Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
Major in 1996 was leading a Tory Party in office for 17 years and facing the charismatic centrist Blair.
May now is leading the Tory Party in office for only 8 years and facing the Tramp lookalike hard left Corbyn
The main difference is that Major presided over a nasty recession, so far the economy is holding up for May so far.
Not really, Major won narrowly in 1992 in a recession against Kinnock, he lost heavily in 1997 against Blair even as the economy boomed
Nothing dodgy at all, just the first clear evidence of Labour Remainers starting to move to the LDs as Corbyn continues to rule out EUref2 and Brexit year dawns
I thought you and I were agreed that the Deal is going to pass.
What you are postulating here is inconsistent with that.
If there really is compelling evidence that Labour will get hammered at the polls for failing to back EUref2 they will back EUref2.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
Corbyn is no Blair.
(Well, actually, that may not be quite true. The parallels between the two can actually be quite eerie at times. But electorally, he is no Blair even if his electoral performance in 2017 was merely underwhelming rather than Armageddon.)
But are the net-satisfaction ratings a function of the opposition leader? Surely Theresa's can still plunge even if Jezza is crap. That they haven't suggests she must be doing something right in the public's view. It can't be her deal - that remains highly unpopular. So what is the nature of this alchemy?
Authenticity - like Corbyn.
Look at the colour of her hair and compare it with other female politicians the same age (or in Nancy Pelosi's case nearly two decade older).
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Voters already know May is committed to her Deal and yet the Tories still have a clear 6% lead over Corbyn Labour with YouGov today
Commitment to her deal and getting it through are too very different things altogether. As for the Tory lead, it’s relatively meaningless at this stage. May has given a commitment to stand down before the next election which is a good thing as she blew a 20% lead in the polls in the last election. Polls when the new leader is in place should be more meaningful.
he Tories their clear lead
If that’s true, and Idoubt ve repeated.
The lesson
It’s no good clinging to that 42% like a child’s comfort. She still blew a 20% lead in the polls during the campaign; she still lost seats; and she still lost her majority. Ramping up big majorities in safe seats is meaningless.
The Tories will still need a credible social care policy whether the last attempt is ditched or not. It’s too big an issue to ignore. So far as Brexit is concerned, we’ll be out so a second referendum or not will be meaningless. People are going to be more concerned about how best to make it a success and what the domestic policy agenda, that has been ignored for too long, actually is.
It is equally no good you clinging to that Corbyn 40% like a child's comfort in your Kipper anti Tory hatred. The only reason May did not get a majority in 2017 is Labour got 40%, had May got exactly the same voteshare but Labour got 30% and the LDs got 15 to 20% May would have won a landslide of over 100 under FPTP as Thatcher did in 1983 and 1987 with almost exactly the same voteshare as May got in 2017 as the centre left vote was divided between Labour and the SDP/Liberal Alliance.
Hence today's YouGov is fantastic news for May and terrible for Corbyn as it shows the centre left vote starting to divide again as Remainers move away from Labour towards the LDs.
What the social care policy is is irrelevant, Labour will need a policy on it too and May still got 42% even with the dementia tax plan. The Tories just need to maintain as much as possible of their 2017 vote and split the centre left vote to win a majority under FPTP next time.
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
Major in 1996 was leading a Tory Party in office for 17 years and facing the charismatic centrist Blair.
May now is leading the Tory Party in office for only 8 years and facing the Tramp lookalike hard left Corbyn
The main difference is that Major presided over a nasty recession, so far the economy is holding up for May so far.
Good point. The Iraq invasion is now infamous, but it didn't stop Tone getting re-elected, under benign economic circumstances, in 2005. So perhaps the old wisdom that nothing trumps the economy still holds. If so, the No-Deal Leavers are in for a massive shock; they're assuming the public will endure the Brexit economic misery they plan to engineer with Dunkirk stoicism and grit.
Mr. NorthWales, I wonder how much that depends on order of voting.
If May's deal gets roundly rejected and then there's a vote on another referendum, that would surely increase the likelihood of said vote passing.
Particularly if it is backed by May as the only way to get her deal passed.
