It wasn't a march per se, but AFAICR the petrol protests in 2000 significantly altered the polling and caused Blair's government some serious concern. But then the protests, and the concerns, melted away.
But that was a very different situation.
it did change the policy of the government though. IIRC they stopped increasing fuel duty for a number of years. At that time though the only thing that interested Blair was ensuring that they won the 2001 election so any bad news was dealt with quickly and decisively. Didn't make for good government though
I see we are now wibbling about whether whether the rally has attracted over half a million or not. .
I see a lot more people querying whether the actual size matters or not than those wibbling about the size. The script for this day was written months ago.
Every time there is a rally on anything - left or right - people whine that rallies don’t count.
It’s incredibly tedious.
The point is is that upwards of half a million feel passionately enough about the clusterfuck that is Brexit to get of their arse and protest about it.
Agreed. The number is clearly impressive, and way more than I expected. It may concentrate a few minds in Westminster.
On the other hand, I am struggling to remember a march in Britain that changed anything. A million and a half marched against the Iraq war, and it did nothing. 400,000 turned up for foxhunting - zip.
Can any PB-er recall a march, in Britain, that changed things significantly? The only possibility I can think of is Jarrow, which changed attitudes over time
Protests often work slowly. Blair would have been remembered differently if he had listened to the marchers, and perhaps listening to the countryside marchers would have dealt with some grievances that festered into Brexitism. May ought to similarly listen.
For once (I get bored of our slanging matches) I agree. The size of this march should make TMay pause, it should make everyone pause.
48% of the country does not want Brexit, in terms of having voted against it (there may be more opposing it now). Yet the government is hurtling us towards the Hardest Brexit of all: No Deal.
This is wrong. The government's response to the surprising size of the YES vote in indyref was a pledge to give more powers to Scotland. That was the right response (even if Nats don't think it was fully honoured). The correct response to the size of the REMAIN vote should be equally respectful.
Put us in fucking EFTA, FFS. Then at the next GE we can decide if we want to move further away, or closer, or whatever.
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
Of course some people in every generation are entitled - but I think it's disingenuous to say that the problems that young people face nowadays are due to some kind of moral failing.
When he was 22, my grandfather was able to get a job in an aircraft factory immediately after leaving university (which was free) paying the inflation adjusted equivalent of about £35,000. He was then able to rent a house in a nice part of the country for about 1/6th of his monthly wage. He was able to save up enough for a mortgage on a semi-detached house at about 3x annual wage.
I'm 22 now and I've just got a job in London after putting in three years of unpaid voluntary work to build the experience I needed to qualify. I'm earning £22,500, but I'm paying almost 1/2 of that after taxes on rent, and even if I were to get a significant pay increase, I'd need to start covering my tuition fees (I'm one of the lucky ones who don't have to start repaying at 21k). Even if I were able to put aside money for a mortgage, I'd be looking at at something around 10x my annual wage.
There are obviously severe structural problems in our economy. No matter how unentitled I am, I'm not going to be able to afford a semi detached house anytime soon. I want to settle down and get on with life - but right now I don't see how I can.
Welcome!
A great first post.
I think you're right, most people don't want revolution, they just want their reasonable expectations in life met -- a steady job with prospects, the chance to get on the property ladder, settle down, have a family. These are not unreasonable things to ask. Unfortunately most of these things are difficult if not impossible for the younger generations now.
Most of the upheavals in recent years can be traced to the structural problems you mention. Corbynism is a middle-class university-educated revolt by people who expected starter homes and steady jobs and got five person houseshares and endless unpaid internships. Brexitism is a different manifestation of the same problem. The country's full, there are too many here already, immigrants will live twenty people to a house.
The trouble is while the problem is easy to identify, no-one's come up with a workable solution yet that doesn't trash the economy...
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
Of course some people in every generation are entitled - but I think it's disingenuous to say that the problems that young people face nowadays are due to some kind of moral failing.
When he was 22, my grandfather was able to get a job in an aircraft factory immediately after leaving university (which was free) paying the inflation adjusted equivalent of about £35,000. He was then able to rent a house in a nice part of the country for about 1/6th of his monthly wage. He was able to save up enough for a mortgage on a semi-detached house at about 3x annual wage.
I'm 22 now and I've just got a job in London after putting in three years of unpaid voluntary work to build the experience I needed to qualify. I'm earning £22,500, but I'm paying almost 1/2 of that after taxes on rent, and even if I were to get a significant pay increase, I'd need to start covering my tuition fees (I'm one of the lucky ones who don't have to start repaying at 21k). Even if I were able to put aside money for a mortgage, I'd be looking at at something around 10x my annual wage.
There are obviously severe structural problems in our economy. No matter how unentitled I am, I'm not going to be able to afford a semi detached house anytime soon. I want to settle down and get on with life - but right now I don't see how I can.
Welcome to PB Bournville
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
The Tories need to risk p***ing off a large part of their voter base by explicitly working to reduce house prices in real (and probably nominal) terms. So far all I see is tinkering at the edges.
Cruz now an average of 7% clear according to RCP. Not looking too close at the moment, sadly.
Midterm turn out is looking like it is going to be close to 2016 levels rather than 2014 levels according to the early voting data. There is no way the AMerican pollsters have the right turnout filter so if the polls are right it is by chance rather than science at the moment.
What way they swing wrong is a complete unknown for which I have no intuition.
Mr. Cooke, it was cunning up until the point he was deposed and ended up dead.
He was mostly a very talented manipulator and devious plotter, but when you piss everyone off, if they have a chance to unite against you they'll take it.
More like 40%. Plus another 10% or so to that nice Mr Cuomo for us. Also the $1.6bn headline figure is paid as an annuity. To take the jackpot as a lump sum you’d only be getting about a billon before tax.
When I lived in London 88, first job after Uni, I was earning 18K so taking home about 1,000 a month. Rent was 375 a month, so 37.5% of take home. I can not remember the house prices but it was the time when you had no chance of buying a house because of the house price boom at the time, even then people we buying as friends to spread the mortage. I bought my first house aged 31. Seems to me, that not much has changed.
As you correctly point out, 88 was around the time of the Lawson boom. So figures are a bit blurry. But at that time a prosperous Northern town two-bed terrace with a downstairs bathroom conversion and no allocated parking would have gone for upper £20K/lower £30K. After the boom subsided and the fall out of the ERM, the same property would have gone for ~£35K up until 1995ish. The same property would now go for between £180 and £200K.
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
More like 40%. Plus another 10% or so to that nice Mr Cuomo for us. Also the $1.6bn headline figure is paid as an annuity. To take the jackpot as a lump sum you’d only be getting about a billon before tax.
Hardly worth buying a ticket, is it? For that, all you could get is a couple of weeks of Tony Blair talking to you after dinner.
