politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nancy Pelosi 1 Donald Trump 0
Donald Trump has just announced that the Government shutdown is over. This means that the 800k government workers who have not been paid since before Christmas will now be paid.
I would say it is still half-time. Mr Trump has the nuclear option of declaring a state of emergency over the wall, hasn't he? He can now say that he has tried all other means before implementing it.
So the government is due to shutdown again on February 15th?
Is the endgame here that Congress agrees to a little more funding for border fencing, Trump insists it's a see-through wall, and everyone gets to claim victory?
Or will there be another long shutdown that ends with another temporary funding deal just before a no-deal Brexit?
So the government is due to shutdown again on February 15th?
Is the endgame here that Congress agrees to a little more funding for border fencing, Trump insists it's a see-through wall, and everyone gets to claim victory?
Or will there be another long shutdown that ends with another temporary funding deal just before a no-deal Brexit?
Practically the wall is not a solution. In many parts the border is on tribal land so the supreme court will say no. In other places it's on river flood plain so - from an engineering point of view - it's madness. Even if it's built, people will still find a way because the demand for cheap labour will pull people in. Ladders are very cheap to make.
The only solution is to make it a federal crime to employ illegal immigrants, punishable by large fines and prison time for the company bosses, plus a scheme for illegal workers to gain citizenship by reporting those employers.
But then food prices would go up and Corporate America would lobby against it.
I would say it is still half-time. Mr Trump has the nuclear option of declaring a state of emergency over the wall, hasn't he? He can now say that he has tried all other means before implementing it.
That would not end well for him.
Mind you, today hasn’t exactly been great for him, and losing to Pelosi must ... burn.
So the government is due to shutdown again on February 15th?
Is the endgame here that Congress agrees to a little more funding for border fencing, Trump insists it's a see-through wall, and everyone gets to claim victory?
Or will there be another long shutdown that ends with another temporary funding deal just before a no-deal Brexit?
The endgame is Trump realising he doesn’t run one of the co-equal institutions of government.
Every bloody time I write a post, I take care over the phraseology in order to apply le mot juste. And then I make a knob gag, but that's not important right now. Pause. Anyhoo, my point is as soon as I press "send", there's a new bloody thread and my galactic cleverness is lost to the winds. Every bloody time, Godsdammit! I am vexed.
I would say it is still half-time. Mr Trump has the nuclear option of declaring a state of emergency over the wall, hasn't he? He can now say that he has tried all other means before implementing it.
That would not end well for him.
Mind you, today hasn’t exactly been great for him, and losing to Pelosi must ... burn.
I’m pretty sure that if Trump really thought that using emergency powers to fund the wall would work he would have done it already.
Every bloody time I write a post, I take care over the phraseology in order to apply le mot juste. And then I make a knob gag, but that's not important right now. Pause. Anyhoo, my point is as soon as I press "send", there's a new bloody thread and my galactic cleverness is lost to the winds. Every bloody time, Godsdammit! I am vexed.
I would say it is still half-time. Mr Trump has the nuclear option of declaring a state of emergency over the wall, hasn't he? He can now say that he has tried all other means before implementing it.
Probably best not to use the phrase "nuclear option" in front of Trump...
So the government is due to shutdown again on February 15th?
Is the endgame here that Congress agrees to a little more funding for border fencing, Trump insists it's a see-through wall, and everyone gets to claim victory?
Or will there be another long shutdown that ends with another temporary funding deal just before a no-deal Brexit?
Practically the wall is not a solution. In many parts the border is on tribal land so the supreme court will say no. In other places it's on river flood plain so - from an engineering point of view - it's madness. Even if it's built, people will still find a way because the demand for cheap labour will pull people in. Ladders are very cheap to make.
The only solution is to make it a federal crime to employ illegal immigrants, punishable by large fines and prison time for the company bosses, plus a scheme for illegal workers to gain citizenship by reporting those employers.
But then food prices would go up and Corporate America would lobby against it.
So a wall it is...
It already is a crime to employ illegal immigrants, but it’s very spottily enforced for precisely the reasons you give. The Trump Organization itself is an offender.