TM is implacably opposed to a second referendum and she is more likely to head to no deal than put forward the legislation for a second referendum
She is, at heart, a Remainer, and so is her husband.
i) How do you know Philip May's views - is he on record anywhere? ii) Would you have made the same observation about a male politician's wife?
Do you seriously doubt that she discusses her options with her husband?
Of course I don't - but this is the first time I've read you discussing the views of a politician's spouse.
Unless I've missed it?
Mrs Corbyn thinks.....
Mrs Cable thinks.....
Mr Murrell thinks...*
Do feel free to direct me to your previous posts on spouses' opinions.
*Though as the CE of the SNP his view might carry more political weight.....
I think it IS the first time I've discussed the views of a politician's spouse. That's because it is particularly pertinent now and not because the PM is a female.
I look forward to your insight into the views of Mrs Corbyn. Lady Cable and Mr Murrell.
Given that Corbyn divorced over a disagreement on education, I think the evidence for spousal influence is pretty limited.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Theresa May on the Marr show at 10:00am. I wonder if she'll have anything new to say.
I suspect she'll say that her critics, - both Remainers and Brexiteers - risk damaging democracy if they oppose her plan. What a hypocrite, given what she's up to in parliament!
nOtHiNg HaS cHaNgEd
Indeed - we are heading for a Tory hard Brexit. The idiots who voted Leave will have plenty of time to reflect on their foolishness...
Any Hard brexit is Labour-facilitated.
They could stop it.
They could. t.
Oh, I thik there will be plenty of shit to go round.
Magic Grandpa will lose some of his shine to the young Europhile left. And the LibDms will be able ot say "We didn't have enough MPs to make the difference. But Labour did...."
Yes, Labour would deserve some of the shit. But they are confident, rightly, that it will be a lot less than the Tories get.
Yet another evidence less based assertion, as this morning's YouGov shows Brexit is now hammering Labour as they plunge to Kinnock 1992 levels and the LDs surge to double figures while the Tories remain on 40%
A poll conducted over two weeks covering an extended Bank Holiday period! Nothing in the least dodgy about that we can be sure.
Nothing dodgy at all, just the first clear evidence of Labour Remainers starting to move to the LDs as Corbyn continues to rule out EUref2 and Brexit year dawns
Are you really saying that you have never encountered the suggestion that polls over Bank Holiday periods are best avoided?
Of course he has, usually by folk who don't like the findings of the poll. Strangely* these folk tend to have no problem with 'holiday' polls when they like the numbers.
I know this is a gambling site but the reality is most punters would be better off if they never bet. Otherwise bookies would be out of business quickly.
True as a general comment.
But you CAN make money (and lots of it) by betting on things where your level of knowledge and insight is vastly in excess of joe average.
Like, for example, every single one of the people on here when it comes to politics.
Replying to yesterdays comments on China displacing the USA. Well don't count your chickens on that. Bad things are brewing in China. Xi Jinping China is beactracking on China's opening to the World. People may have heard about the ratcheting up of Antin foreigner rhetoric in China but you need to read about in detail to feel it...
You can read plenty of worried comments about not sticking out and about you should stay safe and get your money out and move your family. Even some talk of Boxer rebellion 2.0.
Basically China opened to the World to get developed but only wanted the wealth not the pluralism that comes with it. It's now trying to close the door again. I don't think it will work, if they want to stay rich that is.
Of course it's not just Foreigners feeling the pressure, there is a reason for millions of Overseas Chinese around the Pacific Rim and anyone without secure connections desperating trying to get money abroad and visa's. There is no protection in China, your fortunes can change on a whim,
Historically, China has been ascendant. The period of decline from the mid 19th to the late 20th century is atypical if you take a long view of history, as most Chinese do. You can overstate national characteristics, but I would say the Chinese are typically very well organised, clever and ambitious. At the international level, China has the heft, the organisation, the money and increasingly the military power to get its way.
China has problems: governance, corruption and it feels like it is in a property bubble. You put your finger on something interesting. How few foreigners there are there. I get the impression fewer than before despite the growth.
There have been many periods of decline, and brilliance, in Chinese history. The whole period between the end of the Tang and the rise of the Ming was pretty grim.