For all the calls for Britain to come up with new answers, the ball is actually in the EU’s court. A backstop that divides the UK is unacceptable and could well collapse the talks. It is ironic that an insurance policy to prevent a hard Irish border could be the cause of “no-deal” Brexit and so possibly harden the border.
I see we are now wibbling about whether whether the rally has attracted over half a million or not. .
I see a lot more people querying whether the actual size matters or not than those wibbling about the size. The script for this day was written months ago.
Every time there is a rally on anything - left or right - people whine that rallies don’t count.
It’s incredibly tedious.
The point is is that upwards of half a million feel passionately enough about the clusterfuck that is Brexit to get of their arse and protest about it.
Agreed. The number is clearly impressive, and way more than I expected. It may concentrate a few minds in Westminster.
On the other hand, I am struggling to remember a march in Britain that changed anything. A million and a half marched against the Iraq war, and it did nothing. 400,000 turned up for foxhunting - zip.
Can any PB-er recall a march, in Britain, that changed things significantly? The only possibility I can think of is Jarrow, which changed attitudes over time
Protests often work slowly. Blair would have been remembered differently if he had listened to the marchers, and perhaps listening to the countryside marchers would have dealt with some grievances that festered into Brexitism. May ought to similarly listen.
For once (I get bored of our slanging matches) I agree. The size of this march should make TMay pause, it should make everyone pause.
48% of the country does not want Brexit, in terms of having voted against it (there may be more opposing it now). Yet the government is hurtling us towards the Hardest Brexit of all: No Deal.
This is wrong. The government's response to the surprising size of the YES vote in indyref was a pledge to give more powers to Scotland. That was the right response (even if Nats don't think it was fully honoured). The correct response to the size of the REMAIN vote should be equally respectful.
Put us in fucking EFTA, FFS. Then at the next GE we can decide if we want to move further away, or closer, or whatever.
EFTA would probably be the logical place (assuming it allows for control of immigration which a lot of people wanted)
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
They seem to be caught in the headlights. They know they have to leave Merkel's coalition but are afraid to do so because that might trigger an election at which they could lose about half their seats. So they do nothing as their ratings sink further.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
They seem to be caught in the headlights. They know they have to leave Merkel's coalition but are afraid to do so because that might trigger an election at which they could lose about half their seats. So they do nothing as their ratings sink further.
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
There will be no borders between NI and GB in the transition period as the whole UK will be in the SM and CU, as long as May remains PM and needs DUP support that will have to stay the case but the transition period ends at the end of Dec 2021 so a new leader can take over before the 2022 GE on a FTA for GB platform. The DUP also confirmed they would not no confidence the government even if they vote against the Withdrawal Agreement and transition period and backstop (but Starmer on Thursday confirmed Labour would vote for the backstop to protect the GFA even if they then vote to No Confidence the Government).
There are now no other alternatives than No Deal (which likely leads to Remain in EUref2 before Brexit day according to polling, you could expect well over a million in a New Year People's vote march if No Deal), SM + CU indefinitely for the whole UK or SM + CU for NI and FTA for GB. May apparently already told Varadkar she accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
I think I'd prefer a system which could somehow generate 1,600 millionaires from that prize money.
Taking a little bit of money off a lot of people, including very many poorer people, and creating a new millionaire every week is wrong to begin with. Over the lifetime of the lottery it must have contributed to the dramatic growth in wealth inequality we have seen.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
Yes SPD heading the same way as other social democratic parties in France Spain and Greece. Labour party may avoid it with new member influx with Corbyn
For all the calls for Britain to come up with new answers, the ball is actually in the EU’s court. A backstop that divides the UK is unacceptable and could well collapse the talks. It is ironic that an insurance policy to prevent a hard Irish border could be the cause of “no-deal” Brexit and so possibly harden the border.
Cruz now an average of 7% clear according to RCP. Not looking too close at the moment, sadly.
Midterm turn out is looking like it is going to be close to 2016 levels rather than 2014 levels according to the early voting data. There is no way the AMerican pollsters have the right turnout filter so if the polls are right it is by chance rather than science at the moment.
What way they swing wrong is a complete unknown for which I have no intuition.
I doubt it, no midterm election since WW2 has ever got over 50% turnout. 36% turned out in the 2014 midterms, 56% in the 2016 presidential and congressional election, 41% in the 2010 midterms, 55% in the 2012 presidential and congressional election.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
Indeed so - and they're just letting it happen. Going back into Coalition was an act of self-harm.Why on earth does the SPD not just allow the Government to collapse?
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
Yes SPD heading the same way as other social democratic parties in France Spain and Greece. Labour party may avoid it with new member influx with Corbyn
Corbyn is almost a magician in the way he's bucking the trend for social democratic parties in the West to lose a hefty segment of their support.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
Yes SPD heading the same way as other social democratic parties in France Spain and Greece. Labour party may avoid it with new member influx with Corbyn
No, Labour have avoided it by ceasing to be social democratic. They are far closer to the Greens both here and in Germany than the SPD, although I would argue they are less sane, less well organised and less in touch with reality. These latter reasons are why I keep comparing them to the Tea Party.
For all the calls for Britain to come up with new answers, the ball is actually in the EU’s court. A backstop that divides the UK is unacceptable and could well collapse the talks. It is ironic that an insurance policy to prevent a hard Irish border could be the cause of “no-deal” Brexit and so possibly harden the border.
The Leave campaign whipped up untrue fears of millions ofTurks descending on Britain. And Leave activists loved it.
That would be the Turkey that's an ascension country to the EU? The Turkey that was in the process (at the time of the referendum) of getting visa free access to the Schengen area? The Turkey who's only sticking point at the time to entry was its independence of judiciary and its anti terrorism laws.
It's only now following the failed coup and the country going off the deep end that membership is preposterous in even the medium term.
I think it is clear that if Turkey had joined the EU, then there would have been migration on a scale at least comparable to that which followed the Eastern accessions.
I also think it is clear, and was even clear - albeit somewhat less so - at the time of the campaign, that Turkish accession was most unlikely to occur in the first place.
My general inclination, though, was that politicians who jet around the world mouthing strongly-worded but strictly speaking "can't-hold-me-to-anything" platitudes at international conferences about how much they welcome the prospect of progress in Turkey's EU accession talks, have simply no right to complain when people do hold them to it. It's tough, and diplomacy would be easier if you could talk out of different sides of your mouth in different settings without a free press reporting it or voters reacting to the things they aren't meant to hear, but we live in a democracy and my sympathy is most severely limited.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
They seem to be caught in the headlights. They know they have to leave Merkel's coalition but are afraid to do so because that might trigger an election at which they could lose about half their seats. So they do nothing as their ratings sink further.
Perhaps Mr Clegg could advise.
Not sure that falls within his job description and Mr Clegg's time is (finally) quite valuable.
I see we are now wibbling about whether whether the rally has attracted over half a million or not. .
I see a lot more people querying whether the actual size matters or not than those wibbling about the size. The script for this day was written months ago.