I think Trump probably has difficulty empathising with the Federal Government workers. He probably views them as parasites rather than essential to keeping the US ticking over. Trump was of course born with a silver spoon in his mouth rather like some of the crazy people wanting a Hard Brexit that can be found in the UK. You never here the end of it if you take money away from this type of person but they will deprive those less fortunate themselves with cold indifference.
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
The whole thing could be a continuous Vegas-style casino.
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
The whole thing could be a continuous Vegas-style casino.
No ambition....it would need a couple of million Mexicans to help run it.
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
A million people are thought to have died in the construction of the Great Wall of China. Trumps wall will not likely have such a back story and so is not so interesting unless the political struggles are incorporated to the plot to produce a triumph. In contrast a film could be made about the struggle of those trying to escape impoverishment in Latin America. As an aside I watched an interesting documentary on Trumps Grandfather and Father the other day. Trumps Grandfather was born in Bavaria, Germany where he emigrated to the US, when returning back to Germany he was deported and had been in affect made stateless! Risk taking seems to be in Trumps DNA, not so sure that is a good thing given all the 'toys' he can play with given he is President!
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
A million people are thought to have died in the construction of the Great Wall of China. Trumps wall will not likely have such a back story and so is not so interesting unless the political struggles are incorporated to the plot to produce a triumph. In contrast a film could be made about the struggle of those trying to escape impoverishment in Latin America. As an aside I watched an interesting documentary on Trumps Grandfather and Father the other day. Trumps Grandfather was born in Bavaria, Germany where he emigrated to the US, when returning back to Germany he was deported and had been in affect made stateless! Risk taking seems to be in Trumps DNA, not so sure that is a good thing given all the 'toys' he can play with given he is President!
Why do I think The Great Wall of Trump could rival the construction deaths of China's?
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
A million people are thought to have died in the construction of the Great Wall of China. Trumps wall will not likely have such a back story and so is not so interesting unless the political struggles are incorporated to the plot to produce a triumph. In contrast a film could be made about the struggle of those trying to escape impoverishment in Latin America. As an aside I watched an interesting documentary on Trumps Grandfather and Father the other day. Trumps Grandfather was born in Bavaria, Germany where he emigrated to the US, when returning back to Germany he was deported and had been in affect made stateless! Risk taking seems to be in Trumps DNA, not so sure that is a good thing given all the 'toys' he can play with given he is President!
Why do I think The Great Wall of Trump could rival the construction deaths of China's?
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that you did! It was just a number I was shocked to see elsewhere on the internet. I suppose a Trump wall could kill 1 million indirectly but I would hope construction techniques were sufficiently adequate to avert having any deaths as I am sure you would.
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I would say it is still half-time. Mr Trump has the nuclear option of declaring a state of emergency over the wall, hasn't he? He can now say that he has tried all other means before implementing it.
If Trump declares a state of emergency it is over, the Dems win.
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
Something something Project Fear
I'm still recovering from someone last night soothing fears about the export of British lamb by assuring us that meat would be in such short supply in the UK that it would "fly off the shelves" here instead.
For some reason, I found this less than reassuring ...
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
Something something Project Fear
I'm still recovering from someone last night soothing fears about the export of British lamb by assuring us that meat would be in such short supply in the UK that it would "fly off the shelves" here instead.
For some reason, I found this less than reassuring ...
That was me and if you understand what you say when you write "meat would be in such short supply in the UK that it would "fly off the shelves" here instead.
Lamb farmers in the UK would be able to sell every Lamb they reared. It is that simple.
The bit I can see does not disclose whether the donors think the UK should Hard Brexit/ May Deal Brexit or Remain. Looks like the threat of a snap General Election is removed from the PM's armoury unless it is disinformation!
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
Whatever the solution may be, a wall certainly isn't it. It didn't work in Hadrian's time, and it sure as hell won't work now.
I wonder if Trump got the idea from China? It seems some on the right in politics get their ideas from the ancient past rather than thinking contemporary or future!
The Great Wall of Trump needs to become an equavalent massive tourist attraction. Disney could perhaps build it?