Imperial China certainly had grim periods, but to classify the entire span between the tenth and fourteenth centuries as such is too broad. That period includes the Song dynasty, which was one of the major dynasties, and the Yuan dynasty where China did far better under the Mongols than anyone else. Even the interregnum between the Tang and Song dynasties was marked by economic growth.
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
I think people respect her steady demeanor and persistence. They don't think much of the Deal, but don't in general feel they have enough insight to judge whether she could have got a better one.
And an important word in your comment is "yet". At some point, she will finally run out of road and need to do something with the ball instead of kicking it some more. We'll see what people make of things then.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Christ, tell me about it. I tried airport exchanges because they have a guaranteed buyback at purchase rates, but that's logistically difficult: I ended up carrying about 3K in my go-bag, which is beyond daft. Things like Tramonex wanted a minimum number of transactions per period. I settled for opening Euro and Dollar accounts with a high-street bank: the conversion cost is about 3% (so to convert and convert back costs about 6%). That's not good but its a good compromise. Every £1000 I convert costs about £60 and I'll take that as quite a low cost for peace-of-mind.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Not if you do it properly.
Given your profession i assume you're not bullshitting. So if you do have any insights i'll be grateful to hear them.
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
Major in 1996 was leading a Tory Party in office for 17 years and facing the charismatic centrist Blair.
May now is leading the Tory Party in office for only 8 years and facing the Tramp lookalike hard left Corbyn
The main difference is that Major presided over a nasty recession, so far the economy is holding up for May so far.
Good point. The Iraq invasion is now infamous, but it didn't stop Tone getting re-elected, under benign economic circumstances, in 2005. So perhaps the old wisdom that nothing trumps the economy still holds. If so, the No-Deal Leavers are in for a massive shock; they're assuming the public will endure the Brexit economic misery they plan to engineer with Dunkirk stoicism and grit.
That is not entirely true though is it, as I said the Tories won in 1992 in a recession against the leftwing Kinnock but lost in 1997 when the economy was booming against the centrist Blair. Even in a recession a government can win if the alternative is unpalatable
Voters already know May is committed to her Deal and yet the Tories still have a clear 6% lead over Corbyn Labour with YouGov today
Commitment to her deal and getting it through are too very different things altogether. As for the Tory lead, it’s relatively meaningless at this stage. May has given a commitment to stand down before the next election which is a good thing as she blew a 20% lead in the polls in the last election. Polls when the new leader is in place should be more meaningful.
he Tories their clear lead
If that’s true, and Idoubt ve repeated.
The lesson
It’s no good clinging to that 42% like a child’s comfort. She still blew a 20% lead in the polls during the campaign; she still lost seats; and she still lost her majority. Ramping up big majorities in safe seats is meaningless.
The Tories will still need a credible social care policy whether the last attempt is ditched or not. It’s too big an issue to ignore. So far as Brexit is concerned, we’ll be out so a second referendum or not will be meaningless. People are going to be more concerned about how best to make it a success and what the domestic policy agenda, that has been ignored for too long, actually is.
What the social care policy is is irrelevant, Labour will need a policy on it too and May still got 42% even with the dementia tax plan. The Tories just need to maintain as much as possible of their 2017 vote and split the centre left vote to win a majority under FPTP next time.
Shame you don’t know know the difference between being anti-Tory and anti-May. I suppose the 117 MPswho voted against her in the confidence vote are all suffering from “Kipper anti-Tory hatred” too. Such childishness is, well, childish.
You can do as much if only analysis as you like. She lost her majority in a snap election she called. Vote share is irrelevant. Labour eroded a 20% lead in the polls and did much better than anyone expected. May didn’t win a landslide. She lost her majority.
Against a Labour opposition wracked with antisemitism and misogyny, today’s YouGov poll is poor. It’s a the high end of the range it’s been in for a long time.
The Tories need a new set of policies of which social care is one. Copying Labour’s policies as May did with electricity price capping, shows simply intellectual bankruptcy. New policies can only come with a new leader.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Christ, tell me about it. I tried airport exchanges because they have a guaranteed buyback at purchase rates, but that's logistically difficult: I ended up carrying about 3K in my go-bag, which is beyond daft. Things like Tramonex wanted a minimum number of transactions per period. I settled for opening Euro and Dollar accounts with a high-street bank: the conversion cost is about 3% (so to convert and convert back costs about 6%). That's not good but its a good compromise. Every £1000 I convert costs about £60 and I'll take that as quite a low cost for peace-of-mind.