Every time there is a rally on anything - left or right - people whine that rallies don’t count.
It’s incredibly tedious.
The point is is that upwards of half a million feel passionately enough about the clusterfuck that is Brexit to get of their arse and protest about it.
Agreed. The number is clearly impressive, and way more than I expected. It may concentrate a few minds in Westminster.
On the other hand, I am struggling to remember a march in Britain that changed anything. A million and a half marched against the Iraq war, and it did nothing. 400,000 turned up for foxhunting - zip.
Can any PB-er recall a march, in Britain, that changed things significantly? The only possibility I can think of is Jarrow, which changed attitudes over time
Protests often work slowly. Blair would have been remembered differently if he had listened to the marchers, and perhaps listening to the countryside marchers would have dealt with some grievances that festered into Brexitism. May ought to similarly listen.
For once (I get bored of our slanging matches) I agree. The size of this march should make TMay pause, it should make everyone pause.
48% of the country does not want Brexit, in terms of having voted against it (there may be more opposing it now). Yet the government is hurtling us towards the Hardest Brexit of all: No Deal.
This is wrong. The government's response to the surprising size of the YES vote in indyref was a pledge to give more powers to Scotland. That was the right response (even if Nats don't think it was fully honoured). The correct response to the size of the REMAIN vote should be equally respectful.
Put us in fucking EFTA, FFS. Then at the next GE we can decide if we want to move further away, or closer, or whatever.
EFTA would probably be the logical place (assuming it allows for control of immigration which a lot of people wanted)
I think it has an emergency brake on immigration, but it doesn't end FoM. But immigration from the EU is plummeting anyway. So it's less of an issue.
You cannot have EFTA alone without agreeing the backstop for NI first and Barnier has been clear that requires SM + CU for NI before the future trading relationship between the UK and EU can be agreed, including the UK entering the EFTA pillar
For all the calls for Britain to come up with new answers, the ball is actually in the EU’s court. A backstop that divides the UK is unacceptable and could well collapse the talks. It is ironic that an insurance policy to prevent a hard Irish border could be the cause of “no-deal” Brexit and so possibly harden the border.
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
Was it not the Governor of the Boe who said that whoever won the 2010 election would bear all the consequences of the task that needed doing?
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
There will be no borders between NI and GB in the transition period as the whole UK will be in the SM and CU, as long as May remains PM and needs DUP support that will have to stay the case but the transition period ends at the end of Dec 2021 so a new leader can take over before the 2022 GE on a FTA for GB platform. The DUP also confirmed they would not no confidence the government even if they vote against the Withdrawal Agreement and transition period and backstop (but Starmer on Thursday confirmed Labour would vote for the backstop to protect the GFA even if they then vote to No Confidence the Government).
There are now no other alternatives than No Deal (which likely leads to Remain in EUref2 before Brexit day according to polling, you could expect well over a million in a New Year People's vote march if No Deal), SM + CU indefinitely for the whole UK or SM + CU for NI and FTA for GB. May apparently already told Varadkar she accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
The level of ignorance displayed about our political system is shocking. That the EU don't understand it isn't wholly surprising, because they never have cared about or even realised their ignorance, and most of them are possessed of the intellectual capacity of a stuffed donkey anyway. But you have no such excuses. To spell it out in simple language:
No Parliament can bind its successor. Therefore, May cannot guarantee a 'permanent' backstop.
You can hedge and twist and turn and post silly numbers all you like. The simple fact however is that Europe is asking for something we can't give them. They may not realise it (heck, does that drug addled nobody in charge of the Commission even know today's not Thursday any more?) but they are.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
Yes SPD heading the same way as other social democratic parties in France Spain and Greece. Labour party may avoid it with new member influx with Corbyn
Generally, parties to the left of social democracy are doing well - Corbyn, Melanchon, German Greens and Left, etc. - arguably the Democrats are showing the same pattern in the US. There is a widespread sense that assisting in blunting the worst effects of capitalism is not sufficiently attractive for those worried about such things.
But yes, it's bonkers that the SPD went back into coalition - they genuinely felt they were doing it in the national interest, but the nation isn't impressed.
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
Was it not the Governor of the Boe who said that whoever won the 2010 election would bear all the consequences of the task that needed doing?
Yes, and then Cameron won a majority in 2015. Which makes that forecast fairly average, even by the Bank's somewhat disappointing standards.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
I mean, if you're claiming it's constitutionally impossible to agree to a withdrawal agreement with the EU, then *maybe* this is the sort of thing we should have considered before we started running down the clock with no idea where we wanted to end up.
Because painting yourself into a corner is a bad idea. Doing it with *landmines*, as the Brexit Buccaneers have done, is especially dim.
Also, FWIW, if the EU are all simpletons, what does that say about the Brexit Buccaneers, who the EU have managed to outmaneuver, outplay and outclass at every single turn?
I guess by your reasoning Brexiteers would have to be bona fide clinically brain dead.
Cruz now an average of 7% clear according to RCP. Not looking too close at the moment, sadly.
Midterm turn out is looking like it is going to be close to 2016 levels rather than 2014 levels according to the early voting data. There is no way the AMerican pollsters have the right turnout filter so if the polls are right it is by chance rather than science at the moment.
What way they swing wrong is a complete unknown for which I have no intuition.
I doubt it, no midterm election since WW2 has ever got over 50% turnout. 36% turned out in the 2014 midterms, 56% in the 2016 presidential and congressional election, 41% in the 2010 midterms, 55% in the 2012 presidential and congressional election.
In some states this one will. The early voting figures are extraordinary.
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
Was it not the Governor of the Boe who said that whoever won the 2010 election would bear all the consequences of the task that needed doing?
Yes, and then Cameron won a majority in 2015. Which makes that forecast fairly average, even by the Bank's somewhat disappointing standards.
My point is that the British voter is in my view pragmatic. They knew in 201 the country was in trouble financially and needed sorting out. So they agreed with the medicine and as you say gave the Tories credit for it in 2015. I think the same will happen for May, the country (barring some extremes) understand she got a hospital pass from Cameron and will give her some leeway or the Tories leeway if there is a no deal outcome at the next GE.
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
There will be no borders between NI and GB in the transition period as the whole UK will be in the SM and CU, as long as May remains PM and needs DUP support that will have to stay the case but the transition period ends at the end of Dec 2021 so a new leader can take over before the 2022 GE on a FTA for GB platform. The DUP also confirmed they would not no confidence the government even if they vote against the Withdrawal Agreement and transition period and backstop (but Starmer on Thursday confirmed Labour would vote for the backstop to protect the GFA even if they then vote to No Confidence the Government).