A million people are thought to have died in the construction of the Great Wall of China. Trumps wall will not likely have such a back story and so is not so interesting unless the political struggles are incorporated to the plot to produce a triumph. In contrast a film could be made about the struggle of those trying to escape impoverishment in Latin America. As an aside I watched an interesting documentary on Trumps Grandfather and Father the other day. Trumps Grandfather was born in Bavaria, Germany where he emigrated to the US, when returning back to Germany he was deported and had been in affect made stateless! Risk taking seems to be in Trumps DNA, not so sure that is a good thing given all the 'toys' he can play with given he is President!
Why do I think The Great Wall of Trump could rival the construction deaths of China's?
Sorry, I did not mean to imply that you did! It was just a number I was shocked to see elsewhere on the internet. I suppose a Trump wall could kill 1 million indirectly but I would hope construction techniques were sufficiently adequate to avert having any deaths as I am sure you would.
I'm not sure stats are easy to come by, but there were some very considerable numbers alleged as Dubai was built.
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
No. Whatever the price, it’s “worth it”...
Not any price is, and frankly remaining might as well be the best option now as people increasingly hunt for unicorns, but since people weeping about this presumably do not think we are getting the EMA back, you might as well be arguing that since the damage is done it is time to press on and make the best of it, not least since the same people usually talk of how diminished we will always be.
I'm still recovering from someone last night soothing fears about the export of British lamb by assuring us that meat would be in such short supply in the UK that it would "fly off the shelves" here instead.
For some reason, I found this less than reassuring ...
That was me and if you understand what you say when you write "meat would be in such short supply in the UK that it would "fly off the shelves" here instead.
Lamb farmers in the UK would be able to sell every Lamb they reared. It is that simple.
You are right to get annoyed by people who don't understand supply and demand. And you are correct that every lamb will be sold.
But you are worryingly blase about the likely impact on farm incomes.
Let us assume that a lamb farmer today has costs of £50,000, and revenues of £100,000. (And for his costs, I'm assuming everything except his own labour.)
Now, assume that British lamb is subject to 50% tariffs going into the EU. This means that the EU will - in all likelihood - import more New Zealand lamb, and their overall consumption will fall slightly, as the cost to consumers will have risen and price elasticity of demand.
British lamb could be sold into the US or other foreign markets. But it will be competing with New Zealand lamb, and there are transport costs, and tariffs. (Especially as the UK has utterly failed to replicate existing EU agreements.)
Together this means that the clearing price for British lamb will be lower. It will need to be cheaper to either overcome tariffs in the EU (or elsewhere abroad), or it will need to be cheaper to displace beef demand.
Let us assume the right number that prices will be 20% lower. Now, this may be ameliorated somewhat by a lower pound. But, it may not. And of course certain inputs (like the cost of fuel for the farmer's Defender) will be imported, and therefore they will rise the fall in Sterling.
So, the farmer's revenues will fall £20,000, or 20%. But his income will fall 40% to £30,000. That's a pretty huge drop. And I suspect that most farmers actually run on leaner profit margins than that, especially once loans are taken into account.
Also, my number is an average. There will be sheep farmers today who are already marginal, just as there are ones who make robust profits. Some people will lose out, and will lose out badly. No Deal Brexit might - on a two decade view - result in a GDP 10% larger than would be the case if we stayed in the EU, or left with a deal. (Who knows?) But what we do know is that the sudden imposition of tariffs on certain sectors of the economy would have a pretty severe impact.
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
No. Whatever the price, it’s “worth it”...
Not any price is, and frankly remaining might as well be the best option now as people increasingly hunt for unicorns, but since people weeping about this presumably do not think we are getting the EMA back, you might as well be arguing that since the damage is done it is time to press on and make the best of it, not least since the same people usually talk of how diminished we will always be.
It would be a big surprise if we didn’t end up shadowing the EMA, at a minimum.
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
No. Whatever the price, it’s “worth it”...
The employment figures here don't look too bad right now. Of course, if you are a young person in Italy, Spain or Greece for example you might shake your head for different reasons. Being in the EU has done wonders for their lifetime prospects, no?
What did Hilton actually achieve in his advisory role to Cameron? This is a genuine question!