What about just getting a Revolut account and putting whatever money you want in the appropriate currency. The premium account with unlimited currency exchanges at bank interchange rates is £6 a month..
Replying to yesterdays comments on China displacing the USA. Well don't count your chickens on that. Bad things are brewing in China. Xi Jinping China is beactracking on China's opening to the World. People may have heard about the ratcheting up of Antin foreigner rhetoric in China but you need to read about in detail to feel it. I was watching a You tube There has been a big crackdown on Churches. Boards proclaiming socialism have been springing up, also lots of quotations and pictures of the leader. Anti Foreigner rhetoric has increased, local authorities have tried to stamp out
You can read plenty of worried comments about not sticking out and about you should stay safe and get your money out and move your family. Even some talk of Boxer rebellion 2.0.
Basically China opened to the World to get developed but only wanted the wealth not the pluralism that comes with it. It's now trying to close the door again. I don't think it will work, if they want to stay rich that is.
Of course it's not just Foreigners feeling the pressure, there is a reason for millions of Overseas Chinese around the Pacific Rim and anyone without secure connections desperating trying to get money abroad and visa's. There is no protection in China, your fortunes can change on a whim,
Historically, China has been ascendant. The period of decline from the mid 19th to the late 20th century is atypical if you take a long view of history, as most Chinese do. You can overstate national characteristics, but I would say the Chinese are typically very well organised, clever and ambitious. At the international level, China has the heft, the organisation, the money and increasingly the military power to get its way.
China has problems: governance, corruption and it feels like it is in a property bubble. You put your finger on something interesting. How few foreigners there are there. I get the impression fewer than before despite the growth.
There have been many periods of decline, and brilliance, in Chinese history. The whole period between the end of the Tang and the rise of the Ming was pretty grim.
Imperial China certainly had grim periods, but to classify the entire span between the tenth and fourteenth centuries as such is too broad. That period includes the Song dynasty, which was one of the major dynasties, and the Yuan dynasty where China did far better under the Mongols than anyone else. Even the interregnum between the Tang and Song dynasties was marked by economic growth.
The conquests by the Liao, Jin, and Mongols (in particular) involved appalling loss of life, and all three groups treated the Chinese as a conquered race. I agree that the Song were pretty good.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Christ, tell me about it. I tried airport exchanges because they have a guaranteed buyback at purchase rates, but that's logistically difficult: I ended up carrying about 3K in my go-bag, which is beyond daft. Things like Tramonex wanted a minimum number of transactions per period. I settled for opening Euro and Dollar accounts with a high-street bank: the conversion cost is about 3% (so to convert and convert back costs about 6%). That's not good but its a good compromise. Every £1000 I convert costs about £60 and I'll take that as quite a low cost for peace-of-mind.
What about just getting a Revolut account and putting whatever money you want in the appropriate currency. The premium account with unlimited currency exchanges at bank interchange rates is £6 a month..
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
After an extensive 12 second google search I can confirm your argument is garbage
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
I was referring to March 2019. If we no deal, markets and sterling will tank. If we remain, they will soar. If May's deal is agreed, I think they will rise a bit because uncertainty will be reduced. Plenty of scope for hedging by wealthy investors. I'd be hedging against no deal and betting on the 3/1 offered for no deal. I think that's why it's too short.
I think "no deal" will happen. To cope with this I have opened a Euro account and have moved some money into Euros, to match the money that I moved into a Dollar account in 2017. I think people who hedge big money will do their hedging by moving money into different currencies or purchase insurance policies (Lloyd's will insure anything for the right premium). I don't think they'll open a betting account nor go into the local bookie's shop.
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
The only issue is that Forex conversion rake is even more severe than bookie's overrounds !
Christ, tell me about it. I tried airport exchanges because they have a guaranteed buyback at purchase rates, but that's logistically difficult: I ended up carrying about 3K in my go-bag, which is beyond daft. Things like Tramonex wanted a minimum number of transactions per period. I settled for opening Euro and Dollar accounts with a high-street bank: the conversion cost is about 3% (so to convert and convert back costs about 6%). That's not good but its a good compromise. Every £1000 I convert costs about £60 and I'll take that as quite a low cost for peace-of-mind.