There are now no other alternatives than No Deal (which likely leads to Remain in EUref2 before Brexit day according to polling, you could expect well over a million in a New Year People's vote march if No Deal), SM + CU indefinitely for the whole UK or SM + CU for NI and FTA for GB. May apparently already told Varadkar she accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
The level of ignorance displayed about our political system is shocking. That the EU don't understand it isn't wholly surprising, because they never have cared about or even realised their ignorance, and most of them are possessed of the intellectual capacity of a stuffed donkey anyway. But you have no such excuses. To spell it out in simple language:
No Parliament can bind its successor. Therefore, May cannot guarantee a 'permanent' backstop.
You can hedge and twist and turn and post silly numbers all you like. The simple fact however is that Europe is asking for something we can't give them. They may not realise it (heck, does that drug addled nobody in charge of the Commission even know today's not Thursday any more?) but they are.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
Governments can bind their successors through international treaties.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
I mean, if you're claiming it's constitutionally impossible to agree to a withdrawal agreement with the EU, then *maybe* this is the sort of thing we should have considered before we started running down the clock with no idea where we wanted to end up.
Because painting yourself into a corner is a bad idea. Doing it with *landmines*, as the Brexit Buccaneers have done, is especially dim.
Also, FWIW, if the EU are all simpletons, what does that say about the Brexit Buccaneers, who the EU have managed to outmaneuver, outplay and outclass at every single turn?
I guess by your reasoning Brexiteers would have to be bona fide clinically brain dead.
Which kinda fits.
Am I right that we could put the backstop into the withdrawal treaty - but if we wanted to cancel the backstop in future the entire withdrawal treaty woud lapse?
I see we are now wibbling about whether whether the rally has attracted over half a million or not. .
I see a lot more people querying whether the actual size matters or not than those wibbling about the size. The script for this day was written months ago.
Every time there is a rally on anything - left or right - people whine that rallies don’t count.
It’s incredibly tedious.
The point is is that upwards of half a million feel passionately enough about the clusterfuck that is Brexit to get of their arse and protest about it.
Agreed. The number is clearly impressive, and way more than I expected. It may concentrate a few minds in Westminster.
On the other hand, I am struggling to remember a march in Britain that changed anything. A million and a half marched against the Iraq war, and it did nothing. 400,000 turned up for foxhunting - zip.
Can any PB-er recall a march, in Britain, that changed things significantly? The only possibility I can think of is Jarrow, which changed attitudes over time
Protests often work slowly. Blair would have been remembered differently if he had listened to the marchers, and perhaps listening to the countryside marchers would have dealt with some grievances that festered into Brexitism. May ought to similarly listen.
EFTA would probably be the logical place (assuming it allows for control of immigration which a lot of people wanted)
I think it has an emergency brake on immigration, but it doesn't end FoM. But immigration from the EU is plummeting anyway. So it's less of an issue.
You cannot have EFTA alone without agreeing the backstop for NI first and Barnier has been clear that requires SM + CU for NI before the future trading relationship between the UK and EU can be agreed, including the UK entering the EFTA pillar
Why? If the UK leaves the EU and applies to join EFTA that is a matter for the EFTA states. Where does Barnier come into it?
The problem with referendums is that it's difficult to get people to vote on the question on the ballot paper. The first EU referendum was probably more about people's discontent with "elites" in general, and if we have another one it'll probably be a vote on whether having a second referendum is a good idea in itself rather than whether or not we should stay in the EU. Neither referendum would actually be about the question posed. But there isn't much you can do about that problem.
I just love how butthurt right wingers get at mass protests. Stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity.
Right wingers? I would have thought that it was mainly Lib/Dems, new Labour types, Greens and politically naïve students who were on that protest march.
It is the Brexit one in London you're talking about, not the EDL one in Manchester isn't it?
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
Was it not the Governor of the Boe who said that whoever won the 2010 election would bear all the consequences of the task that needed doing?
Yes, and then Cameron won a majority in 2015. Which makes that forecast fairly average, even by the Bank's somewhat disappointing standards.
My point is that the British voter is in my view pragmatic. They knew in 201 the country was in trouble financially and needed sorting out. So they agreed with the medicine and as you say gave the Tories credit for it in 2015. I think the same will happen for May, the country (barring some extremes) understand she got a hospital pass from Cameron and will give her some leeway or the Tories leeway if there is a no deal outcome at the next GE.
Maybe but there are a lot of the 17.4m (like me) who are completely pissed off with May's incompetence, the ineptitude with which this has been negotiated and the terms of the deal that we will (probably) get stuck with. I have no doubt May is doing her best, its just that her best is not very good.
The Tories' best hope is that Corbyn is still the alternative. That will drive their supporters to the polls like nothing else.
At least 600,000 according to that Remainer mouthpiece, LBC.
You mean Farage's and Ian Dale's station. What utter garbage.
I need a sarcasm tag.
Like this:
Theresa May is doing excellent job and her handling of Brexit has been flawless /s Boris Johnson would make an excellent Prime Minister /s Liam Fox isn't a disgrace and a national security risk /s
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
Of course some people in every generation are entitled - but I think it's disingenuous to say that the problems that young people face nowadays are due to some kind of moral failing.
When he was 22, my grandfather was able to get a job in an aircraft factory immediately after leaving university (which was free) paying the inflation adjusted equivalent of about £35,000. He was then able to rent a house in a nice part of the country for about 1/6th of his monthly wage. He was able to save up enough for a mortgage on a semi-detached house at about 3x annual wage.
I'm 22 now and I've just got a job in London after putting in three years of unpaid voluntary work to build the experience I needed to qualify. I'm earning £22,500, but I'm paying almost 1/2 of that after taxes on rent, and even if I were to get a significant pay increase, I'd need to start covering my tuition fees (I'm one of the lucky ones who don't have to start repaying at 21k). Even if I were able to put aside money for a mortgage, I'd be looking at at something around 10x my annual wage.
There are obviously severe structural problems in our economy. No matter how unentitled I am, I'm not going to be able to afford a semi detached house anytime soon. I want to settle down and get on with life - but right now I don't see how I can.
Let me get this straight. You have voluntarily opted to work in a field which requires 3 years of unpaid voluntary work, after 3 years at university, leading to a salary that, although not very low by National standards, does not permit a very good standard of living in London. You have freely chosen to do this, but complain about the consequences of your choices.
EFTA alone is not enough...Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
There will be no borders between NI and GB in the transition period as the whole UK will be in the SM and CU, as long as May remains PM and needs DUP support that will have to stay the case but the transition period ends at the end of Dec 2021 so a new leader can take over before the 2022 GE on a FTA for GB platform. The DUP also confirmed they would not no confidence the government even if they vote against the Withdrawal Agreement and transition period and backstop (but Starmer on Thursday confirmed Labour would vote for the backstop to protect the GFA even if they then vote to No Confidence the Government).