I believe he was key in the evolution of what became known as the Big Society.
As I thought, nothing of any consequence. No wonder he quit when he did! He was probably worried he had been found out as an empty intellectual vessel!
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
I'm still recovering from someone last night soothing or some reason, I found this less than reassuring ...
Lamb farmers in the UK would be able to sell every Lamb they reared. It is that simple.
ritish lamb could be sold into the US or other foreign markets. But it will be competing with New Zealand lamb, and there are transport costs, and tariffs. (Especially as the UK has utterly failed to replicate existing EU agreements.)
Together this means that the clearing price for British lamb will be lower. It will need to be cheaper to either overcome tariffs in the EU (or elsewhere abroad), or it will need to be cheaper to displace beef demand.
Let us assume the right number that prices will be 20% lower. Now, this may be ameliorated somewhat by a lower pound. But, it may not. And of course certain inputs (like the cost of fuel for the farmer's Defender) will be imported, and therefore they will rise the fall in Sterling.
So, the farmer's revenues will fall £20,000, or 20%. But his income will fall 40% to £30,000. That's a pretty huge drop. And I suspect that most farmers actually run on leaner profit margins than that, especially once loans are taken into account.
Also, my number is an average. There will be sheep farmers today who are already marginal, just as there are ones who make robust profits. Some people will lose out, and will lose out badly. No Deal Brexit might - on a two decade view - result in a GDP 10% larger than would be the case if we stayed in the EU, or left with a deal. (Who knows?) But what we do know is that the sudden imposition of tariffs on certain sectors of the economy would have a pretty severe impact.
Yes, want I would like to see is a serious discussion of the issues.
With your point above talking about export markets, if we have no deals with the RoW Lamb suppliers than all current Lamb that comes in tariff free will be subject to as you say potentially 50% tariffs. So UK Lamb will still be competitive in the UK market without having to find export markets, because demand for raw meat outstrips supply or outstrips noncompetitive supply.
The major factor that could bankrupt Lamb farmers is the UK government response. If they open the UK market to unlimited supply at zero tariffs then Lamb farmers are in trouble.
I have not made this argument before, but I would argue because of the politics of Welsh Lamb farmers going bust they would do as every other developed country does, manage the import of lamb with a set quota of zero tariffs to maintain Lamb production in the UK. They also manage for cyclical reasons i.e NZ Lamb provides a supply when UK producers are not delivering Lamb to the market.
Do we have any reliable statistics on what percentage of the staff are moving to Amsterdam and how many have elected to resign? Because I recall there was some concern it was a much higher number than anticipated and that it might negatively affect their ability to licence new medicines.
I do not know about numbers of staff, but i sit here watching the EMA, Sony, etc moving elsewhere and Brexiteers in denial about the impact and i shake my head in disbelief. Will they ever have an "Oh cr*p!!" moment?
No. Whatever the price, it’s “worth it”...
The employment figures here don't look too bad right now. Of course, if you are a young person in Italy, Spain or Greece for example you might shake your head for different reasons. Being in the EU has done wonders for their lifetime prospects, no?
The EU threw those countries under the bus when they set interest rate policy to suit Germany years back.
Some remainers here love to scream about hypothetical damage to our economy if we leave.
Look at actual damage to real peoples lives in countries that are in the EU.
Ironically we acted as a safety valve for some of those countries - imagine their unemployment rates if they couldn't leave to find work
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Yep, the EU chose to keep an EU body inside the EU. Whoever would have thought it? With around nine weeks to a No Deal Brexit and all that entails, it looks to have been a very sensible decision.
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Unnecessary? Seriously delusional. We voted to leave. You support it. What on Earth do you expect?
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Unnecessary? Seriously delusional. We voted to leave. You support it. What on Earth do you expect?
I’ve continually argued that the EU and U.K. would benefit from opening up the EMA to non EU members.
It’s unnecessary in the sense that the staff don’t want it, the FDA doesn’t like it, the pharma companies don’t want it and patients will suffer. But the EU commission can go and buff their nails and feel good about themselves.
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Unnecessary? Seriously delusional. We voted to leave. You support it. What on Earth do you expect?