What about just getting a Revolut account and putting whatever money you want in the appropriate currency. The premium account with unlimited currency exchanges at bank interchange rates is £6 a month..
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
Major in 1996 was leading a Tory Party in office for 17 years and facing the charismatic centrist Blair.
May now is leading the Tory Party in office for only 8 years and facing the Tramp lookalike hard left Corbyn
The main difference is that Major presided over a nasty recession, so far the economy is holding up for May so far.
Good point. The Iraq invasion is now infamous, but it didn't stop Tone getting re-elected, under benign economic circumstances, in 2005. So perhaps the old wisdom that nothing trumps the economy still holds. If so, the No-Deal Leavers are in for a massive shock; they're assuming the public will endure the Brexit economic misery they plan to engineer with Dunkirk stoicism and grit.
46-51% (depending on the polling company) of the voters favour Brexit and most of them support the Conservatives. Combined with right wing dislike of Corbyn, that keeps the Conservatives on 40%.
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The export ban on beef springs to mind.
Decent call - though I am not sure that us not being in the EU would have had any effect on that.
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The BRRD. It's a nasty piece of EU legislation designed to protect the Eurozone but we have to implement it as well despite having the means (our own currency) to avoid having to bail in depositors in the event of a bank going under.
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
After an extensive 12 second google search I can confirm your argument is garbage
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
After an extensive 12 second google search I can confirm your argument is garbage
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
After an extensive 12 second google search I can confirm your argument is garbage
I think the difference is that they were just fringe eccentrics: Spock and assorted backbench oddballs and malcontents. With Theresa, her euro-sceptic tormentors have actually either held Brexit-critical government positions (Boris, DD) or lead one of the Tories' coalition partners (Rees-Mogg). Today's public have seen how the euro-sceptics performed when given responsibility, and it wasn't pleasant viewing.
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years.
Doesn't that rather depend on where standards etc are set?
If it only is in the purview of the EU, then we've had a voice.
If, however, its an international standard, then the EU has negotiated on our behalf.
Moving forward, we'll have no say on standards set solely in a market we want to sell into (the EU, the US, Australia), but will have a say on standards set internationally - unlike individual EU members, who have delegated that right to the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The export ban on beef springs to mind.
Decent call - though I am not sure that us not being in the EU would have had any effect on that.
There would certainly have been multiple bans (such as the 10-year French ban) but there would not have been an overall, blanket prohibition on exports no matter whether another country wanted to import it or not.
That still angers me, even years later. Leaving aside the fact that we were at most the second worst affected by the outbreak, we were one of only two countries in Europe (the other being Switzerland) that had measures in place to remove potentially infected material.
Yet, we were the ones slapped with the ban, for daring to be honest and dealing with the problem. I still say the European Commission on Agriculture should face criminal charges for what they did.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The export ban on beef springs to mind.
Decent call - though I am not sure that us not being in the EU would have had any effect on that.
There would certainly have been multiple bans (such as the 10-year French ban) but there would not have been an overall, blanket prohibition on exports no matter whether another country wanted to import it or not.
That still angers me, even years later. Leaving aside the fact that we were at most the second worst affected by the outbreak, we were one of only two countries in Europe (the other being Switzerland) that had measures in place to remove potentially infected material.
Yet, we were the ones slapped with the ban, for daring to be honest and dealing with the problem. I still say the European Commission on Agriculture should face criminal charges for what they did.
My uncle was responsible for fixing the problem and took a huge amount of flak for doing so*, but it's thanks to him that we have the high quality standards that we do today
(edit: * so much so that he tried to resign several times, but Gentleman John wouldn't allow him to)
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The BRRD. It's a nasty piece of EU legislation designed to protect the Eurozone but we have to implement it as well despite having the means (our own currency) to avoid having to bail in depositors in the event of a bank going under.
Did the UK fight tooth and nail to prevent its adoption? I genuinely don't remember.