There are now no other alternatives than No Deal (which likely leads to Remain in EUref2 before Brexit day according to polling, you could expect well over a million in a New Year People's vote march if No Deal), SM + CU indefinitely for the whole UK or SM + CU for NI and FTA for GB. May apparently already told Varadkar she accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
The level of ignorance displayed about our political system is shocking. That the EU don't understand it isn't wholly surprising, because they never have cared about or even realised their ignorance, and most of them are possessed of the intellectual capacity of a stuffed donkey anyway. But you have no such excuses. To spell it out in simple language:
No Parliament can bind its successor. Therefore, May cannot guarantee a 'permanent' backstop...
No, but governments can sign treaties, which would presumably satisfy the EU’s legal requirement.
A recent BBC report suggested a possible fudge mechanism on the ‘permanent’ bit: Brussels noted with approval that the prime minister had talked about a process for deciding when it should come to an end instead of a date - a formula that was "event-driven" rather than time-specific. It was also much closer to the phrase agreed with the EU that any backstop would be in place "unless and until" another solution is found. And it would be legal for the EU to commit to during the Brexit process whereas a permanent customs solution was not, confirmed a European official who quoted the European treaties....
I just love how butthurt right wingers get at mass protests. Stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity.
As opposed to the two plus years of stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity-fest of Remainderdom?
See, look! You're doing it right now!
The lack of self-awareness of petulant Brexiteers when they're at their most objectionably self-pitying is kinda adorable.
I have to admit, though. I do *understand* why you're so angry. The remainers have been trying to tell you for years what was going to happen, and you ignored them.
And then the remainers were proved absolutely correct and the chaos unfolded exactly as everyone told you they would. Nobody likes being proved so hilariously, catastrophically, consistently and publicly wrong.
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
Of course some people in every generation are entitled - but I think it's disingenuous to say that the problems that young people face nowadays are due to some kind of moral failing.
When he was 22, my grandfather was able to get a job in an aircraft factory immediately after leaving university (which was free) paying the inflation adjusted equivalent of about £35,000. He was then able to rent a house in a nice part of the country for about 1/6th of his monthly wage. He was able to save up enough for a mortgage on a semi-detached house at about 3x annual wage.
I'm 22 now and I've just got a job in London after putting in three years of unpaid voluntary work to build the experience I needed to qualify. I'm earning £22,500, but I'm paying almost 1/2 of that after taxes on rent, and even if I were to get a significant pay increase, I'd need to start covering my tuition fees (I'm one of the lucky ones who don't have to start repaying at 21k). Even if I were able to put aside money for a mortgage, I'd be looking at at something around 10x my annual wage.
There are obviously severe structural problems in our economy. No matter how unentitled I am, I'm not going to be able to afford a semi detached house anytime soon. I want to settle down and get on with life - but right now I don't see how I can.
Always good to see a new PBer.
Can I ask if your career is London only or can you get equivalent positions in other parts of the country ?
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
Of course some people in every generation are entitled - but I think it's disingenuous to say that the problems that young people face nowadays are due to some kind of moral failing.
When he was 22, my grandfather was able to get a job in an aircraft factory immediately after leaving university (which was free) paying the inflation adjusted equivalent of about £35,000. He was then able to rent a house in a nice part of the country for about 1/6th of his monthly wage. He was able to save up enough for a mortgage on a semi-detached house at about 3x annual wage.
I'm 22 now and I've just got a job in London after putting in three years of unpaid voluntary work to build the experience I needed to qualify. I'm earning £22,500, but I'm paying almost 1/2 of that after taxes on rent, and even if I were to get a significant pay increase, I'd need to start covering my tuition fees (I'm one of the lucky ones who don't have to start repaying at 21k). Even if I were able to put aside money for a mortgage, I'd be looking at at something around 10x my annual wage.
There are obviously severe structural problems in our economy. No matter how unentitled I am, I'm not going to be able to afford a semi detached house anytime soon. I want to settle down and get on with life - but right now I don't see how I can.
Let me get this straight. You have voluntarily opted to work in a field which requires 3 years of unpaid voluntary work, after 3 years at university, leading to a salary that, although not very low by National standards, does not permit a very good standard of living in London. You have freely chosen to do this, but complain about the consequences of your choices.
At least 600,000 according to that Remainer mouthpiece, LBC.
You mean Farage's and Ian Dale's station. What utter garbage.
I need a sarcasm tag.
Well they do have remainderman in chief James O'Brien on there whinging his head off every weekday morning, I phoned his show once, he's impossible to deal with.
He's right and everybody who disagrees with him on Brexit is wrong seems to be his moto.
Incidentally, I think I'm one of the few who want a referendum on the Deal who believes it'll end with the Deal getting support and Remain losing again.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
Was it not the Governor of the Boe who said that whoever won the 2010 election would bear all the consequences of the task that needed doing?
Indeed. Unless whoever got more votes had someone else to focus scapegoat attention on, but what were the chances of that...
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
More seriously, the Brexit march demonstrates that the wounds from Brexit will not heal easily.
The arguments we're having with Brussels are not the problem. In time, the UK and the EU will realise that they need to have a productive relationship, because it is both their best interests.
The problems we're having are internal. And part of the problem is that the political class is obsessed with the negotiations. We've perhaps never had a government so lacking in dialog with their own population.
I don't know what the solution is, because there Theresa May is emotionally unable to connect with people, and the negotiations are entering their final leg.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
I've just read a superb book by Will Storr called Selfie which discusses those types of things. One of the best I've read in the last five years. The first 50 pages are about ancient Greece and the next 50 about Christianity in the middle ages, so it isn't just about selfies, smartphones, social media, etc.
I just love how butthurt right wingers get at mass protests. Stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity.
As opposed to the two plus years of stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity-fest of Remainderdom?
See, look! You're doing it right now!
The lack of self-awareness of petulant Brexiteers when they're at their most objectionably self-pitying is kinda adorable.
I have to admit, though. I do *understand* why you're so angry. The remainers have been trying to tell you for years what was going to happen, and you ignored them.
And then the remainers were proved absolutely correct and the chaos unfolded exactly as everyone told you they would. Nobody likes being proved so hilariously, catastrophically, consistently and publicly wrong.
I feel your pain.
Angry? Nope.
You'll know when we're angry. We'll quietly, with little fuss, go and eject from power all the arseholes who haven't learnt to do as they were told....
More like 40%. Plus another 10% or so to that nice Mr Cuomo for us. Also the $1.6bn headline figure is paid as an annuity. To take the jackpot as a lump sum you’d only be getting about a billon before tax.
Hardly worth buying a ticket, is it? For that, all you could get is a couple of weeks of Tony Blair talking to you after dinner.
The SPD in Germany are like the Liberals in interwar Britain, just disappearing in plain sight. Incredible.
They seem to be caught in the headlights. They know they have to leave Merkel's coalition but are afraid to do so because that might trigger an election at which they could lose about half their seats. So they do nothing as their ratings sink further.
