In the longer run it will be pure benefit as we run our economy to suit ourselves.
Unless running our economy to suit ourselves involves long multinational supply chains.
In which case we're fucked
I wonder how other successful economies manage not being in the EU?
The UK will be less successful outside the EU. That's the point. With Brexit we aspire to be Italy, which isn't a great role model to aspire to. It's a pretty miserable place for people who want to get on. Particularly for young people. We can do better than than that. And we were doing better than that.
To be fair to Raab, the strategic significance of the Dover Calais Link is a highly specialised topic, quite opaque without years of experience or technical qualifications such as GCSE geography.
Actually our company does sell more to Inner (not Outer admittedly!) Mongolia than Ireland. Really!
What do you sell, tent pegs for yurts?
Funnily enough I had an enquiry from Mongolia a couple of months back. I did a quick reci and it looks a lot more prosperous than I had imagined. Could well be a growth market.
Mongolia is a member of the next group of countries to succeed the BRICS.
Really?
A big copper mine exporting to China, and only 3 million people?
it may become like Botswana, a small niche prosperous economy, but at the same level as BRICS in importance to UK?
The Brexiteers have found an alternative to Dover and the channel tunnel that provides access to a unique, hitherto untapped market.
In April 2019, David Davis will unveil a new tunnel crossing. With our entrance in Yorkshire, the new tunnel provides a direct multidimensional link to 1950s Britain enabling us to trade with the best possible partner, ourselves.
The Brexiteers have found an alternative to Dover and the channel tunnel that provides access to a unique, hitherto untapped market.
In April 2019, David Davis will unveil a new tunnel crossing. With our entrance in Yorkshire, the new tunnel provides a direct multidimensional link to 1950s Britain enabling us to trade with the best possible partner, ourselves.
Not your best.
Honestly, when the govt doesn’t know that Dover is important it is impossible to send it up. It’s time to brace for impact.
In the longer run it will be pure benefit as we run our economy to suit ourselves.
Unless running our economy to suit ourselves involves long multinational supply chains.
In which case we're fucked
I wonder how other successful economies manage not being in the EU?
The UK will be less successful outside the EU. That's the point. With Brexit we aspire to be Italy, which isn't a great role model to aspire to. It's a pretty miserable place for people who want to get on. Particularly for young people. We can do better than than that. And we were doing better than that.
So why did we have a referendum asking if we wanted to remain or leave?
To appease the headbangers
Sounds far fetched to me...
But lets assume for a moment Brexit really can't be delivered, that means your admitting the UK is NOT "sovereign" (even though you always claimed we were) as in your own words it's "impossible" to enact the sovereign will of the people...
As this lamentable Government confirmed in the Brexit White Paper, we were always sovereign, it just didn’t feel like it.
Do you disagree?
(Post script. Much as most of our trade _is_ via Dover, it just didn’t feel like it. To the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union that is.)
Our trade is 55% to 60% RoW and 45% to 40% EU. So how can most of our trade come via Dover?
There's a fair amount of stuff that goes - in either direction - via Rotterdam.
To be fair to Raab, the strategic significance of the Dover Calais Link is a highly specialised topic, quite opaque without years of experience or technical qualifications such as GCSE geography.
I've just watched the BBC's documentary on Charles at 70.
I think it was supposed to provide us with reassurance that he gets the difference between being heir and sovereign, and to show him as a reasoned human being.
I'm afraid I wasn't convinced.
Monarchy is not about ability or suitability. It is about institutionalising inheiritance.
I think Charles is fine, but even if he is crap, he is still king. If we want to assess and select a candidate on merit rather than genetic lottery then we should have an elected head of state.
The programme on BBC2 on "WW1: The Final Hours" was compelling history though, well worth watching.
It’s perfectly possible to support the institution whilst criticising the behaviour of the individual within it. I would have used even stronger language about Edward VIII.
There are rules about being a leading member of the royal family, and the heir, but Charlesaftv seems to think the rules don’t really apply to him, or can be bent.
If you don’t like Chas then stop supporting a system whereby heads of state are picked by a biological lottery. It really is that simple.
How does anyone “plan their affairs” to take account of anything? What are your suggestions?
Most of us have very large mortgages, and little savings, with what’s left locked into a big-name managed stakeholder pension.
We can’t really do anything about anything.
Obviously it depends on your circumstances, which is why I added the proviso 'as far as they can'. Some people won't be able to do much, some will. Obvious points, which may or may not apply, include:
- Not taking on too much debt
- Fixing low interest rates on a mortgage as far as possible
- Considering the impact of a possible hit to the economy if you're contemplating changing job
- Ensuring any pension fund is invested in a way which won't be badly hit either by a sharp rise or a sharp fall in economic confidence in the UK. In a stakeholder pension you might have a choice of funds, for example. In some cases you can switch between those funds at no cost.
- Avoiding doubling up on risk - for example, not investing your pension in your employer's company
... etc etc. I can't advise, except to advise people to think about their own circumstances.
David Cameron said leaving would not be a disaster.
Was he lying?
David Cameron put a vote to the Country on an issue we are now being told equates to economic suicide.
Doesn't really encourage me to trust a Conservative party if they were that reckless.
One of my absolute pet hates is accusations of lying when a politician expresses an opinion or prediction about what might happen. Do you not know the difference between a lie and a prediction which turns out to be wrong?
As for whether leaving will be a disaster or not, that depends on what deal we get with our EU friends, and most of all on the vote in parliament on the deal. If parliament rejects a deal, yes, there is a risk it will be a disaster. I've planned my affairs to take account of that, I suggest others do the same, as far as they can.