My uncle was responsible for fixing the problem and took a huge amount of flak for doing so, but it's thanks to him that we have the high quality standards that we do today
I would have been a damn sight less angry if the French with their 305,000 (belatedly) admitted cases of BSE or 12 million actual cases had been pro-active in dealing with their crisis, or at the very least, not broken every law in the book to make us suffer so they could profit - for which they and Barnier himself, who was involved, remember, have never faced any sanction at all.
The enormous strain on my father (who was also heavily involved in trying to sort out the mess) very nearly killed him.
My uncle was responsible for fixing the problem and took a huge amount of flak for doing so, but it's thanks to him that we have the high quality standards that we do today
I would have been a damn sight less angry if the French with their 305,000 (belatedly) admitted cases of BSE or 12 million actual cases had been pro-active in dealing with their crisis, or at the very least, not broken every law in the book to make us suffer so they could profit - for which they and Barnier himself, who was involved, remember, have never faced any sanction at all.
The enormous strain on my father (who was also heavily involved in trying to sort out the mess) very nearly killed him.
Especially as we provided the EU with GPS coordinates for where the bodies were buried (literally)
Interesting analysis. By rights Theresa should now be in the same boat as Gentleman John circa 1996: both were worthy pragmatists with no particularly interest in the EU trying to keep the eurosceptic nutters at bay for the good of the nation. Yet the public turned on him as they haven't, yet, turned on her. Is it because the Tory eurosceptic lineup is now such a grotesque array of fanatics, chancers and incompetents that the public is simply judging Theresa against those pitted against her?
I think people respect her steady demeanor and persistence. They don't think much of the Deal, but don't in general feel they have enough insight to judge whether she could have got a better one.
And an important word in your comment is "yet". At some point, she will finally run out of road and need to do something with the ball instead of kicking it some more. We'll see what people make of things then.
The other point is what they were up against. Major faced Blair, who was at the time universally popular outside die-hard Tories and viewed as almost too credible an alternative in that one of the few attack lines Major had was that New Labour were too slick by half.
May faces Corbyn, whom even his defenders admit is a marmite figure, is mistrusted on the big issue of the day by lots of his own voters, and is possibly the least likely Labour leader in history to attract Tories into his camp. But is also entirely immovable because of he has devotees who will forgive him any idiocy or abhorrence and they now control and populate the Labour membership.
Is it confirmation that Brexit is become the English Nationalist project, or is Dan trying to get away from the bald, white, Anglospheric bloke image? Bit of both I'd guess.
Is it confirmation that Brexit is become the English Nationalist project, or is Dan trying to get away from the bald, white, Anglospheric bloke image? Bit of both I'd guess.
Or just pointing out what a lunatic Andrew Adonis is?
It instead of a cross of St George we were talking about a Saltire would you say the same thing?
Is it confirmation that Brexit is become the English Nationalist project, or is Dan trying to get away from the bald, white, Anglospheric bloke image? Bit of both I'd guess.
Or just pointing out what a lunatic Andrew Adonis is?
It instead of a cross of St George we were talking about a Saltire would you say the same thing?
If a (disastrously failed) SNP parliamentary candidate tweeted a pic of himself avec Saltire & saying that, I'd a) think he was a bit of a dick, and b) assume Hannan was RTing it for almost diametrically opposite reasons.
Indeed. And I agree with Mr K. The years of negotiations will also give opportunity for thought.
I'm afraid I don't agree with Mr Kinabalu. The Deal means either rapid capitulation to the Vassal State, which I don't think suits the UK - it's not Norway - or FTA death by a thousand cuts, which comes to the same thing ultimately. Brexit will dominate for the foreseeable. Remaining is the only outcome where there's nothing further to negotiate, even if a part of the population rejects it outright.
Rapid capitulation to the Vassal State is all we deserve. I'm sure we'll be well looked after within the warm embrace of the EU rather than shivering in the cold outside.
Though I found Mr Kinabalu's contribution thoughtful and interesting, it didn't convince me to vote for The Deal. I'm still a Remainer.
Indeed. There's no interest in everyone agreeing. On that note, I wouldn't say the Vassal State is what the UK deserves. It's what we're going to get. The EU simply won't trust us unless we do what they tell us and everything is totally nailed down. Being outside rather than inside we will be unable to push back.