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
I bought a house - a house, not a flat- in London in 1981, a year after I graduated. It cost £20k, which was four times my then salary of £5k. Most of my contemporaries bought houses or flats within a few years of graduation. That same house, which is about a mile from where I now live, would be worth at least half a million today which, I suppose, is about twenty times a graduate salary.
That is madness, and it results from policy decisions by governments over many decades.
I agree with those who find the People’s Vote label annoying. I don’t think it’s disingenous, just inexact.
What we need is a Vote on the Deal.
If, having properly scrutinised the fudge-fuck that May finally returns, we decide to go ahead, so be it. Remainerism will have been vanquished, and we must hard-headedly confront our future. Indeed, I would be quite content with that.
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
More seriously, the Brexit march demonstrates that the wounds from Brexit will not heal easily.
The arguments we're having with Brussels are not the problem. In time, the UK and the EU will realise that they need to have a productive relationship, because it is both their best interests.
The problems we're having are internal. And part of the problem is that the political class is obsessed with the negotiations. We've perhaps never had a government so lacking in dialog with their own population.
I don't know what the solution is, because there Theresa May is emotionally unable to connect with people, and the negotiations are entering their final leg.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
I've just read a superb book by Will Storr called Selfie which discusses those types of things. One of the best I've read in the last five years. The first 50 pages are about ancient Greece and the next 50 about Christianity in the middle ages, so it isn't just about selfies, smartphones, social media, etc.
I don’t see what wanting to be able to buy a house and have a decent life has to do with being self obsessed.
I think it's clear if May genuinely believed no deal was better than a bad deal then we'd already be at the point where she'd be openly chucking in the talks and explaining to everyone there wasn't any point any longer trying to talk to the EU.
She isn't doing that, so I'm pretty convinced she will come back with some sort of deal. She will completely cave in to actually get it and it will not be a great deal, but she'll put some sort of deal to the HOC.
If that deal gets voted down in the House of Commons (by a combination of Labour not caring what the deal is, just wanting to push for an election, and the ERG rebelling because they hate it) *then* it should be a second referendum, but not before then.
And even then it should be a two-part question along the lines of:
1. Accept/Reject TM's deal 2. If Reject is the majority in 1., then choose either Leave With No Deal/Rescind Article 50
But I don't think it will come to that as no matter how crappy TM's deal I think it will squeeze through as there will be too much concern about what would happen after TM's deal got voted down, precisely BECAUSE leavers will fear a second referendum overturning the first and remainers fearing no deal.
Basically, I think we're on for the "exact-middle-of-the-road-satisfies-almost-nobody" awkward halfway house that the referendum result and subsequent GE vote essentially demands.
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
More seriously, the Brexit march demonstrates that the wounds from Brexit will not heal easily.
The arguments we're having with Brussels are not the problem. In time, the UK and the EU will realise that they need to have a productive relationship, because it is both their best interests.
The problems we're having are internal. And part of the problem is that the political class is obsessed with the negotiations. We've perhaps never had a government so lacking in dialog with their own population.
I don't know what the solution is, because there Theresa May is emotionally unable to connect with people, and the negotiations are entering their final leg.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
I've just read a superb book by Will Storr called Selfie which discusses those types of things. One of the best I've read in the last five years. The first 50 pages are about ancient Greece and the next 50 about Christianity in the middle ages, so it isn't just about selfies, smartphones, social media, etc.
I don’t see what wanting to be able to buy a house and have a decent life has to do with being self obsessed.
Do you think you ought to be able to buy a house in London?
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
Interesting numbers.
£500k in Morden is a normal 3 bed semi give or take.
In 1990 that would have been about 70-80k. (Family member who bought similar in 1991).
So in the 30 years between 1960 and 1990 it increased around 15 times. In the 28 years between 1990 and 2018 it increased around 6-7 times.
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
Interesting numbers.
£500k in Morden is a normal 3 bed semi give or take.
In 1990 that would have been about 70-80k. (Family member who bought similar in 1991).
So in the 30 years between 1960 and 1990 it increased around 15 times. In the 28 years between 1990 and 2018 it increased around 6-7 times.
Hmmm.
General inflation and therefore wage inflation would have been very substantially higher in the first 30 years than in the subsequent 28.
I just love how butthurt right wingers get at mass protests. Stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity.
As opposed to the two plus years of stamping their feet and sulking in an endlessly unattractive petulant self-pity-fest of Remainderdom?
See, look! You're doing it right now! The lack of self-awareness of petulant Brexiteers when they're at their most objectionably self-pitying is kinda adorable. I have to admit, though. I do *understand* why you're so angry. The remainers have been trying to tell you for years what was going to happen, and you ignored them. And then the remainers were proved absolutely correct and the chaos unfolded exactly as everyone told you they would. Nobody likes being proved so hilariously, catastrophically, consistently and publicly wrong. I feel your pain.
Angry? Nope. You'll know when we're angry. We'll quietly, with little fuss, go and eject from power all the arseholes who haven't learnt to do as they were told....
It sounds, Mr Mark, as though you are slowly turning against the Conservatives.....
I see we are now wibbling about whether whether the rally has attracted over half a million or not. .
I see a lot more people querying whether the actual size matters or not than those wibbling about the size. The script for this day was written months ago.
Every time there is a rally on anything - left or right - people whine that rallies don’t count.
It’s incredibly tedious.
The point is is that upwards of half a million feel passionately enough about the clusterfuck that is Brexit to get of their arse and protest about it.
Agreed. The number is clearly impressive, and way more than I expected. It may concentrate a few minds in Westminster.
On the other hand, I am struggling to remember a march in Britain that changed anything. A million and a half marched against the Iraq war, and it did nothing. 400,000 turned up for foxhunting - zip.
Can any PB-er recall a march, in Britain, that changed things significantly? The only possibility I can think of is Jarrow, which changed attitudes over time
Protests often work slowly. Blair would have been remembered differently if he had listened to the marchers, and perhaps listening to the countryside marchers would have dealt with some grievances that festered into Brexitism. May ought to similarly listen.
EFTA would probably be the logical place (assuming it allows for control of immigration which a lot of people wanted)
I think it has an emergency brake on immigration, but it doesn't end FoM. But immigration from the EU is plummeting anyway. So it's less of an issue.
You cannot have EFTA alone without agreeing the backstop for NI first and Barnier has been clear that requires SM + CU for NI before the future trading relationship between the UK and EU can be agreed, including the UK entering the EFTA pillar
Why? If the UK leaves the EU and applies to join EFTA that is a matter for the EFTA states. Where does Barnier come into it?
As we need EU approval to join the EFTA pillar of the EEA
EFTA alone is not enough, Barnier wants SM+CU for the NI backstop (and most NI voters want to stay in the SM +CU anyway). May should agree that then move onto FTA talks in the transition period, which can move to for GB only before the next general election. The DUP may complain but they represent barely more than a third of NI voters and will not no confidence the government and put Corbyn and McDonnell in either
I don't think that's quite true. the main concern of the DUP is to ensure that there are no borders between NI and GB. if they think that is nailed on they will bring down the government regardless of the consequences. It'd still be better than crossing their red line. May seems to know this.
