection between this and the Damore case.
I believe that until recently we were a very positive influence on the EU. The Single Market and budgetary reforms to CAP were largely British led, for example. We have also been very positive about structural development of the former Eastern Block towards democracy and liberal capitalist economies.
The EU has benefited tremendously from our involvement, and will change direction now that we can no longer participate. Of course we did not always get our way, but we changed the whole course of the EU project.
Brexit is Suez all over again. Suez marked our end as a world power, Brexit marks our end as a European power. The first was inevitable, but the second was our choice.
Simple example: There's not enough democratic accountability over the Commission, which is several layers of indirection away from the voters. The way to solve this is to gradually politicize the European level and appoint people based on election results. But when pro-democracy people in the EU try to do that by having pan-European groups put up candidates who take part in debates and have the winner get the job, the British right try to sabotage it and appoint someone who wasn't a candidate.
I think there is still room for stores that offer specialism / something unique or very very low price, however being in the middle of nowhere is where a lot of failing chains are e.g. Sports Direct does fine despite Amazon, Debenhams is going under. Woolies went bust, B&M, Wilkos and The Range grew.
To those people a Corbynite protectionist Peoples Brexit is more appealing than a Hannanite freebooting one. If they wanted free trade they would have voted to remain in the organisation that we do most of our Free Trade through.
needs testing of course but it's more realistic than most of the suggestions.
In that case, having no relationship is not only viable. It is essential. There's a big old world out there, offering more opportunity to us than being locked into a failing EU.
https://twitter.com/jillongovt/status/1043404243561074688
Plus while the Singapore low tax, low spend, limited regulation, pure free trade city state model may work for London it would be less likely to work for the whole UK. Of course London voted Remain anyway
https://twitter.com/Peter_Shilton/status/1043204935326879744
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6195453/Crisis-hit-G4S-hand-prison-keys-Lib-Dem-conman-Michael-Brown.html
Now if that could be achieved in this country it certainly would boost the Leave voting areas.
If.
As they have acknowledged.
All together now: The four pillars of freedom of movement of goods, services*, capital and labour are indivisible**
* Long way to go - NO FTAs currently cover services and they are not regulated by Brussels anyway
** Except when it suits the EU....
Being a female coder is difficult and not because of the programming
But some retail chains must be doing very well - non food stores sales have increased by 20% over the last five years.
There is a reason that there are very few Singapores in the world, and quite a lot of East Timors.
This morning our electric kettle died and so we checked our local Debenhams for it's replacement and it is retailed at £60
Before we went into Town I checked Amazon for the same kettle and it is on line at £29.99 delivered tomorrow and not through Prime.
There is your High Street disaster in the starkest of terms
Given the Internet will always have a bigger range to choose from than even the most diverse High Street that is no surprise. However business rate cuts would help High Street shops for those who like to still browse before they buy while enjoying a coffee or lunch at the same time
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
Even so I expect even Debenhams now employs more people in its warehouses processing online deliveries and in its vans delivering them than in its actual stores nowadays, Amazon of course now has just warehouses and deliverers with no store at all and a few techies to manage its online service
Amazon will soon be virtually all AI.
Sadly the High Street of department stores will be extinct within 5 years
In or out of the EU we will still be a European power ie the most powerful European nation after Germany alongside France. You could also say Russia is really the most powerful European nation (as most of it is in Europe) and they have never been in the EU at all.
The fact the UK does not want to be part of an attempt to create an EU superpower does not change that
How many times was the UK on the winning side of an EU vote with France and Germany on the losing side ?
We shop at Debenhams regularly and did yesterday. It was inescapable that there was virtually no one in the store. Far more assistants than customers
Even so I expect even Debenhams now employs more people in its warehouses processing online deliveries and in its vans delivering them than in its actual stores nowadays, Amazon of course now has just warehouses and deliverers with no store at all and a few techies to manage its online service
Amazon will soon be virtually all AI.
Sadly the High Street of department stores will be extinct within 5 years'
If the High Street disappears almost entirely and Amazon becomes virtually all AI there will be virtually no jobs at all for most people, especially with the rise of self service supermarket checkouts and automation of most manufacturing jobs too. Hence the argument for a universal basic income and tax on robots would become inevitable
And requires change in many aspects of UK society and economy.
The magic money tree being cut down being one of them.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/brexit-six-months-to-go-final-WEB.pdf
A fuller analysis here and a breakdown by country and subject areas. Overall we used to be a positive influence, but those days are gone:
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1043440108777754624?s=19
Don’t do it until the last moment
Put any old rubbish down, don’t worry about being right
When your teachers give you a bad mark say they’ve insulted you, aren’t showing you respect and tell them they should do the homework
Singapore may be a model for London, not the UK. Post Brexit we will have to pick one model to follow, the EU as they have made clear will not make one up for the UK and to make a success of No Deal a Singapore model would be the only option
And that is what in reality the EU is.
How many times have we heard that "France will need an ally against Germany" or "Germany will need an ally against France" ?
Yet France and Germany continued as allies and the UK was the odd country out.
Unless the EU is prepared to be collaborative we need to walk away
It’s stupid and idiotic of them. But unfortunately they have been misled into believing that Brexit can be reversed
Internet sales have increased much more but some physical shops must be doing very well.
Alternatively the number of physical shops has increased - those outlet shops along main roads appear to be doing better than High Streets to my eye.
The truth is that the EU is greater than the sum of its parts.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/22/dont-mistake-british-politeness-for-weakness-jeremy-hunt-tells-eu
More posturing, purely for domestic Murdoch/Mail consumption. Each bit of a grandstanding, like Tusk's "cherry" tweet and this nonsense from Hunt, brings a no-deal 'accident' closer.
McDonnell is going to face an almighty row at conference about the referendum, incidentally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Bargains
Turnover 2011 £0.7bn
Turnover 2016 £1.6bn
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_&_M
Turnover 2012 £0.9bn
Turnover 2017 £2.4bn
The comments following McDonnell's commitment to Brexit are a joy to behold. Really big trouble looming if they are to be believed
If it had been British car factories that had been breaking vehicle emissions laws do you think the EU would have looked the other way as they did with Germans ?
However I agree it would not get past the electorate