Yes, who would have thought that leaving the EU would mean no longer hosting EU bodies?
It rather reminds me of this classic poll finding on Freedom of Movement:
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Unnecessary? Seriously delusional. We voted to leave. You support it. What on Earth do you expect?
I’ve continually argued that the EU and U.K. would benefit from opening up the EMA to non EU members.
It’s unnecessary in the sense that the staff don’t want it, the FDA doesn’t like it, the pharma companies don’t want it and patients will suffer. But the EU commission can go and buff their nails and feel good about themselves.
I think it’s outrageous the Commission itself is not in Norway.
The miners were so forgiving when their pits closed. It only took them a week or two to get over it....
Not!
If that is your comparison for a successful Brexit then God help us all.
Yes. If my intention were to allay concerns about the impact of a No Deal Brexit I would not be offering up the current woe-begotten state of those communities in South Yorkshire which used to rely on the coal industry. It's all stray dogs and slag heaps now. Will that be most of the country after we leave the EU without a deal? Stray dogs and slag heaps?
Good evening and a Happy New Year PBers.
Although trying to reduce my addiction to this site and despite having been sickened beyond belief by the posturing of our politicians I was drawn back by the above comment from the previous thread.
While not wanting to mention the B word, South Yorkshire isn't a good example of current woe - houses, industrial units, hotels and even restaurants and shops are being built as fast I've ever seen and even the Guardian reports on a jobs boom:
I am sure a Brexiteer will be along in a minute to tell us that
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies or 2) this is a great victory for Britain or 3) All of the above...
It’s a shame, unnecessary and a net negative to world health. But the EU has chosen to do it. I note that they are not highlighting how many EMA staff have chosen to stay in London and work for the MHRA...
Unnecessary? Seriously delusional. We voted to leave. You support it. What on Earth do you expect?
I’ve continually argued that the EU and U.K. would benefit from opening up the EMA to non EU members.
It’s unnecessary in the sense that the staff don’t want it, the FDA doesn’t like it, the pharma companies don’t want it and patients will suffer. But the EU commission can go and buff their nails and feel good about themselves.
You’ve continually argued that? Did nobody point out that EEA countries already take part and have observers on the management board?
Comments
https://twitter.com/profcarroll/status/1088626729009246209?s=21
Now we need some of that here, good news I mean
Is the endgame here that Congress agrees to a little more funding for border fencing, Trump insists it's a see-through wall, and everyone gets to claim victory?
Or will there be another long shutdown that ends with another temporary funding deal just before a no-deal Brexit?
The only solution is to make it a federal crime to employ illegal immigrants, punishable by large fines and prison time for the company bosses, plus a scheme for illegal workers to gain citizenship by reporting those employers.
But then food prices would go up and Corporate America would lobby against it.
So a wall it is...
Mind you, today hasn’t exactly been great for him, and losing to Pelosi must ... burn.
50 overs under his belt.
I think Trump probably has difficulty empathising with the Federal Government workers. He probably views them as parasites rather than essential to keeping the US ticking over. Trump was of course born with a silver spoon in his mouth rather like some of the crazy people wanting a Hard Brexit that can be found in the UK. You never here the end of it if you take money away from this type of person but they will deprive those less fortunate themselves with cold indifference.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/427009-ojeda-drops-out-of-presidential-race
(Or is it the second ?)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HGjH605zxbQ
Holder and Dowrich's stand of 295 may be impressive, but it's neither a seventh-wicket record for West Indies, nor a seventh-wicket record at Bridgetown. And nor it is even a seventh-wicket record between a captain and his wicketkeeper!
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/17430/scorecard/62792/west-indies-vs-australia-4th-test-australia-tour-of-west-indies-1955
Would still be an improvement.
Where is our Pelosi?
https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1088513396834742273?s=21
https://twitter.com/anncoulter/status/1088888030901882880?s=21
1) this never happened. It is all EU lies
or
2) this is a great victory for Britain
or
3) All of the above...
For some reason, I found this less than reassuring ...