There will be no borders between NI and GB inshe accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
The level of ignorance displayed about our political system is shocking. That the EU don't understand it isn't wholly surprising, because they never have cared about or even realised their ignorance, and most of them are possessed of the intellectual capacity of a stuffed donkey anyway. But you have no such excuses. To spell it out in simple language:
No Parliament can bind its successor. Therefore, May cannot guarantee a 'permanent' backstop.
You can hedge and twist and turn and post silly numbers all you like. The simple fact however is that Europe is asking for something we can't give them. They may not realise it (heck, does that drug addled nobody in charge of the Commission even know today's not Thursday any more?) but they are.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
If Parliament votes for the backstop it will be included in the Withdrawal Agreement which will be legally binding on future Parliaments under international law
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
Interesting numbers.
£500k in Morden is a normal 3 bed semi give or take.
In 1990 that would have been about 70-80k. (Family member who bought similar in 1991).
So in the 30 years between 1960 and 1990 it increased around 15 times. In the 28 years between 1990 and 2018 it increased around 6-7 times.
Hmmm.
The average wage in the UK (don't have the figures for London but it would have been higher there) was £700 in 1960, £13,750 in 1990 and £27.750 in 2017.
So you could buy that house for 7 times a single persons average salary in 1960 around 5.5 times their salary in 1990, not a lot of difference there, but last year it would be costing around 16 times their salary.
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
More seriously, the Brexit march demonstrates that the wounds from Brexit will not heal easily.
The arguments we're having with Brussels are not the problem. In time, the UK and the EU will realise that they need to have a productive relationship, because it is both their best interests.
The problems we're having are internal. And part of the problem is that the political class is obsessed with the negotiations. We've perhaps never had a government so lacking in dialog with their own population.
I don't know what the solution is, because there Theresa May is emotionally unable to connect with people, and the negotiations are entering their final leg.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
I've just read a superb book by Will Storr called Selfie which discusses those types of things. One of the best I've read in the last five years. The first 50 pages are about ancient Greece and the next 50 about Christianity in the middle ages, so it isn't just about selfies, smartphones, social media, etc.
I don’t see what wanting to be able to buy a house and have a decent life has to do with being self obsessed.
Do you think you ought to be able to buy a house in London?
I think that if nearly everyone couldn't afford the house they live in, unless they bought years ago, then house prices are too high and will have a correction.
Interest rates were much higher in 92 when I bought my first house at 3 times salary, and mortgage was 40% of my income.
My grandparents bought a house in Morden, south London in 1960 for £5000, it's now worth over half a million, my Grandfather was a milkman and my Grandmother a part time school dinner lady.
Are people with those sort of jobs ever going to be able to buy a family home again?
Interesting numbers.
£500k in Morden is a normal 3 bed semi give or take.
In 1990 that would have been about 70-80k. (Family member who bought similar in 1991).
So in the 30 years between 1960 and 1990 it increased around 15 times. In the 28 years between 1990 and 2018 it increased around 6-7 times.
Hmmm.
The Ogdens paid £575 for their house in Coronation Street in 1964 with the estate agent saying equivalent houses were going for 'two to three thousand' in London:
Just so everyone knows, the Brexit march is the lead story on CNN in the US.
Only kidding, it doesn't even get a mention.
More seriously, the Brexit march demonstrates that the wounds from Brexit will not heal easily.
The arguments we're having with Brussels are not the problem. In time, the UK and the EU will realise that they need to have a productive relationship, because it is both their best interests.
The problems we're having are internal. And part of the problem is that the political class is obsessed with the negotiations. We've perhaps never had a government so lacking in dialog with their own population.
I don't know what the solution is, because there Theresa May is emotionally unable to connect with people, and the negotiations are entering their final leg.
We've become a 'take it from them and give it to me' society.
The failure of the economy to 'life all boats' meant that for some to get richer wealth had to be transferred from others.
To justify this wealth transfer it was easier to demonise those from whom it was being taken.
Its a process which began about 15 years ago - when levels of home ownership started falling being a good indicator of a changing society.
It is an entitlement society where many younger people feel entitled to everything without having to strive or work for it.
My children in their forties do not feel like that so I guess it is those in their thirties and younger.
Perhaps brought about by a culture instilled by teachers and easy exams where no one fails - not sure.
I've just read a superb book by Will Storr called Selfie which discusses those types of things. One of the best I've read in the last five years. The first 50 pages are about ancient Greece and the next 50 about Christianity in the middle ages, so it isn't just about selfies, smartphones, social media, etc.
I don’t see what wanting to be able to buy a house and have a decent life has to do with being self obsessed.
Do you think you ought to be able to buy a house in London?
I think that if nearly everyone couldn't afford the house they live in, unless they bought years ago, then house prices are too high and will have a correction.
Interest rates were much higher in 92 when I bought my first house at 3 times salary, and mortgage was 40% of my income.
I agree with that. But I think it needs the young to start voting with their feet to help bring the change. As long as they continue to pay the silly rents, nothing will change.
Comments
A great first post.
I think you're right, most people don't want revolution, they just want their reasonable expectations in life met -- a steady job with prospects, the chance to get on the property ladder, settle down, have a family. These are not unreasonable things to ask. Unfortunately most of these things are difficult if not impossible for the younger generations now.
Most of the upheavals in recent years can be traced to the structural problems you mention. Corbynism is a middle-class university-educated revolt by people who expected starter homes and steady jobs and got five person houseshares and endless unpaid internships. Brexitism is a different manifestation of the same problem. The country's full, there are too many here already, immigrants will live twenty people to a house.
The trouble is while the problem is easy to identify, no-one's come up with a workable solution yet that doesn't trash the economy...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lottery/u-s-mega-millions-lottery-hits-record-1-6-billion-after-no-winners-on-friday-idUSKCN1MU0FO
The Tories need to risk p***ing off a large part of their voter base by explicitly working to reduce house prices in real (and probably nominal) terms. So far all I see is tinkering at the edges.
Welcome aboard Bournville.
What way they swing wrong is a complete unknown for which I have no intuition.
My reasoning is that if people get the chance to go yay or nay on the Deal, there may be less unrest and discontent afterwards of the "we never voted for this!" variety. The "get the voters to dip their hands in the blood" philosophy.
Then again, though, given that otherwise the Tories will just carry the can for imposing a specific Brexit on the population, of which any negatives (and let's face it, even the most ardent Brexiteer sees that there'll be some negatives of some degree) will get blamed on them - why should I, or any non-Tory, worry for them?
From a strictly partisan point of view, the Tories should most want a Deal Referendum (I'm searching for a name there that isn't "Peoples Vote" as the last one was also a Peoples Vote, or Second Referendum, because that implies it's a plain rerun of the exact same question) and non-Tories should most not want a Deal Referendum.