We have been a vassal state for years. It is only the Eurofanatics who can't see that. The pretence of control was simply a means to keep us onboard with the project and in the end a majority of the public saw that. Including many Remain voters who, if polls and vox pops are to be believed only voted Remain for fear of something worse.
If nothing else the Brexit process has highlighted this so that only the genuine fanatics can be under an delusions about our influence within the EU.
What has been imposed on us that we did not want imposed? I am sure there must have been stuff - really blindingly obvious, big ticket stuff that our government fought tooth and nail to prevent but just couldn't - but I cannot for the life of me think of what it was.
The BRRD. It's a nasty piece of EU legislation designed to protect the Eurozone but we have to implement it as well despite having the means (our own currency) to avoid having to bail in depositors in the event of a bank going under.
Did the UK fight tooth and nail to prevent its adoption? I genuinely don't remember.
Comments
What you are postulating here is inconsistent with that.
If there really is compelling evidence that Labour will get hammered at the polls for failing to back EUref2 they will back EUref2.
Meaning EUref2 will happen.
Meaning the Deal will NOT pass.
?
However I do take your point about the 3/1 (although my concerns expressed in previous posts are still valid)
Look at the colour of her hair and compare it with other female politicians the same age (or in Nancy Pelosi's case nearly two decade older).
Hence today's YouGov is fantastic news for May and terrible for Corbyn as it shows the centre left vote starting to divide again as Remainers move away from Labour towards the LDs.
What the social care policy is is irrelevant, Labour will need a policy on it too and May still got 42% even with the dementia tax plan. The Tories just need to maintain as much as possible of their 2017 vote and split the centre left vote to win a majority under FPTP next time.
*Not strangely
But you CAN make money (and lots of it) by betting on things where your level of knowledge and insight is vastly in excess of joe average.
Like, for example, every single one of the people on here when it comes to politics.
:-)
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/01/06/asia-pacific/chinas-xi-urges-military-ready-war-amid-risks-challenges-2019/
And an important word in your comment is "yet". At some point, she will finally run out of road and need to do something with the ball instead of kicking it some more. We'll see what people make of things then.
You can do as much if only analysis as you like. She lost her majority in a snap election she called. Vote share is irrelevant. Labour eroded a 20% lead in the polls and did much better than anyone expected. May didn’t win a landslide. She lost her majority.
Against a Labour opposition wracked with antisemitism and misogyny, today’s YouGov poll is poor. It’s a the high end of the range it’s been in for a long time.
The Tories need a new set of policies of which social care is one. Copying Labour’s policies as May did with electricity price capping, shows simply intellectual bankruptcy. New policies can only come with a new leader.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/China-tech/China-s-research-papers-lead-the-world-in-cutting-edge-tech
https://anmblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c565553ef0192aba25169970d-pi
If it only is in the purview of the EU, then we've had a voice.
If, however, its an international standard, then the EU has negotiated on our behalf.
Moving forward, we'll have no say on standards set solely in a market we want to sell into (the EU, the US, Australia), but will have a say on standards set internationally - unlike individual EU members, who have delegated that right to the EU.
That still angers me, even years later. Leaving aside the fact that we were at most the second worst affected by the outbreak, we were one of only two countries in Europe (the other being Switzerland) that had measures in place to remove potentially infected material.
Yet, we were the ones slapped with the ban, for daring to be honest and dealing with the problem. I still say the European Commission on Agriculture should face criminal charges for what they did.
(edit: * so much so that he tried to resign several times, but Gentleman John wouldn't allow him to)
NEW THREAD
The enormous strain on my father (who was also heavily involved in trying to sort out the mess) very nearly killed him.
May faces Corbyn, whom even his defenders admit is a marmite figure, is mistrusted on the big issue of the day by lots of his own voters, and is possibly the least likely Labour leader in history to attract Tories into his camp. But is also entirely immovable because of he has devotees who will forgive him any idiocy or abhorrence and they now control and populate the Labour membership.
https://twitter.com/AmandeepBhogal/status/1081853194848870400
Is it confirmation that Brexit is become the English Nationalist project, or is Dan trying to get away from the bald, white, Anglospheric bloke image? Bit of both I'd guess.
It instead of a cross of St George we were talking about a Saltire would you say the same thing?