How does anyone “plan their affairs” to take account of anything? What are your suggestions?
Most of us have very large mortgages, and little savings, with what’s left locked into a big-name managed stakeholder pension.
I've just watched the BBC's documentary on Charles at 70.
I think it was supposed to provide us with reassurance that he gets the difference between being heir and sovereign, and to show him as a reasoned human being.
I'm afraid I wasn't convinced.
He's going to be a disaster... Luckily it'll be a relatively short reign so the monarchy should manage to survive whatever damage he does to it.
He’ll be fine, as monarchs go. Just think, in two generations we get a king (whose name escapes me) because Wills had three too many vodkas at St Andrews one night, and got off with some sort from Berkshire.
In the longer run it will be pure benefit as we run our economy to suit ourselves.
Unless running our economy to suit ourselves involves long multinational supply chains.
In which case we're fucked
I wonder how other successful economies manage not being in the EU?
The UK will be less successful outside the EU. That's the point. With Brexit we aspire to be Italy, which isn't a great role model to aspire to. It's a pretty miserable place for people who want to get on. Particularly for young people. We can do better than than that. And we were doing better than that.
What does less successful mean?
Smaller growth, fewer jobs, less tax revenue for public services and fewer opportunities than as member of the EU. Those are somewhat measurable metrics. It won't be a disaster but it will be a downgrade.
To be fair to Raab, the strategic significance of the Dover Calais Link is a highly specialised topic, quite opaque without years of experience or technical qualifications such as GCSE geography.
Actually our company does sell more to Inner (not Outer admittedly!) Mongolia than Ireland. Really!
What do you sell, tent pegs for yurts?
Funnily enough I had an enquiry from Mongolia a couple of months back. I did a quick reci and it looks a lot more prosperous than I had imagined. Could well be a growth market.
Mongolia is a member of the next group of countries to succeed the BRICS.
Really?
A big copper mine exporting to China, and only 3 million people?
it may become like Botswana, a small niche prosperous economy, but at the same level as BRICS in importance to UK?
It is one of 11 3G countries with growth of 6.3% over the years up to 2050. Not just copper but rare earths which are increasingly important.
David Cameron said leaving would not be a disaster.
Was he lying?
David Cameron put a vote to the Country on an issue we are now being told equates to economic suicide.
Doesn't really encourage me to trust a Conservative party if they were that reckless.
One of my absolute pet hates is accusations of lying when a politician expresses an opinion or prediction about what might happen. Do you not know the difference between a lie and a prediction which turns out to be wrong?
As for whether leaving will be a disaster or not, that depends on what deal we get with our EU friends, and most of all on the vote in parliament on the deal. If parliament rejects a deal, yes, there is a risk it will be a disaster. I've planned my affairs to take account of that, I suggest others do the same, as far as they can.
How does anyone “plan their affairs” to take account of anything? What are your suggestions?
Most of us have very large mortgages, and little savings, with what’s left locked into a big-name managed stakeholder pension.
We can’t really do anything about anything.
Baked beans, wet wipes and a shovel.
Getting a foreign passport, or permanent residence at least, is the key step.
David Cameron said leaving would not be a disaster.
Was he lying?
David Cameron put a vote to the Country on an issue we are now being told equates to economic suicide.
Doesn't really encourage me to trust a Conservative party if they were that reckless.
One of my absolute pet hates is accusations of lying when a politician expresses an opinion or prediction about what might happen. Do you not know the difference between a lie and a prediction which turns out to be wrong?
As for whether leaving will be a disaster or not, that depends on what deal we get with our EU friends, and most of all on the vote in parliament on the deal. If parliament rejects a deal, yes, there is a risk it will be a disaster. I've planned my affairs to take account of that, I suggest others do the same, as far as they can.
How does anyone “plan their affairs” to take account of anything? What are your suggestions?
Most of us have very large mortgages, and little savings, with what’s left locked into a big-name managed stakeholder pension.
We can’t really do anything about anything.
Come on old chap. The average age on here is probably around 55. Us leveraged youths are a small minority!
At least you have a route to an alternative citizenship...
Is there ever a push in the US for Senators to be allocated porportionally to states rather than on a flat two-per-state basis?
Currently, there is one US Senator for every 18.6m Californian voters and one per 0.3m Wyoming voters. Hardly fair.
The States are the foundation of the USA, not the individuals who inhabit the territory. Equal representation in the Senate recognises their sovereignty and gives a measure of protection to the small states from domination by their larger neighbours.
Comments
A big copper mine exporting to China, and only 3 million people?
it may become like Botswana, a small niche prosperous economy, but at the same level as BRICS in importance to UK?
NEW THREAD
- Not taking on too much debt
- Fixing low interest rates on a mortgage as far as possible
- Considering the impact of a possible hit to the economy if you're contemplating changing job
- Ensuring any pension fund is invested in a way which won't be badly hit either by a sharp rise or a sharp fall in economic confidence in the UK. In a stakeholder pension you might have a choice of funds, for example. In some cases you can switch between those funds at no cost.
- Avoiding doubling up on risk - for example, not investing your pension in your employer's company
... etc etc. I can't advise, except to advise people to think about their own circumstances.
He’ll be fine, as monarchs go. Just think, in two generations we get a king (whose name escapes me) because Wills had three too many vodkas at St Andrews one night, and got off with some sort from Berkshire.
At least you have a route to an alternative citizenship...
You're welcome.