Lamb farmers in the UK would be able to sell every Lamb they reared. It is that simple.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/25/conservative-donors-refuse-hand-cash-disgust-theresa-mays-leadership/
The bit I can see does not disclose whether the donors think the UK should Hard Brexit/ May Deal Brexit or Remain. Looks like the threat of a snap General Election is removed from the PM's armoury unless it is disinformation!
Good night.
Perfect 8 wins out of 8 for Ole - Give him the job
Whatever the price, it’s “worth it”...
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/01/24/lawrence_odonnell_pelosi_crushed_president_trump_over_state_of_the_union.html
But you are worryingly blase about the likely impact on farm incomes.
Let us assume that a lamb farmer today has costs of £50,000, and revenues of £100,000. (And for his costs, I'm assuming everything except his own labour.)
Now, assume that British lamb is subject to 50% tariffs going into the EU. This means that the EU will - in all likelihood - import more New Zealand lamb, and their overall consumption will fall slightly, as the cost to consumers will have risen and price elasticity of demand.
British lamb could be sold into the US or other foreign markets. But it will be competing with New Zealand lamb, and there are transport costs, and tariffs. (Especially as the UK has utterly failed to replicate existing EU agreements.)
Together this means that the clearing price for British lamb will be lower. It will need to be cheaper to either overcome tariffs in the EU (or elsewhere abroad), or it will need to be cheaper to displace beef demand.
Let us assume the right number that prices will be 20% lower. Now, this may be ameliorated somewhat by a lower pound. But, it may not. And of course certain inputs (like the cost of fuel for the farmer's Defender) will be imported, and therefore they will rise the fall in Sterling.
So, the farmer's revenues will fall £20,000, or 20%. But his income will fall 40% to £30,000. That's a pretty huge drop. And I suspect that most farmers actually run on leaner profit margins than that, especially once loans are taken into account.
Also, my number is an average. There will be sheep farmers today who are already marginal, just as there are ones who make robust profits. Some people will lose out, and will lose out badly. No Deal Brexit might - on a two decade view - result in a GDP 10% larger than would be the case if we stayed in the EU, or left with a deal. (Who knows?) But what we do know is that the sudden imposition of tariffs on certain sectors of the economy would have a pretty severe impact.
https://twitter.com/michaelmalice/status/1088891977003868160
With your point above talking about export markets, if we have no deals with the RoW Lamb suppliers than all current Lamb that comes in tariff free will be subject to as you say potentially 50% tariffs. So UK Lamb will still be competitive in the UK market without having to find export markets, because demand for raw meat outstrips supply or outstrips noncompetitive supply.
The major factor that could bankrupt Lamb farmers is the UK government response. If they open the UK market to unlimited supply at zero tariffs then Lamb farmers are in trouble.
I have not made this argument before, but I would argue because of the politics of Welsh Lamb farmers going bust they would do as every other developed country does, manage the import of lamb with a set quota of zero tariffs to maintain Lamb production in the UK. They also manage for cyclical reasons i.e NZ Lamb provides a supply when UK producers are not delivering Lamb to the market.
Some remainers here love to scream about hypothetical damage to our economy if we leave.
Look at actual damage to real peoples lives in countries that are in the EU.
Ironically we acted as a safety valve for some of those countries - imagine their unemployment rates if they couldn't leave to find work
It’s unnecessary in the sense that the staff don’t want it, the FDA doesn’t like it, the pharma companies don’t want it and patients will suffer. But the EU commission can go and buff their nails and feel good about themselves.
It rather reminds me of this classic poll finding on Freedom of Movement:
https://twitter.com/osheaf01/status/1087045757725753344
Although trying to reduce my addiction to this site and despite having been sickened beyond belief by the posturing of our politicians I was drawn back by the above comment from the previous thread.
While not wanting to mention the B word, South Yorkshire isn't a good example of current woe - houses, industrial units, hotels and even restaurants and shops are being built as fast I've ever seen and even the Guardian reports on a jobs boom:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/14/uk-jobs-boom-strongest-in-south-yorkshire-and-merseyside-thinktank-finds
I can't talk about stray dogs but the slag heaps have been around for over a century and they've been landscaped now.
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/who-we-are/management-board
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/427057-nixon-foundation-distances-nixon-from-roger-stone-after-indictment