If Brexit screws things up in any significant way, it'll be as much of a drag on the Party that took it through (and resisted any attempts for a say on how it was done) as the Winter of Discontent, or Black Wednesday. If not more so.
"Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
1h1 hour ago
Germany, Forsa poll:
CDU/CSU-EPP: 27% (-1)
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 21% (+2)
AfD-EFDD: 15% (+1)
SPD-S&D: 14% (-2)
LINKE-LEFT: 9%
FDP-ALDE: 9%"
https://www.ft.com/content/2d510aca-d2c7-11e8-9a3c-5d5eac8f1ab4
I do not see how a second referendum comes about
However, if remain reversed the vote would remainers and leavers care to speculate what happens next
There are now no other alternatives than No Deal (which likely leads to Remain in EUref2 before Brexit day according to polling, you could expect well over a million in a New Year People's vote march if No Deal), SM + CU indefinitely for the whole UK or SM + CU for NI and FTA for GB. May apparently already told Varadkar she accepts the Irish backstop needs to be permanent.
I also think it is clear, and was even clear - albeit somewhat less so - at the time of the campaign, that Turkish accession was most unlikely to occur in the first place.
My general inclination, though, was that politicians who jet around the world mouthing strongly-worded but strictly speaking "can't-hold-me-to-anything" platitudes at international conferences about how much they welcome the prospect of progress in Turkey's EU accession talks, have simply no right to complain when people do hold them to it. It's tough, and diplomacy would be easier if you could talk out of different sides of your mouth in different settings without a free press reporting it or voters reacting to the things they aren't meant to hear, but we live in a democracy and my sympathy is most severely limited.
No Parliament can bind its successor. Therefore, May cannot guarantee a 'permanent' backstop.
You can hedge and twist and turn and post silly numbers all you like. The simple fact however is that Europe is asking for something we can't give them. They may not realise it (heck, does that drug addled nobody in charge of the Commission even know today's not Thursday any more?) but they are.
Therefore, in a few weeks we will end up with no deal. Which is infuriating and stupid and will be extremely damaging to everybody, but was inevitable the moment we voted to leave.
But yes, it's bonkers that the SPD went back into coalition - they genuinely felt they were doing it in the national interest, but the nation isn't impressed.
Because painting yourself into a corner is a bad idea. Doing it with *landmines*, as the Brexit Buccaneers have done, is especially dim.
Also, FWIW, if the EU are all simpletons, what does that say about the Brexit Buccaneers, who the EU have managed to outmaneuver, outplay and outclass at every single turn?
I guess by your reasoning Brexiteers would have to be bona fide clinically brain dead.
Which kinda fits.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1053676697206304768
I think the same will happen for May, the country (barring some extremes) understand she got a hospital pass from Cameron and will give her some leeway or the Tories leeway if there is a no deal outcome at the next GE.
Trial by combat, two LBC champions, James O'Brien and Nigel Farage, to the death, no rules.
Survivor gets the final say on Brexit.
It is the Brexit one in London you're talking about, not the EDL one in Manchester isn't it?
The Tories' best hope is that Corbyn is still the alternative. That will drive their supporters to the polls like nothing else.
It would be odd if any did considering there are twice the number of British people who travel abroad than foreign people who travel to this country.
Theresa May is doing excellent job and her handling of Brexit has been flawless /s
Boris Johnson would make an excellent Prime Minister /s
Liam Fox isn't a disgrace and a national security risk /s
I might even buy PB a round.
This is what irritates people about millennials.
A recent BBC report suggested a possible fudge mechanism on the ‘permanent’ bit:
Brussels noted with approval that the prime minister had talked about a process for deciding when it should come to an end instead of a date - a formula that was "event-driven" rather than time-specific.
It was also much closer to the phrase agreed with the EU that any backstop would be in place "unless and until" another solution is found.
And it would be legal for the EU to commit to during the Brexit process whereas a permanent customs solution was not, confirmed a European official who quoted the European treaties....
The lack of self-awareness of petulant Brexiteers when they're at their most objectionably self-pitying is kinda adorable.
I have to admit, though. I do *understand* why you're so angry. The remainers have been trying to tell you for years what was going to happen, and you ignored them.
And then the remainers were proved absolutely correct and the chaos unfolded exactly as everyone told you they would. Nobody likes being proved so hilariously, catastrophically, consistently and publicly wrong.
I feel your pain.
Can I ask if your career is London only or can you get equivalent positions in other parts of the country ?
With a cherry. The cherry's important.
He's right and everybody who disagrees with him on Brexit is wrong seems to be his moto.
Unless whoever got more votes had someone else to focus scapegoat attention on, but what were the chances of that...
Being European has diddly squat to do with the EU, even though they have tried to hijack the adjective.
You'll know when we're angry. We'll quietly, with little fuss, go and eject from power all the arseholes who haven't learnt to do as they were told....
People prefer long odds of becoming sillily wealthy vs just a millionaire
That is madness, and it results from policy decisions by governments over many decades.
What we need is a Vote on the Deal.
If, having properly scrutinised the fudge-fuck that May finally returns, we decide to go ahead, so be it. Remainerism will have been vanquished, and we must hard-headedly confront our future. Indeed, I would be quite content with that.
She isn't doing that, so I'm pretty convinced she will come back with some sort of deal. She will completely cave in to actually get it and it will not be a great deal, but she'll put some sort of deal to the HOC.
If that deal gets voted down in the House of Commons (by a combination of Labour not caring what the deal is, just wanting to push for an election, and the ERG rebelling because they hate it) *then* it should be a second referendum, but not before then.
And even then it should be a two-part question along the lines of:
1. Accept/Reject TM's deal
2. If Reject is the majority in 1., then choose either Leave With No Deal/Rescind Article 50
But I don't think it will come to that as no matter how crappy TM's deal I think it will squeeze through as there will be too much concern about what would happen after TM's deal got voted down, precisely BECAUSE leavers will fear a second referendum overturning the first and remainers fearing no deal.
Basically, I think we're on for the "exact-middle-of-the-road-satisfies-almost-nobody" awkward halfway house that the referendum result and subsequent GE vote essentially demands.
£500k in Morden is a normal 3 bed semi give or take.
In 1990 that would have been about 70-80k. (Family member who bought similar in 1991).
So in the 30 years between 1960 and 1990 it increased around 15 times.
In the 28 years between 1990 and 2018 it increased around 6-7 times.
Hmmm.
So you could buy that house for 7 times a single persons average salary in 1960 around 5.5 times their salary in 1990, not a lot of difference there, but last year it would be costing around 16 times their salary.
Interest rates were much higher in 92 when I bought my first house at 3 times salary, and mortgage was 40% of my income.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHM5jaLHECU
A similar swing away from the Tories at the next general election would easily see Corbyn become PM